Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Did the FBI Plant a Mole in Trump’s Presidential Campaign?

Did the FBI Plant a Mole in Trump’s Presidential Campaign?

Also, why is the FBI being so difficult with information?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE

In The Wall Street Journal, Kimberley Strassel penned an op-ed that suggests the FBI may have placed a mole within then-GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign since the department will not reveal its top-secret source.

And when did the FBI become so secretive? A former FBI agent wrote in the WSJ that in his time, Congress wouldn’t ever need to request a subpoena to retrieve information from the bureau.

The FBI Source

She wrote (emphasis mine):

Among them is that the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation outright hid critical information from a congressional investigation. In a Thursday press conference, Speaker Paul Ryan bluntly noted that Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes’s request for details on this secret source was “wholly appropriate,” “completely within the scope” of the committee’s long-running FBI investigation, and “something that probably should have been answered a while ago.” Translation: The department knew full well it should have turned this material over to congressional investigators last year, but instead deliberately concealed it.

House investigators nonetheless sniffed out a name, and Mr. Nunes in recent weeks issued a letter and a subpoena demanding more details. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s response was to double down—accusing the House of “extortion” and delivering a speech in which he claimed that “declining to open the FBI’s files to review” is a constitutional “duty.” Justice asked the White House to back its stonewall. And it even began spinning that daddy of all superspook arguments—that revealing any detail about this particular asset could result in “loss of human lives.”

Strassel described Rosenstein’s response as desperation and more than likely the reveal will make the FBI “very uncomfortable.” Strassel continued:

Thanks to the Washington Post’s unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes’s request deals with a “top secret intelligence source” of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S. citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe. When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency. Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.

This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting. It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough. Obama political appointees rampantly “unmasked” Trump campaign officials to monitor their conversations, while the FBI played dirty with its surveillance warrant against Carter Page, failing to tell the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that its supporting information came from the Hillary Clinton campaign. Now we find it may have also been rolling out human intelligence, John Le Carré style, to infiltrate the Trump campaign.

It’s very possible that this “source” is someone who already had a place in the campaign and the FBI merely chose the person. However, the DOJ has also said that revealing the name could possibly “damage international relationships.” Strassel wrote that means the person “may be overseas, have ties to foreign intelligence, or both.”

Yes, it’s possible another foreigner is part of this puzzle. I mean, everyone is all uppity about Russia interfering in our election, but remember an Australian diplomat “reported the Papadopoulos conversation,” former British spy Christoper Steele authored the dossier, and a former British diplomat told Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) about said dossier.

FOREIGNERS EVERYWHERE.

If the FBI actually planted someone in the campaign, that deserves an investigation like the Russia-Trump collusion. It’s an intrusion into a presidential campaign and, in my opinion, no better than a foreign government doing the same thing. Actually, it sickens me more to think of our agencies doing it.

The DOJ claims the FBI triggered its investigation into possible collusion after it received a tip in July 2016 about an over talkative George Papadopoulos.

We still need these answers: When did the FBI receive that infamous Steele dossier? When did the FBI receive the Papadopoulos information?

We also need to know when this “source” started because if the person came into play before the Papadopoulos information the FBI “was spying on the Trump campaign before that moment,” which means that the department “had been spurred to act on the basis of something other than a junior campaign aide’s loose lips.”

FBI’s Secretive Behavior

Let’s also look at the hostile behavior from the FBI and DOJ. The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed about it from retired FBI special agent Thomas Baker on the same day as Strassel’s piece.

Baker cannot believe the department’s “shocking disrespect for Congress” because during his 33 years at the FBI, “lawmakers’ requests for information got prompt responses.” Baker wrote (emphasis mine):

Former Directors William Webster (1978-87) and Louis Freeh (1993-2001) insisted that the FBI respond promptly to any congressional request. In those days a congressional committee didn’t need a subpoena to get information from the FBI. Yes, we were particularly responsive to the appropriations committees, which are key to the bureau’s funding. But my colleagues and I shared a general sense that responding to congressional requests was the right thing to do.

The bureau’s leaders often reminded us of Congress’s legitimate oversight role. This was particularly true of the so-called Gang of Eight, which was created by statute to ensure the existence of a secure vehicle through which congressional leaders could be briefed on the most sensitive counterintelligence or terrorism investigations.

