Sharyl Atkisson on Spygate: Sure looks like FBI's operation against Trump was political

No, I don't. Please document that with something other than Mother Jones.

 

The left has appropriated the FBI, the IRS, and the Justice Dept for political purposes. And you can add the State Department to that list, because they've been radical leftists for decades.

It's a grim situation. I have ZERO faith in the government and I no longer fly my American flag.

This country sucks, but I'll fight the leftists until I die.

 

takes less time to list the agencies that weren't politicized during Obama's reign of corruption

 

You are free to leave.

 

It looks as if Trump's fake,"They're spying on me!" attempt at diversion from the Trump Justice Department Special Counsel's investigation into Putin's perverting the 2016 US presidential election to help Trump and hurt Clinton has fizzled, just like his phony claim that millions of invisible people had voted against him.

His self-serving lies thrill his cult, but they are short-lived phenomena.

Trump demanded the briefing, claiming without any evidence that the FBI put a spy on his campaign for political purposes.

Since the briefing, the public has only heard from members of congressional Democratic leadership, who demanded to be included in the meeting after they were initially to be kept out. Although they gave no details about what they learned, they did say that they heard, “no evidence to support any allegation that the FBI or any intelligence agency placed a spy in the Trump campaign.”​

Republicans in the meeting — including key Trump defender Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) — have been mum about what they heard. That leads experts to believe that Republicans didn’t learn of anything they could use to back up Trump’s claim.

https://mic.com/articles/189546/tod...ng-on-the-trump-campaign-informant#.m5pcQfks6
​

He's lying as fast as he can!

"What do I have to do to divert from the Russia thing?
Keep my promise to release my tax returns???"​

 

Is The Hill ok?

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill....eporter-wasnt-hacked-had-delete-key-stuck?amp

 

How The Code Name ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ Undermines The FBI’s Russia Story
The paper of record has apparently joined a campaign, spearheaded by government and political operatives, to minimize Christopher Steele’s role in the Russia investigation.


The New York Times’ 4,000-word report last week on the Federal Bureau of Investigation probe of Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign’s possible ties to Russia revealed for the first time that the investigation was called “Crossfire Hurricane.”

After an October news report showed his dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, facts that further challenged the credibility of Steele’s research, the FBI investigation’s origin story shifted.

Further reinforcement of the new origin story came from congressional Democrats. A January 29 memo written by House Intelligence Committee minority staff under ranking member Rep. Adam Schiff further distances Steele from the opening of the investigation. “Christopher Steele’s raw reporting did not inform the FBI’s decision to initiate its counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016. In fact, the FBI’s closely-held investigative team only received Steele’s reporting in mid-September.”

The code name “Crossfire Hurricane” is further evidence that the FBI’s cover story is absurd. A reference to a movie about a British spy evading Russian spies behind enemy lines suggests the Steele dossier was always the core of the bureau’s investigation into the Trump campaign.

The damage done to the American press is equally large. Since the November 2016 presidential election, a financially imperiled media industry gambled its remaining prestige on Russiagate. Yet after nearly a year and a half filled with thousands of stories feeding the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy, last week still represented a landmark moment in American journalism. The New York Times, which proudly published the Pentagon Papers, provided cover for an espionage operation against a presidential campaign.

These questions are sure to be asked. What we know already is that the Times reporters did not ask them, because they do not bother to indicate that the officials interviewed for the story had declined to answer. That they did not ask these questions is evidence the Times is no longer a newspaper that sees its job as reporting the truth or holding high government officials responsible for their crimes.....snip~

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/25/code-name-crossfire-hurricane-evidence-fbis-russia-cover-story/

 

I don't know what you're talking about. Your post makes no sense at all. I know that this is a refrain that Trumpsters are all parroting, but it makes no sense at all.

But then, this whole Trump tantrum doesn't make any sense. His claim that there was a mole inside his campaign is false on its face.

 

As noted, your "Glorious Leader!"s self-serving lies thrill his cult.

"Trump demanded the briefing, claiming without any evidence ...

Republicans ... have been mum about what they heard. That leads experts to believe that Republicans didn’t learn of anything they could use to back up Trump’s claim."​

 

Once again, cartoons do your thinking for you and right wing blogs that distort the stories they are commenting on are your primary sources.

I don't suppose you read the Times article, now did you????

This is a weak attempt at spin.

At its core is the assertions that somehow the FBI changed its story about the origin of the investigation.
The only people who have made that assertion have been the right wing media, which uses repetition to convince its audience that this core false claim is fact. It is not.

This is clearly false, as is suggested by the very timeline in the article itself. Indeed, it is generally accepted that the FBI was already alarmed about reports that it was recieving from intelligencee agencies in other countries about the suspicious activities of Trump campaign officials and in particular the report, on the Ambassadorial level of the activites of Mr Papadopolous, which were conveyed to the FBI shortly after the Wikileaks data dump.

FBI agents did not talk to Christopher Steele until October, by which time many people in the media already had the "dossier".

 

Obama's Deep State mouthpiece Brennan: we spied on Trump campaign to protect the Trump campaign
Limbaugh/Nolte: maybe Hillary campaign would have been successful if they were similarly 'protected'?

 

Once again you show why you aren't in tune with Reality.....Natty. Truly sit down and listen to Johnny Nash and how he can see Clearly now. It can only Help.



President Trump and his allies are outraged at reports that the FBI used an “informant” to spy on Trump’s 2016 campaign. “Really bad stuff!” the president tweeted early Friday. Supporters of the White House claim the FBI’s reported tactics were illegal. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has even subpoenaed the Justice Department for information on who the informant might have been; department and FBI officials say public disclosures of this kind could put sources in danger.

