Archive for the ‘Government Corruption’ Category

Andrew McCarthy on Dem Campaign Corruption: In Politicized Justice, Desperate Times Call for Disparate Measures

From his article at the National Review:

We wuz robbed. That’s the theme Democrats and their media allies are working hard to cement into conventional wisdom. And robbed in a very specific way: The 2016 presidential election, we’re to believe, was stolen from Hillary Clinton by disparate treatment. As Democrats tell it, the FBI scandalized their candidate while protecting Donald Trump.

You might think peddling that story with a straight face would be a major challenge. But they figure it may work because it was test-driven by the FBI’s then-director, James Comey, in his now infamous press conference on July 5, 2016 — back when the law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus on which we rely to read the security tea leaves was simply certain that Mrs. Clinton would win.

If you or I had set up an unauthorized private communications system for official business for the patent purpose of defeating federal record-keeping and disclosure laws; if we had retained and transmitted thousands of classified emails on this non-secure system; if we had destroyed tens of thousands of government records; if we had carried out that destruction while those records were under subpoena; if we had lied to the FBI in our interview — well, we’d be writing this column from the federal penitentiary in Leavenworth. Yet, in a feat of dizzying ratiocination, Director Comey explained that to prosecute Mrs. Clinton would be to hold her to a nitpicking, selective standard of justice not imposed on other Americans.

So it was that the New York Times, in this week’s 4,100-word exposé on the origins of the FBI’s Trump–Russia probe, recycled the theme: Government investigators were savagely public about Clinton’s trifling missteps while keeping mum about the Manchurian candidate’s treasonous conspiracy with Putin.

As we contended in rebuttal on Thursday, the Times’ facts are selective and its narrative theme of disparate treatment is hogwash: Clinton’s bid was saved, not destroyed, by Obama’s law-enforcement agencies, which tanked a criminal case on which she should have been indicted. And the hush-hush approach taken to the counterintelligence case against Donald Trump was not intended to protect the Republican candidate; it was intended to protect the Obama administration from the specter of a Watergate-level scandal had its spying on the opposition party’s presidential campaign been revealed.

But let’s put that aside. Let’s consider the disparate-treatment claim on its own terms.

The DNC Server
It has now been confirmed that the Trump campaign was subjected to spying tactics under counterintelligence law — FISA surveillance, national-security letters, and covert intelligence operatives who work with the CIA and allied intelligence services. It made no difference, apparently, that there was an ongoing election campaign, which the FBI is supposed to avoid affecting; nor did it matter that the spy targets were American citizens, as to whom there is supposed to be evidence of purposeful, clandestine, criminal activity on behalf of a foreign power before counterintelligence powers are invoked.

But what was the rationale for using these spying authorities?

The fons et origo of the counterintelligence investigation was the suspicion — which our intelligence agencies assure us is a fact — that the Democratic National Committee’s server was hacked by covert Russian operatives. Without this cyber-espionage attack, there would be no investigation. But how do we know it really happened? The Obama Justice Department never took custody of the server — no subpoena, no search warrant. The server was thus never subjected to analysis by the FBI’s renowned forensics lab, and its evidentiary integrity was never preserved for courtroom presentation to a jury.

How come? Well, you see, there was an ongoing election campaign, so the Obama Justice Department figured it would be a terrible imposition to pry into the Democrats’ communications. So, yes, the entire “Russia hacked the election” narrative the nation has endured for nearly two years hinges on the say-so of CrowdStrike, a private DNC contractor with significant financial ties to the Clinton campaign.

In Investigations 101, using foreign-intelligence authorities to spy on Americans is extraordinary, while taking custody of essential physical evidence is basic. By the way, the government’s failure to ensure the evidentiary integrity of the DNC server by taking possession of it and performing its own rigorous testing on it makes it practically impossible to prosecute anyone for “colluding” in Russia’s cyber-espionage. It’s tough to prove that anyone conspired in something unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the something actually happened the way you say it happened. To do that in a courtroom, you need evidence — a confident probability analysis by your intelligence agencies won’t do.