This Gang of Eight is not the same Gang of Eight formed in 2013 who wrote an immigration bill.

No, this Gang of Eight includes eight senators who receive briefings on classified information. This is why Baker cannot believe that the FBI and DOJ have guarded information so closely or that former FBI Director James Comey didn’t tell Congress about the investigation on Trump.

THIS IS WHY CONGRESS HAS THE GANG OF EIGHT. Baker said not using this group of senators “is inexplicable” because they EXIST FOR THIS VERY REASON.

[Featured image via YouTube]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:
, ,

Comments

simple answer?

they are hiding something that is either embarrassing, illegal or both.

Colonel Travis | May 11, 2018 at 3:08 pm

Why is this entire mess not perceived as being profoundly worse than Watergate?

Rhetorical question.

The epidemic corruption involved to bring down this president is sickening.

Possible loss of life to Arkancide.

When did all of this start ?
As soon after Jan 20 2009 as the dinglebarry admin could get it going.
I am not limiting this to the 2016 election cycle, I am referring to the weaponizing of the bureaucracy against the American people and anyone that was NOT a good apparatchik.

    Paul in reply to Lewfarge. | May 11, 2018 at 3:22 pm

    Most people didn’t really know what “bringing Chicago-style politics to DC” really meant. Now they know that it means sickening corruption to the core.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Paul. | May 11, 2018 at 5:22 pm

      …and Death Panels in the Obama (non)Health Care System.

If the FBI will not answer to Congress then who the god damn fuck is supposed to provide oversight??!!?!1

Henry Hawkins | May 11, 2018 at 3:55 pm

This weaponization of the FBI and DOJ (and IRS, and etc.,etc.) means they all have an adversarial relationship with the very people they are supposed to serve and with those folks’ representatives in Congress. In government at any level, a lack of oversight leads directly to corruption.

Now that we know tht there was a specific “source” for the counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign, the current speculation is that the FBI had an agent in place within the campaign. The reason why this is popular, among most of the media, is because it bolsters the idea that there was actually some evidence of collusion to begin with. However, there are other possible theories to account for the “source” who provided information to justify the launch of the counterintelligence investigation on the campaign. It is a huge mistake to make the assumption that there was any collusion to find, in the first place.

Sundance, at the Conservative Treehouse, proposes an equally possible theory based upon his presumption of the identity of the unnamed “source”.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/05/11/the-insurance-policy-the-ec-the-2016-fbi-counterintel-operation-and-the-mysterious-informant-who-originated-brennans-ec/

If this proves accurate, it is far more worrisome than simply placing an agent within the campaign. Much More Worrisome. It forces one to choose between the FBI/DOJ being composed of complete morons or that the higher levels of the organization were actively engaged in framing Trump et al.

This just gets better and better.

    regulus arcturus in reply to Mac45. | May 11, 2018 at 5:22 pm

    Once the full picture of this super-duper secret “informant” is known, it will likely lead to dismantling FBI.

      forksdad in reply to regulus arcturus. | May 12, 2018 at 10:03 pm

      It will be like fast and furious and all the other scandals either some ‘lone wolf’ will fall on his sword, a slap on the wrist or nothing at all.

    So rather than “in”, the man was adjacent to, in heavy contact with, and so on and so forth. I view this as a distinction without much of a difference, but if that’s the game they want to play, fine. I am patient, and while it appears to be agonizingly slow, Congress is slowly working its way toward these details.

    It’s obviously difficult for Congress to conduct a thorough inquiry if the intelligence agencies it created and funds on an annual basis refuse to cooperate where the sources of Russian collusion are concerned.

    gonzotx in reply to Mac45. | May 11, 2018 at 5:38 pm

    ConservativeTreeHouse is not a source I would be quoting. They are either insane, stupid, or a fake front. They believe Sessions and Trump are really incohots and at any minute Sessions is going to ride in on his white stallion and lay all the evidence against the Deep State. Lots of talk about white hat vs black hat BS.
    I would go to trumpet hillaryis44.org if you want some insight into CTH.
    Of course the site no longer supports hillary and is full force behind Trump. Excellent political analysis

      Tom Servo in reply to gonzotx. | May 11, 2018 at 6:52 pm

      I disagree with some of the conclusions drawn at the Treehouse. (mostly written by “Sundance”, iirc) But I also note that this writer has gotten some things correct weeks before anyone else has, so I don’t write him off entirely, either.