But Trump and his backers are wrong about what it means that the FBI reportedly was using a confidential source to gather information early in its investigation of possible campaign ties to Russia. The investigation started out as a counterintelligence probe, not a criminal one. And relying on a covert source rather than a more intrusive method of gathering information suggests that the FBI may have been acting cautiously — perhaps too cautiously — to protect the campaign, not undermine it.....snip~

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...er-trump-it-was-to-protect-him/?noredirect=on

 

Read Post 65 from your left leaning WAPO


Then read all of this by Mark Penn. Former Clintonista. From the Hill.....another leftist source.


Stopping Robert Mueller to protect us all....


The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation. With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

At this point, there is little doubt that the highest echelons of the FBI and the Justice Department broke their own rules to end the Hillary “matter,” but we can expect the inspector general to document what was done or, more pointedly, not done. It is hard to see how a yearlong investigation of this won’t come down hard on former FBI Director James and perhaps even former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who definitely wasn’t playing mahjong in a secret “no aides allowed” meeting with former President Clinton on a Phoenix airport tarmac.

With this report on the way and congressional investigators beginning to zero in on the lack of hard, verified evidence for starting the Trump probe, current and former intelligence and Justice Department officials are dumping everything they can think of to save their reputations.

But it is backfiring. They started by telling the story of Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat, as having remembered a bar conversation with George Papadopoulos a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. But how did the FBI know they should talk to him? That’s left out of their narrative. Downer’s signature appears on a $25 million contribution to the Clinton Foundation. You don’t need much imagination to figure that he was close with Clinton Foundation operatives who relayed information to the State Department, which then called the FBI to complete the loop. This wasn’t intelligence. It was likely opposition research from the start.

In no way would a fourth-hand report from a Maltese professor justify wholesale targeting of four or five members of the Trump campaign. It took Christopher Steele, with his funding concealed through false campaign filings, to be incredibly successful at creating a vast echo chamber around his unverified, fanciful dossier, bouncing it back and forth between the press and the FBI so it appeared that there were multiple sources all coming to the same conclusion.

Time and time again, investigators came up empty. Even several sting operations with an FBI spy we just learned about failed to produce a DeLorean-like video with cash on the table. But rather than close the probe, the deep state just expanded it. All they had were a few isolated contacts with Russians and absolutely nothing related to Trump himself, yet they pressed forward. Egged on by Steele, they simply believed Trump and his team must be dirty. They just needed to dig deep enough.

Perhaps the murkiest event in the timeline is Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointment of a special counsel after he personally recommended Comey’s firing in blistering terms. With Attorney General Jeff Sessionsshoved out of the way, Rosenstein and Mueller then ignored their own conflicts and took charge anyway. Rosenstein is a fact witness, and Mueller is a friend of Comey, disqualifying them both.....snip~


http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/388549-stopping-robert-mueller-to-protect-us-all


Doesn't get any better than a leftist that doesn't need money or fame to get out and tell the truth. Must be his Blue Dog roots that sets him apart from other leftists.

 

There are a number of claims in this post the verge between false and downright idiotic.

First of all, I was not referencing the Isakoff article, but I could have.

There is no question that this "dossier" and its contents were known to people in the media as early as September.

Which makes a mockery of the right wing attempt to rewrite facts to assert that Comey some how "set up" Trump by giving him a "partial briefing" two days before the story was finally printed in the media.

You can't parse your way around that no matter how hard you try. (BTW, Trump recently lied in television about the most salacious part of those documents).

it is not a lie to expect the official of a Presidential campaign to be on top of things like the existance of the Steele "dossier" or its contents, since we know that many reporters had it.

But if you want to argue that Trump's campaign officials were both reckless and INCOMPETENT, there's plenty of other evidence to support that notion!

 

Mark Penn is not liberal, and the Hill is not either.

 

The Hill is a leftist source and Mark Penn is a leftist. He is not a Progressive. Nor illiberal. So that leaves Liberal. Moreover he was a Clintonite.

 

Here...I'll go S-L-O-W-L-Y, to help you process the OBVIOUS.

NO ONE in the Trump Campaign EVER sought out the Russians for dirt to influence the election...but they needed "informants" to "protect them from Russian influence", when the ONLY RUSSIAN "INFLUENCE" there, was that planted by the Obama Swamp's allies in the UK.

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign SECRETLY ACTIVELY SOUGHT OUT AND PAID $MILLIONS to CONTACT RUSSIAN AGENTS TO GET "DIRT" ON TRUMP, to INFLUENCE THE ELECTION....but they, somehow, didn't need "informants" to "protect them from Russian influence".

If that doesn't illustrate the GLARING STUPIDITY of the Obama Swamp's "it wasn't political" bullshit to your understanding, I have a great bridge I know you'd love to buy....

 

A right wing hack writing for an extreme right rag!!

 

Is that desperation showing, or just true TDS? Any frothing at the mouth means Pure TDS. Just sayin.

 

A leftwing hack, Alinksy-deflecting due to utter inability to refute the facts established.

 

They are in danger of shorting out their keyboards/phone screens, from all the froth...

 

Ever find any evidence of this or is this still about feels more than facts?

 

It's coming. Mifsud was not there, offering UNSOLICITED LIES about "Russians and Clinton emails" to Papadopolous, by "coincidence".

Still haven't heard WHY, the Clinton campaign, who SECRETLY, ACTIVELY SOUGHT OUT , then $ PAID MILLIONS to CONTACT RUSSIAN AGENTS, TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION, ( then LIED ABOUT IT FOR A YEAR) ...somehow , didn't need "protection from the Russians", via Obama Swamp "informants".

Odd that, huh?

 

It's always about feels. LOL

 

Trump's fake spy story has fizzled.