The Espionage Act v. the Logan Act
Here is then-director Comey’s explanation of why Mrs. Clinton should not be indicted for patent felony violations of the Espionage Act’s provisions on mishandling classified information:

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”

This statutory analysis is gibberish. Notwithstanding that Mrs. Clinton’s actions were intentional and willful, the Espionage Act does not require proof of that mental state. Despite considerable evidence that she obstructed investigations, it’s not necessary to prove that either. Nor to establish disloyalty or any intent to harm the United States. To avoid indicting Mrs. Clinton, the FBI and Justice Department ignored the statute that has been on the books for a century and substituted an impossible-to-prove statute of their imagination.

……Despite the absence of any evidence that the Trump campaign conspired in Russia’s espionage, the Obama Justice Department — led by then–acting attorney general Sally Yates — relied on the Logan Act to conduct a criminal investigation of General Michael Flynn, a 30-year decorated combat veteran. A key Trump campaign adviser who played a central role in the Trump transition and was designated as the incoming national-security adviser, it was Flynn’s job to communicate with such foreign counterparts as Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, a Washington fixture whose dance card has never been short on Democrats. Flynn was also an intense Obama critic, and the outgoing administration understood that he was preparing to reverse Obama policies.

The Obama Justice Department and FBI investigated Flynn — including an ambush interview — on the theory that his discussions with Kislyak and other diplomats violated the Logan Act. Currently codified as Section 953 of the federal penal code, this statute purports to criminalize “any correspondence or intercourse” with agents of a foreign sovereign conducted “without authority of the United States” — an impossibly vague term that probably means permission from the executive branch. The Logan Act is patently unconstitutional, but no court has had the opportunity to invalidate it because, to borrow a phrase, no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. As our Dan McLaughlin has explained, the Act dates to 1799, a dark time for free-speech rights during the John Adams administration. Never in its 219-year history has it resulted in a single conviction; indeed, there have been only two indictments, the last one in 1852.

By contrast, there have been several prosecutions under the Espionage Act, including several convictions of military personnel prosecuted under the same provisions at issue in Mrs. Clinton’s case — although their misconduct was far less extensive…..

Truth or Consequences
Speaking of lying to the FBI, Mrs. Clinton — during the brief interview the FBI conducted after Director Comey’s speech exonerating her was already written — told agents she did not know what the designation “(C)” in classified documents meant. She claimed to have assumed it might have had something to do with putting paragraphs in alphabetical order, notwithstanding the absence of any (A), (B), or (D) paragraphs.

Patently, this was a false statement: Mrs. Clinton, who was in the Senate for eight years, was indoctrinated in classified-information practice on becoming secretary of state, a position in which classified documents abound. She signed an acknowledgment that she understood her obligations and had read the relevant executive orders on classification — the main one had been issued by her husband. (C), which stands for confidential, the lowest level of classification, is a ubiquitous marking in classified documents, well known to officials with security clearances. But Mrs. Clinton had falsely told the public she had never sent or received any documents “marked classified,” so she needed to pretend that she didn’t know what the classified markings meant.

She wasn’t prosecuted, of course. She got to run for president. Her underlings weren’t prosecuted either — Clinton confidants Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin both told the FBI they were unaware that Clinton was using a private server while they worked for four years as her top State Department staffers; as the Daily Caller’s Chuck Ross points out, Mills explicitly asked Abedin about the server in a 2010 email.

Paul Combetta, the Platte River Networks technician who serviced Clinton’s homebrew server and applied the “BleachBit” program to destroy tens of thousands of her emails, lied to the FBI in his initial interviews; far from being prosecuted in order to squeeze him for cooperation, he was given immunity. With no fear that there was any interest in prosecuting him, Combetta proceeded to tell a risible story about why he destroyed the emails, transparently protecting Clinton and her subordinates.

That’s not quite the way things go in the Trump–Russia investigation. General Flynn and three other subjects — George Papadopoulos, Richard Gates, Alex van der Zwaan — have been prosecuted for making false statements in FBI interviews. None of the false statements alleged had anything to do with Russia’s cyber-espionage attack on the 2016 election, the ostensible subject matter of Mueller’s investigation. (Unlike the Clinton probe, where the defense lawyers worked closely with the Justice Department, the defense lawyers in the Trump probe are not allowed to know the scope of Mueller’s investigative authority.)

 

 

Hillary deliberately used an illegal, unsecure server to store and transmit classified information, tampered with evidence, deleted incriminating emails, and lied before Congress. It’s right in front of everyone’s face.  She knew that it was a national security violation, but did it anyway.

All kinds of federal laws were broken.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton on board her private jet in what was clearly a conflict of interest and a conversation on whether or not the DOJ would indict Hillary for her crimes.

After that, the fix was in.

Comey gave immunity to five Clinton State Department aides and IT experts.  Those aides include Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff, along with two other State Department staffers, John Bentel and Heather Samuelson, Bryan Pagliano, Clinton’s former IT aide, and Paul Combetta, an employee at Platte River networks, the firm hired to manage her server after she left the State Department.

Combetta, who went on Reddit requesting technical advice on how to strip a “VIP (VERY VIP)” email address from archives stored on a server he has “full access to“, posed as ‘Stonetear’ on the site, and the ‘VIP’ was indeed Hillary. Combetta used the computer program “Bleachbit” to destroy Clinton’s records, despite an order from Congress to preserve them, and Samuelson also destroyed Clinton’s emails.

Obama also knew about Clinton’s clandestine email server and participated in the email exchange.

Pagliano created Hillary’s email server over a series of months while working in a room on K Street in D.C.  After he constructed the server, Pagliano stated that he “rented a minivan and drove to Chappaqua New York to install the email server in the Clinton residence.”

Hillary gets away with her bullshit, but a General who served this country, gets raked over the fucking coals for a security violation that was far less severe.

Not to mention the money-laundering Clinton Foundation.

The DOJ has all the evidence they need to prosecute the bitch, but the Dems will never prosecute one of their own and the GOP-led Congress doesn’t have the balls.

As for the investigation set-up against President Trump:

The leftwing Deep State really didn’t believe Trump would win the election. As an ‘insurance policy‘ during the campaign, the FBI, James Comey, the Hillary campaign, a reprobate former MI6 agent, and the Obama regime all had a hand in producing and paying for a lurid, fabricated dossier which was then used to secure a warrant from the FISA court under fraudulent claims, to spy on the Trump campaign.

Former MI6 operative, Christopher Steele, was hired by Fusion GPS, a corporate espionage firm, to dig up dirt on Trump but came up with a fabricated smear instead. Not deterred by the total implausibility of the story described in the dossier, GPS shopped the dossier to the liberal media and paid journos to feed the fake story to the press with predicable results; the left wing morons at Buzzfeed and  CNN  jumped at the chance to print the fake news.  The FBI even offered $50,000 to Steele for information.

The Obama regime paid almost one million dollars to the same law firm that funneled money to GPS.  Somewhere in that mess is RINO John McCain,  who received the dossier from a former British ambassador to Moscow.

Glenn Simpson, GPS co-founder,  was questioned in a closed door hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The Mueller clusterfuck is two fold: The fake dossier was tried and failed, then they used the planted story about the Trump campaign having inside knowledge of the Russians possessing Hillary’s emails.  They also inserted a mole into the Trump campaign.

The more that comes out about these anti-Trump Deep State douchebags, the worse it gets.

 

Advertisements

WaPo Identifies FBI Spy Who Infiltrated Trump Campaign as ‘Retired Professor’ (UPDATED)

UPDATE:

Confirmed:

A Cambridge professor with deep ties to American and British intelligence has been outed as an agent who snooped on the Trump presidential campaign for the FBI.

Multiple media outlets have named Stefan Halper, 73, as the secret informant who met with Trump campaign advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos starting in the summer of 2016. The American-born academic previously served in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations.

……The Halper revelation also shows the Obama administration’s FBI began prying into the opposing party’s presidential nominee earlier than it previously admitted.

Halper’s sit-downs with Page reportedly started in early July 2016, undermining fired FBI Director James Comey’s previous claim that the bureau’s investigation into the Trump campaign began at the end of that month.

Halper made his first overture when he met with Page at a British symposium. The two remained in regular contact for more than a year, meeting at Halper’s Virginia farm and in Washington, DC, as well as exchanging emails.

 

From Twitchy:

According to the Post, the source is:

“A retired American professor in 2016 began working as a secret informant for the FBI as it investigated Russia’s interference in the U.S. presidential campaign, and he contacted three Trump advisers in the summer and fall of that year, according to people familiar with his activities.”

The paper is not naming the retired professor at this time:

“The role played by the source is now at the center of a contentious battle that has pitted President Trump against his own Justice Department and fueled the president’s attacks on the special counsel investigation. The Washington Post has confirmed the informant’s identity with multiple people familiar with his role but is not reporting his name following warnings from U.S. intelligence officials that exposing him could endanger him or his contacts.”

OK, so how many “retired American professors” were talking to Trump advisers? We’ll no doubt know his identity shortly.

It’s most likely a Oxford/Cambridge professor named Stefan Halper, who was part and parcel to the Deep State conspiracy to undermine the 2016 election.

And WaPo’s excuse for the spying is one for the shit pile:

 

Clapper: ‘If FBI Spied On Trump It Was A ‘Good Thing’

Violating the law and the Constitution is always a good thing as long as you’re a Dem.

Via The Daily Wire

On Thursday night, CNN’s Don Lemon interviewed Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who insisted that if the FBI indeed spied on the Trump campaign in 2016, it was a “good thing” for America.

Lemon stated, “Here’s what the president tweeted this morning. He said, ‘Wow, word seems to be coming out that the Obama FBI spied on the Trump campaign with an embedded informant. Andrew McCarthy says, ‘There’s probably no doubt that they had at least one confidential informant in the campaign.’ If so, this is bigger than Watergate!’”

Lemon continued, “That is an extraordinary claim, and based on your experience, what is the likelihood that it’s true?”

Clapper answered, “Well, I think this is hyperbole. They may have someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but the focus here, as it was with the intelligence community, is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing to try to instantiate themselves in the campaign or to influence it or leverage it.”

Then Clapper made his outrageous statement: “So, if there was someone that was observing that sort of thing, that’s a good thing because the Russians pose a threat to the very basis of our political system.”

He continued, “And I think it’s hugely dangerous if someone like that is exposed, because the danger to that person, not to mention the reluctance of others to be informants for the FBI and the FBI gains a lot of valuable information from informants. So to me, this is incredible.”

As The Daily Wire has reported, Clapper reportedly manipulated the intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election in a partisan way to damage Donald Trump.

 

Here’s what’s been exposed: Obama weaponized the intelligence agencies in a conspiracy.  There was all out sedition on part of the FBI leadership and the Obama regime to undermine the election and overthrow Donald Trump if he became president.

Clapper was one of the most corrupt douchebags in Obama’s White House, and that’s saying a lot. He lied his ass off under oath before Congress about blanket surveillance.  He was part and parcel to Obama’s violation of the Constitution.

The Russian aren’t threat to our political system; the Dems and the Deep State are.

 

 

 

Related posts

https://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2018/02/02/house-memo-outlines-corruption-and-surveillance-abuse-of-weaponized-government-agencies-by-obama-regime-against-trump-campaign/

https://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2017/05/27/obama-used-the-nsa-fbi-to-illegally-spy-on-americans-for-years-tried-to-hack-election/

 

John Brennan Pushed Fake Investigation Against President Trump

Not hard to believe since Brennan hates Trump and was a perfect tool for Obama.

 

BizPac Review

Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova dropped the bombshell revelation that former Obama CIA director John Brennan intentionally pushed false information that would later be used to launch an illegitimate counter-intelligence investigation of Donald Trump when he was running for president.

“It is abundantly clear that there was no legitimate basis even for a counter-intelligence investigation, let alone a criminal investigation,” DiGenova said on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show May 15.

“It is quite obvious that John Brennan was at the head of the group of people who were going to create a counter-intelligence investigation against Trump by creating false information that was going to be fed through Carter Page and George Papadopoulos so that it would be picked up, reported back to Washington, and provide the basis for a fake counter-intelligence investigation.

It was all Brennan’s doing. That’s why the Justice Department is viciously fighting, revealing everything they can about the source in London who everybody knows the identity of… The source in London was another person who was feeding false information to George Papadopoulos and others about collusion, which did not exist.”

Like many other attorneys, DiGenova says the illegal surveillance of Trump aides and the fruitless “Russia collusion” investigation stems from Barack Obama’s failed attempts to rig the election for Hillary Clinton by weaponizing the FBI and CIA against Donald Trump when he was a private citizen.

“I don’t think there is any question that the Mueller investigation, as it sits now, is illegitimate,” DiGenova previously said. “The appointment by [Obama’s deputy Attorney General Rod] Rosenstein of Mueller did not name a crime that was being investigated. It named nothing. This was a way for the Department of Justice under Rosenstein to avoid responsibility for conducting an inquiry.”

 

A background on Brennan:

A Feb. 13, 2010 speech Brennan gave at the New York City School of Law was organized by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a group founded by the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization, whose members operate within the United States, with Obama’s blessing. During the speech, he soft-peddled jihad as a touchy-feely soul-searching struggle.  Meanwhile, the blood bath in the name of Islam continued unabated.

Brennan also forced Benghazi survivors to sign non-disclosure agreements, and opined that critics of Obama’s flaccid ‘counter terrorism’ policies were ‘serving goals of Al Qaeda’ .

More: In a 2008 paper, Brennan called on U.S. officials to “cease public Iran-bashing,” and recommended that the U.S. “tolerate, and even … encourage, greater assimilation of Hezbollah into Lebanon’s political system, a process that is subject to Iranian influence.”  He helped strip language about “radical Islam” and similar terms from government vernacular, choosing instead to refer to “violent extremism.”

He also colluded with British and Estonian spies in an effort to sabotage Trump’s campaign.
Brennan is a douchebag who has done everything he can to undermine the national security and foreign policy of the United States.

He fit right in with the Obama regime.

Speaking of which, Brennan actually squeezed the fake dossier allegations into Obama’s daily briefings and lied about his knowledge of the dossier before Congress. 

What a twat.

 

 

Related articles: 

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2018/04/20/bad-day-for-the-bad-guys-giulianis-in-comey-memos-are-out-and-the-reaction-is-overwhelming-625982

https://www.justice.gov/file/19351/download: A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal
Prosecution

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/14/2_colleagues_contradict_brennan_on_use_of_dossier.html

 

The Mueller Investigation is a Set Up

The Dems were so desperate to thwart the election of Donald Trump that they cooked up an elaborate scheme to manipulate a naive 24 year old braggart who didn’t know anything but wanted to make an impression.

That ploy was aside from the fake dossier.

Rush Limbaugh breaks down the scandal of how an FBI informant, most likely a Oxford/Cambridge professor named Stefan Halper, set up George Papadopoulos and a phony meeting with the Australian ambassador. FBI operatives in the UK fed Papadopoulos false information that the Russians had thousands of Hillary emails, and Papadopoulos parroted the story.

The following excerpts are from Limbaugh’s program today. Go to the links and read the whole thing to get a good idea of the cloak and dagger tactics these crapweasels used.

Via Rush Limbaugh:

I know now know who the FBI was running in the Trump campaign. I don’t think I’m gonna give you the name of the spy, but I’m gonna tell you everything the spy has done. It is the most amazing story. It is a story of entrapment. When you hear this, it’s gonna infuriate you. You’re gonna realize how utterly phony this entire investigation of Donald Trump is. It’s phonier than you even realize now.

And there is a CliffsNotes version of this, and there is the intricate detailed version of this. I’m gonna give you the CliffsNotes version when we get into this. The name of the spy, you may not know it, it’s not somebody when you hear the name, “Oh, that person.” It’s not that kind of person. Even to call the person a spy is a little bit of a stretch. It’s more like an operative employed by the FBI to basically entrap somebody who worked with the Trump campaign in a peripheral way, and it worked like a charm.

And it all involved the name George Papadopoulos. Does the name George Papadopoulos ring a bell? George Papadopoulos is the so-called second reason the Mueller investigation or the FBI investigation into Trump colluding with Russia began. The first reason we were given was Carter Page. A FISA warrant, as you know, was secured to spy on Carter Page because of the Steele dossier. But nothing came of Mr. Page.

The New York Times over the New Year’s weekend, 2017-2018, wrote a story saying that actually it was something else that triggered everything, and that was George Papadopoulos. They dropped Carter Page entirely and, using the media, when the Steele dossier was exposed as a fraud, when it was exposed as an opposition research document, the intelligence people, the FBI, DOJ, went into stage 2, came up with a new reason, ostensibly to trigger the investigation.

Turns out it wasn’t Carter Page. It was George Papadopoulos. And do you remember what they said Papadopoulos did? Papadopoulos got drunk one night at a bar in London and started talking to somebody that just happened to be an ambassador from Australia. And Papadopoulos told this guy that the Russians had thousands of Hillary Clinton emails. The New York Times weekend story, New Year’s weekend in 2017-2018 stressed that that is what actually triggered the investigation.

Well, Papadopoulos was entrapped by three people, including the person who is reputed to be the spy. And very simply here’s the CliffsNotes version of what happened. George Papadopoulos, 24-year-old peripheral member of the Trump foreign policy campaign team. He was a nothing. He was a nobody, which made him a perfect mark. He was a young guy who wanted to go places.

On his resume trying to get jobs with governments and campaigns, he actually put on his resume that he had participated in Model U.N. in high school and college. The spy, the operative, sent this guy from the U.K., sent this guy an invitation to write a paper on things about Turkey and Cyprus and some other things, offered to pay him $3,000, and his plane ticket to the U.K.

Before that happened, another operative had informed Papadopoulos that the Russians had Hillary Clinton emails. Papadopoulos did not independently know this. He was told this by a Russian spy or a person connected to the Russians whose name is Mifsud. Mifsud operates with the person thought to be the FBI’s informant on the Trump campaign and the Australia ambassador.

So some months before Papadopoulos was offered this research paper and speech by the informant, he was paid three grand for it and his plane ticket to Europe, sometime before that this Mifsud guy happened to see — Papadopoulos was set up and targeted. And he was told, “By the way, Russians have 3,000 or a bunch of Hillary emails, thousands of Hillary emails.” Papadopoulos keeps it close to the vest, doesn’t say anything about it, but thinks it’s really cool that somebody is letting him in on things.

In other words, Papadopoulos, reputedly the source and the reason, the second explanation for the investigation, only knew supposedly the Russians do have Hillary. We don’t even know that that’s true. But they planted that news with him to set him up. Folks, this is entrapment like you cannot believe. So Papadopoulos, when he’s given this offer of $3,000 to do a lecture and write a report by the FBI’s informant, he already knows because he’s been told by this Mifsud fellow that the Russians have thousands of Hillary e-mails.

So when he is summoned — and Papadopoulos himself says his invitation to write this paper and come to the U.K. and be given $3,000 came out of the blue. He couldn’t figure it out, why me, he was asking himself. But he accepted and he went over. He met with the informant, and during a conversation the informant said, “George, do you remember, does it ring a bell, the Russians have thousands of Hillary emails? Do you remember this?”

So now Papadopoulos is hearing it for the second time. But he doesn’t know that he’s talking to an informant for the FBI, a, quote, unquote, spy. So after that, the informant gets hold of the Australian ambassador and suggests to him that he meet Papadopoulos at a London bar, which happened. Papadopoulos gets liquored up, gets drunk, this is factually known, it’s been reported, and Papadopoulos starts bragging to the Australia ambassador, “Hey, did you know that the Russians have thousands of emails?”

Papadopoulos passed this information along as though it were his own. He was just trying to fit in. He was just trying to be a big guy. Papadopoulos telling this story to the Australia ambassador is what triggered this as news. Papadopoulos did not independently know this. He was fed this information. He was used to be a Trump campaign official to make the statement to the Australian ambassador who could then report to the FBI, DOJ, that a member of the Trump campaign has been saying that the Russians have thousands of Hillary’s emails.

The whole thing was a setup. It was perfect entrapment 101. When Papadopoulos was questioned about this by the FBI, he lied about some things, and that’s why Mueller indicted him, convicted him, and he was found guilty of lying to the FBI because at some point he realized what was going on.

Now, the important thing to remember here is that Papadopoulos was a peripheral member of the Trump campaign. He didn’t know anything officially. He wasn’t close enough to anybody to know anything. He’s 24, 25 years old, whatever, but he never had day-to-day contact with Trump. He didn’t have day-to-day contact with the Trump campaign foreign policy team, none of that. He was targeted because he was a young, eager beaver. He was targeted and he was set up and he was entrapped.

The informant and Mifsud implant the news with Papadopoulos that the Russians have thousands of Hillary emails. He’s hearing this essentially from people working — unbeknownst to him — with the FBI and the DOJ. So he gets drunk one night in a bar with the Australian ambassador, which was also set up and passes that information along as though it’s his own and he knows it as a Trump campaign person. That triggered. That provided an opportunity for the FBI/DOJ to say the Trump campaign knew that the Russians had 3,000 or thousands of Hillary Clinton emails.

……Papadopoulos was set up, including getting him drunk so that he would talk about the Hillary email that they had told him about. Papadopoulos had been informed by Joseph Mifsud. Again, this guy is a London-based academic who professed to have Kremlin connections, and he is introduced to Papadopoulos after the informant invites him over or — the invitation is made to Papadopoulos to do this lecture, to write this piece. That then opens up a channel of communication between Mifsud and Papadopoulos.

So before Papadopoulos even arrives in London, Mifsud informs him of the emails that the Russians have, the Hillary emails that the Russians hacked. So Papadopoulos is told this before he even arrives in London. I want to make that clear. Then he gets to London, accepting the invitation of the informant spy, who then happens to ask (paraphrasing), “George, you remember this story, right, about the Russians hacking Hillary’s emails and they have them? Remember?”

“Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Of course I do.” So Papadopoulos had been informed by Joseph Mifsud, a London-based academic who professed to have Kremlin connections. A few weeks later, drinking in a London bar — this is May of 2016 — Papadopoulos blabbed the news to Alexander Downer. And that’s essentially the story.

Now, it’s been confirmed, by the way, if you go back and look at Glenn Simpson testimony, private testimony, behind-closed-doors testimony to House and Senate committees, he alludes to all of this in a roundabout way, Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS. I mean, the more detail I go into there, the more convoluted the story gets because we’re skipping back and forth in time. As I say, it took me a number of hours on Saturday to put this all together. And I’m not the only one who has; please don’t misunderstand.

I’m telling you everything but the informant’s name. I’ve even gone to some websites who hate Trump, U.K. websites that hate Trump who love the informant. The informant’s an Oxford professor. He’s a typical establishment elitist person in his seventies. He comes from the whole elitist establishment crowd, which would be appalled at somebody like Donald Trump being elected.

He’s got ties to U.S. politics, dual citizenship, has U.K. citizenship and American citizenship and has served in American administrations widely known to American intelligence people and the FBI. And he was asked to perform this mission with Papadopoulos. And it simply, at its base level, is a story of entrapment. Papadopoulos then is questioned by Mueller about all of this. When the news hits that it was Papadopoulos rambling in a bar in London that actually triggered the investigation, that’s what Mueller and Rosenstein, everybody wants us to believe, it was Papadopoulos, not Carter Page, not the FISA warrant, not the Steele dossier.

 

When Papadopoulos was questioned by the FBI, who knew full well that he was set up, he panicked and lied. That’s what got him in hot water.

More:

……This is the same thing that happened with Comey and Trump. Comey set Trump up to get the dossier in the news by presenting him the dossier. James Clapper tells Comey to tell Trump about the dossier, and particularly the pee story, the golden showers story. ‘Cause that’s what they wanted out there. So Comey has admitted that was his assignment. He tells Trump about the dossier; Clapper then is informed by Comey that mission accomplished.

Clapper then tells CNN and CNN runs a story four days later on January 10th that the intelligence community has shown President Trump this dossier and they’re very concerned about. That put it flat-out right there in the news, and it was nothing more than a setup. And CNN, back in May, maybe late April, got an award from the White House Correspondents’ Association for this daring, brave breaking news which was nothing more than a setup engineered by James Clapper who lied about it and then didn’t lie about it, and then who ended up being hired by CNN.

So you could even say that Clapper was paid to do this, in the end. Then the story of George Papadopoulos, who, after the Carter Page angle bombed out as the supposed reason for the investigation, reason for the FISA warrant, then they set up George Papadopoulos, a little peripheral foreign policy so-called adviser. He wasn’t even that. I don’t mean to diminish Papadopoulos; please don’t misunderstood. But in the big scheme he was not a player.

But he was spotted as somebody that wanted to be a player, so he was cultivated by British intelligence and who we know how is the British informant or spy the FBI was using. And they implant information with Papadopoulos that the Russians have thousands of Hillary Clinton hacked emails. They tell him this. Effectively, the FBI and their associates in the United Kingdom tell Papadopoulos this.

That was to set up a meeting that they arranged with Papadopoulos and the Australian ambassador at a bar in London in which Papadopoulos, after having too much to drink, starts bragging about what he knows to the Australian ambassador, that the Russians have a whole bunch of hacked Hillary Clinton emails.

This allows the Australian ambassador ostensibly to call the CIA and the FBI, “Guess what? I just heard from a Trump campaign official that the Russians have hacked Hillary Clinton emails, and the Trump campaign knows about it.” Papadopoulos didn’t know anything. They told him. That then triggered the current phase of this investigation, as announced by the New York Times over New Year’s weekend in a very lengthy story.

This is, as I say, the CliffsNotes version this of. But the point is none of this is real. It was all set up. To call it entrapment is maybe a little bit much because entrapment is used to get somebody you know is guilty. This was just a circular firing squad in a sense, circular intel, if you will. They plant essentially what they want to be attributed to the Trump administration. They plant it in a peripheral Trump foreign policy adviser. Then they arrange a meeting for him with an Australian ambassador, who then hears this news and we’re off to the races.

And none of it is real, none of it.

And the collusion has fallen apart, and the obstruction. There isn’t any obstruction. The president cannot obstruct by doing his constitutional duties. So what we’re left with here is look at the lengths to which these people have gone to, A, prevent Trump from winning, and then, after that, doing their best to get rid of him, to force him to resign, to force all public support to abandon him.

……I started looking into all this when — it was last week, Kimberley Strassel, Washington Post alluding to the fact that the FBI had an informant in the Trump campaign, a spy. Damn right I’m tracking that down. Kimberley Strassel didn’t want to identify who it was until she could have it confirmed by intelligence sources. After I found out who it was, it doesn’t matter who it was. I mean, the name is not a household name for most people in this country. It doesn’t matter who it was. What they did, and damn right when I found out they’re spying, when they’re informing, when they are planting, when they’re setting people up.

And it’s not just the FBI and the DOJ. Folks, this involved U.K. MI6 people. This involves U.K. academics, which are, you know, Oxford and MI6 are practically inseparable. Oxford University. (interruption) Well, you know, Obama’s fingerprints. I don’t think Obama’s fingerprints need to be on it unless you want to say that Brennan and Clapper were doing Obama’s work. But they didn’t need Obama’s fingerprints. That’s my point. These people didn’t need a memo from Obama to do this. This is instinctively something they had to do to protect themselves.

They simply cannot allow for somebody like this to come in and win and accomplish things. They just can’t permit it. It undercuts a lifetime of work that they have done to condition people to have low expectations about major achievements that would improve life around the world and in the United States. They have done everything they can to sustain themselves as the only people qualified to deal with these humongous, big, and complex issues. And creating complexity is primarily what they do.

They manufacture complexity because that then eliminates a large number of people from even being qualified to deal with it. And if you notice people referring to Obama and his brilliance, they talk about his ability to deal with the complexities of the world. These are manufactured complexities, all to service the notion that only they are bright enough to navigate these complexities. They can’t allow somebody they think is a simpleton to come in here and demonstrate that they have created a house of cards.

 

The leftwing Deep State really didn’t believe Trump would win the election. As an ‘insurance policy‘ during the campaign, the FBI, James Comey, the Hillary campaign, a reprobate former MI6 agent, and the Obama regime all had a hand in producing and paying for a lurid, fabricated dossier which was then used to secure a warrant from the FISA court under fraudulent claims, to spy on the Trump campaign.

Former MI6 operative, Christopher Steele, was hired by Fusion GPS, a corporate espionage firm, to dig up dirt on Trump but came up with a fabricated smear instead. Not deterred by the total implausibility of the story described in the dossier, GPS shopped the dossier to the liberal media and paid journos to feed the fake story to the press with predicable results; the left wing morons at Buzzfeed and  CNN  jumped at the chance to print the fake news.  The FBI even offered $50,000 to Steele for information.

The Obama regime paid almost one million dollars to the same law firm that funneled money to GPS.  Somewhere in that mess is RINO John McCain,  who received the dossier from a former British ambassador to Moscow.

Glenn Simpson, GPS co-founder,  was questioned in a closed door hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The Mueller clusterfuck is two fold: The fake dossier was tried and failed, then they used the planted story about the Trump campaign having inside knowledge of the Russians possessing Hillary’s emails.  They also inserted a mole into the Trump campaign.

 

The more that comes out about these anti-Trump Deep State douchebags, the worse it gets.

 

 

 

Related post:

https://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2018/02/02/house-memo-outlines-corruption-and-surveillance-abuse-of-weaponized-government-agencies-by-obama-regime-against-trump-campaign/