      I do believe that the IG’s report is going to be a Big Deal when it finally comes out.

      Mac45 in reply to gonzotx. | May 11, 2018 at 8:21 pm

      Oh, I have a lot of problems with some of Sundance’s positions; most notably that Sessions is NOT part of the Establishment. That position got me booted from that forum months ago. However, Sundance does some very good analysis work. So, while I take his analysis with a grain of salt, until sufficient proof exists to validate it, I do not simply discount it.

      Until we have identified the “source” for the information which spawned the counterintelligence investigation, in the first place, all is speculation.

        amwick in reply to Mac45. | May 12, 2018 at 5:51 am

        FWIW,
        The reason for being booted from CTH have nothing to do with opinions, it has to do with civility and ad hominem attacks. Behavior that is tolerated here is not tolerated there.

      Glenn Jordan in reply to gonzotx. | May 11, 2018 at 10:45 pm

      Conservative Treehouse gets it right. It rates “High” for factual reporting at the Media Bias/Fact Check website. I do find it too sycophantic toward Trump, especially in the comment section, and the talk of 4D chess gets tiresome. However, Sundance nailed the Trump path to the White House almost as soon as DJT came down the escalator. He also shed the first light on the fact that the prosecution had no case against George Zimmerman. He was way ahead of everyone on DOJ and FBI corruption in the Russian Collusion Delusion. Is your main objection the support of Sessions?

      Bruce Hayden in reply to gonzotx. | May 12, 2018 at 2:12 am

      Not my experience at all with the CTH. For example, when the OIG report came out on D Dir McCabe’s lack of candor, and the basis of his firing, I knew exactly what was going on. Who “Special Counsel” was (Lisa Page), and why the IG believed her, and not McCabe – because it was all in the infamous cache of text messages between her and Peter Strzok. 8-9 or so months earlier (7-8/2017), the OIG had disclosed her emails with Peter Strzok, how they had engineered the leak, who they leaked to, that McCabe had approved of the leaks, and finally that his falsely denying such authorizations was seen by her as McCabe being a traitor to, and selling out, his people. And may have been the beginning of the end of his FBI career. Which was all in their Text messages. And it explained why those text messages had been selected for disclosure way back then. Those who followed the CTH fairly closely knew precisely what was going on. Much better than most of the >99% of Americans who don’t. Indeed, the CTH has done a superb job laying out the emerging scandal.

      His latest guess is:
      “Remember the Peter Streak trip to London? The source of John Brennan’s “EC” is likely FBI and CIA operative Stefan Halper a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.”

      We shall see how close he was in a couple months.

      CTH had an excellent timeline for the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, MO, including showing how Brown’s friend Dorian Johnson was a shameless liar about several important issues. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but “Sundance” is an entertaining writer. Every once in a while, I’ll go over there to see what’s going on.

You will recall, I told you that Trump was our weapon of choice against an out of control, corrupt to the core, and crooked government.

It takes time, but it is being exposed.

regulus arcturus | May 11, 2018 at 5:20 pm

Yes, they did plant a spy within Trump’s campaign, and were illegally surveiling him the entire time.

Many people will go to prison for doing this.

Once the indictments start, there may not be a stop to them for some time.

Reverse the parties involved, and the Left would be hammering this 24/7 on every channel.

Now, crickets.

inspectorudy | May 11, 2018 at 6:03 pm

Two things. One, almost half of the country couldn’t care less if the FBI planted a spy in Trump’s campaign. Any action taken has to be legal and severe, not popular. This is an un-American activity that cannot be tolerated. But just like Lois Lerner with 15 hard drive crashes in a week, DoJ will not pursue these terrible crimes against our Constitution!
Two, we are at a point that AG Sessions can no longer play the PC legal game. He has to take the gloves off along with Trump declaring this whole investigation and corruption UNCLASSIFIED! Everyone involved has to be treated like they are traitors even though the legal status would not support it. There can be no double standard for any of the involved people like hillary received. The time is now,not after Muelller decides the fate of our president. Get off of your ass Sessions and go to work!

“Did the FBI Plant a Mole in Trump’s Presidential Campaign?”

You mean, Sessions?

Keeping information classified is done in the interests of national security. In this case, the illegal overthrow of the constitutionally elected President is of the highest national security possible.

https://twitter.com/the_war_economy has researched the adventures of those thought behind this putsch, which organizations that they belong to and many of their affiliations. It’s an interesting read.

Seems it started during the Obama presidency. Remember how tough it was to get information out of IRS for targeting Tea Party groups?

If they were just looking for foreign interference in our election why did the not plant spies in the clinton, sanders, and stein campaigns????

Carter Page
He was an FBI informant in the Russian spycase in 2013 .
He testified in April 2016 in the case in New York .
The AAG running that case was John Carlin.
John Carlin spilled the beans to Rosemary Colliers court in Sept 2016 about all the illegal use of 702 and 705 inquiries that prompted her Fisa opinion of Oct 26 2016 that was declassified April 2017 .
John Carlin then resigned in Oct 2016.
Thus the OIG had no leverage on him.

    Barry in reply to dmi60ex. | May 11, 2018 at 10:49 pm

    Don’t confine yourself to just one plant…

    Bruce Hayden in reply to dmi60ex. | May 12, 2018 at 9:39 am

    I think that maybe the better answer to the FISC opinion that you referenced is that it was a result of the 702 compliance audit ordered by (just retired) NSA Director Adm Rogers, upon finding rampant misuse by the FBI and maybe White House. He apparently shut down 702 To/From and About queries some time in late spring of 2016 and ordered the audit, then supplied the results of the audit to the FISC sometime that fall.

Glenn Jordan | May 11, 2018 at 11:01 pm

The idiocy and hubris of this whole scam prove truth is stranger than fiction. It looks like Manafort has a chance to win in court and the Russians have asked for discovery. Each day passes and it becomes more apparent that the Collusion Delusion is nothing more than a hit job on the ’16 election. Higher Loyalty indeed.

Compared to Obama and his handlers, Nixon was a piker. Who needs Plumbers when you have the entire intelligence apparatus at your disposal?

Congress should do its duty and zero out the DoJ’s budget. It’s clearly a criminal conspiracy operating under the color of law.

Odd, but just 6 months ago if you had told me FBI had planted a mole inside the Trump campaign I would have said something close too:

“Awkward but I trust they have a good reason for it, likely for national security concerns and obviously they won’t interfere politically”

Now my first thought is the FBI was spying on opposition party’s campaign. For Obama and Clinton.

I wonder how many other Americans went down that same path.

There was a time I regarded the FBI as Boy Scouts with Laser Rifles. I would have stepped in front of a bullet for them, cooperated fully with any thing they told me to.

Now I don’t trust them farther than I could throw an SS Officer.

    amwick in reply to Fen. | May 12, 2018 at 6:12 am

    This. However, I still hope it is pretty much just the 7th floor that has the bad actors.

Bruce Hayden | May 12, 2018 at 10:00 am

What may be worse here, than the possibility that the FBI had a moll in the Trump campaign team, is that the entire counterintelligence investigation was initiated by a US govt (CIA and FBI) paid agent provocateur, who got several low level Trump campaign members (e.g. Carter Page) liquored up, asked them compromising questions about the Crooked Hillary email server having been hacked by the Russians, and then sent the incriminating results back via MI6. No need to actually find any dirt, just to make them look a little dirty, and that pretext would have been all it took.

Maybe too conspiratorial, but there seem to be a lot of smoke and mirrors going on, including that the most logical way for Christopher Steele to screw up about Trump attorney Michael Cohen going to Prague would have been if the source of that information were an illegal Title VII FISA database search, and Steele was maybe only involved to launder similarly illegal FISA database search results for use in that Title I FISA warrant application for Carter Page.

It goes something like this:
Comey do you want to be the one who takes down the black president? No rather be fired.
Sessions do you want to be the one who takes down the black president? No rather be fired first.
Rosenstein do you want to be the one who takes down black president? No rather be fired first
Horowitz do you want to be the one who takes down black president? No rather not release report

One of the spies according to what I read from several sources is Stephen Halper. He suckered Papadopoulos to England and apparently got him convicted of a process crime.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend