Image 01 Image 03

Media Spin: FBI Spying on Trump Campaign Was a “Good Thing” Aimed At “Protecting” Trump

Media Spin: FBI Spying on Trump Campaign Was a “Good Thing” Aimed At “Protecting” Trump

Media that insisted there was no spying, now making excuses for it.

The latest revelations about the Obama FBI spying on the Trump campaign are alarming, and it’s hard not to see this in the context of a much bigger picture.

Connecting dots is a perilous business, but when they are neon bright and flashing, they’re hard to ignore.

First, we learned that the Obama administration took the unprecedented step of making it easier for the NSA to share private information on U. S. citizens.  We also learned that Obama’s NSA illegally spied on Americans in what the FISA court called illegal searches that constituted a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

Next, we learned that Obama’s former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and his former ambassador to the UN Samantha Power were both involved in “unmasking” hundreds of names of Trump’s campaign officials and members of his transition team.

And finally we learned that Obama’s FBI used the Steele dossier to obtain a FISA warrant on Trump adviser Carter Page.

While we don’t know if all of this is connected, it certainly seems that way, particularly in light of the latest revelation that Obama’s FBI spied on the Trump campaign.

The leftstream media has gone into hyper-drive as it struggles to protect Obama.  For example, the New York Times claims that Obama’s FBI was not “spying” on the Trump campaign but used an “informant” to “investigate Russia ties.”  The Washington Post is claiming that the Obama FBI was not going after Trump . . . they were “protecting him.”

From the New York Times:

President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia.

. . . . No evidence has emerged that the informant acted improperly when the F.B.I. asked for help in gathering information on the former campaign advisers, or that agents veered from the F.B.I.’s investigative guidelines and began a politically motivated inquiry, which would be illegal.

The Washington Post sees the NYT’s bid and raises them . . . calling the Obama FBI spying an attempt to “protect” Trump.

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.

As a former FBI counterintelligence agent, I know what Trump apparently does not: Counterintelligence investigations have a different purpose than their criminal counterparts. Rather than trying to find evidence of a crime, the FBI’s counterintelligence goal is to identify, monitor and neutralize foreign intelligence activity in the United States. In short, this entails identifying foreign intelligence officers and their network of agents; uncovering their motives and methods; and ultimately rendering their operations ineffective — either by clandestinely thwarting them (say, by feeding back misinformation or “flipping” their sources into double agents) or by exposing them.

. . . .

The real question isn’t why the FBI apparently tried to obtain intelligence from within Trump’s campaign, though — it’s why the bureau didn’t do so more aggressively and directly.

Meanwhile, former director of National Intelligence James Clapper appeared on CNN to claim that the Obama FBI’s Trump campaign spying is “a good thing.”


Rush has some interesting thoughts to share in response to this Clapper interview.

You people have done more to damage the integrity of the American electoral process than Vladimir Putin could in his dreams! And I’m not joking. With what these people have done for the last year and a half — basically get people thinking the election was stolen, that it was illegitimate, that the Russians didn’t want Hillary and wanted Trump and made it happen — look at what they have done to the image, the reputation of the American electoral system and process.

. . . . “They may have had somebody who was talking to them in the campaign. But, you know, the focus here, as it was with the intelligence community, is not on the campaign per se, but what the Russians were going to try.”

That is, pardon me, BS, Mr. Clapper. Your focus was Trump. It was Trump you were spying on. You weren’t spying on the Russians. If you were trying to find Russian influence in the campaign, you’d have been looking in Russia, you’d been looking in Putin, you’d be spying on people that would have done it.

No, you were spying on Trump. You were trying to find evidence that Trump was conspiring with the Russians, not that Russia was conspiring with Trump. That’s what you wanted to prove. And if you could, if you could have gotten close to it, I know these people would have said so.

This is total obfuscation. “No, we weren’t looking at the campaign. No, no, no. We were looking at the Russians because, of course, the Russians were going to try to instantiate themselves in the campaign or influence their leverage,” blah, blah, blah, blah. These guys are trying to double back and cover their tracks, lying through their wooden teeth about what they were doing.

Worth noting, too, is the allegation that Clapper lied to Congress about leaking information about the dossier to CNN.

Congressional Republicans are livid about the Obama FBI spying on the Trump campaign and note, as the prof has many times, that the goal was to manufacture evidence against Trump.

The Hill reports:

The GOP lawmakers have raised alarm bells about the alleged source in service of their argument that the FBI may have inappropriately “spied” on members of the Trump campaign during the election.

But none of the lawmakers have so far made their suspicions about the person’s identity public, and some Republicans privately fear that the alleged informant has been misidentified.

The Justice Department is refusing to provide access to the information lawmakers need to confirm their suspicions — arguing that doing so would endanger the person’s life.

But this has done little to check conservatives who have publicly suggested that the FBI placed a “mole” in President Trump’s campaign in order to manufacture evidence against him.

. . . . “If they did this, if there was a plant, if there was a spy, if there was an informant put in the other party’s campaign during the election, that is as wrong as it gets,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told the network on Friday.

Professor Jacobson noted that we are witnessing a slow-motion coup, and it appears that it may have roots in unsavory, even illegal, actions of the Obama administration.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The Media must think their viewers are really stupid.

    JohnSmith100 in reply to Fen. | May 19, 2018 at 9:15 pm

    The least reputable media do have a bunch of very dull witted viewers.

    They would be right. On a bell curve, 25% of the population has an IQ less than 90. That is good enough to graduate high school, if you really work at it, but barely trainable for a job, and even worse as they fall farther left on the curve. (Is that why we call them the LEFT?) AND THAT IS MORE THAN 80 MILLION PEOPLE. You will encounter a few every day.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to Fen. | May 20, 2018 at 2:36 pm

    The Media is counting on that.

Henry Hawkins | May 19, 2018 at 9:03 pm

Ends justify means. Pure leftism.

    Henry Hawkins: Ends justify means. Pure leftism.

    No. The ends justify the means is a characteristic of extremism, whether on the left, right, or otherwise. Most people on the political left and most people on the political right are not extremists.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Zachriel. | May 20, 2018 at 10:43 am

      You’re just making up new definitions to fit your narrative. Seems an extreme expediency to take.

        Henry Hawkins: You’re just making up new definitions to fit your narrative.

        Actually, are use of terminology is quite conventional. People that constitute the political left range from moderate liberals to radical leftists, while those that constitute the political right range from moderate conservatives to reactionaries.

          Barry in reply to Zachriel. | May 20, 2018 at 11:18 pm

          Nope, the political “left” are all commies all the time and have been for the last 20 years or so. Like you, murderers of 100+million people in the last century.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Zachriel. | May 21, 2018 at 12:12 pm

          The directive instruction that ‘ends justify means’ is all over leftist literature, from Rules For Radicals thru Cloward-Piven. It is no where to be found in conservative literature.

          Barry: Nope, the political “left” are all commies all the time

          The political left represents a wide spectrum of beliefs. Redefining the word to only refer to those on the far left (“commies”) is not an argument, but a fallacy of definition.

          Henry Hawkins: The directive instruction that ‘ends justify means’ is all over leftist literature …

          It’s found in extremist literature.

          Henry Hawkins: It is no where to be found in conservative literature.

          Oh gee whiz. The right-wing in Argentina used to drop people into the ocean in order to desaparecer them.

During the election, I was very afraid that Trump would win. Not because I was worried about what he would do – I was worried about what they would do. They have exceeded my fears.

The Dems/Obama/Hillary/MSM/FBI swamp would rather destroy the country than let him be President.

If you’re trying to protect someone from bad people in their organization, you tell them you’ve got someone inside or ask them to hire your person- you let them know there may be a problem. If you’re spying on someone, you insert someone into their organization- and don’t tell them. And further- don’t tell them there may be a problem.

The FBI didn’t tell Trump they had someone in his organization. Draw your conclusion from that.

    alaskabob in reply to gospace. | May 19, 2018 at 11:46 pm

    Would be interesting to know if not only Obama but Hillary also was in the loop. That tarmac meeting of Clinton and Lynch takes on added meaning.

captainscarlet | May 19, 2018 at 9:12 pm

Media can spin this all they like for now. If just one person gets indicted as a result of the IG report and a trial ensues. It’s game over for all of them, everything will come out.

One of the very interesting aspects of the Trump campaign rallies was the way Trump used them as a polling device. As he was talking, he would gauge the crowd response to the different issues. He talked about it, too. About the “Drain the Swamp” chant, he said that he was not sure it was such a good idea, but it took on a life of its own.

I think a lot of people are very well aware that our executive branch has been malfunctioning. “Drain the Swam” became an instruction to him.

I feel like Cassandra. I warned on his campaign’s facebook page about the entrenched administrative state before Deep State came into common use.

Something close to “we could elect another Reagan and it won’t make any difference because entrenched federal beurocrats would keep promoting their own leftist policies”

Put the intern that was on watch that night on latrine duty 😉

Congressional Republicans are livid about the Obama FBI spying on the Trump campaign

Not enough of them, not sufficiently, and perhaps too late.

    Tom Servo in reply to moonmoth. | May 20, 2018 at 8:14 am

    It’s a shame we are stuck using the word “Republican” although that’s how the system is organizes. In the Senate there are maybe 40, max, that support what Trump is trying to do. (and that number could be optimistic) There are 49 Senators who will oppose him automatically, on everything he tries to do. And then there’s anywhere from 12 – 15 who hate him and who want to help all the maneuvering to wreck him, but who are scared of their own constituents and so pretend they support him. More and more of these are coming out into the open and expressing their hatred publicly, thought, such as Flake, Corker, and McCain.

    Similar numbers in the House, where up to 40 of the so-called “Republicans” would be glad to vote with Pelosi as long as they thought they wouldn’t have to pay any price.

    The wildest of all wild cards is how things shake out this fall.

Let’s face it, our govern is the most corrupt it has ever been in all its history.

It’s still in the hands of criminals. Most insideous among them are the GOPe cockroaches like McConnell and Ryan, still fighing the will of the American people.

Until they’re gone (we do have control over their ability to be in office: they have no base, and only we can vote them in or out), and until the likes of clinton and obama re prosectued, don’t fool yourself into thinking the American govenment is any different than any other organized crime organization.

The Justice Department is refusing to provide access to the information lawmakers need to confirm their suspicions — arguing that doing so would endanger the person’s life.

In danger? For revenge? Or so he doesn’t talk?

Revenge on the small fry would be counterproductive at this point. But the danger to his bosses of the spy singing like a bird is obviously great.

So this hypothetical danger would seem to be from the D’rats or the Deep State. But both of them already know his identity.

So, this JD excuse is BS, and very unimaginative BS at that. These guys are really not very good at this stuff. But they didn’t think they’d have to be … not with a Hillary win.

    randian in reply to tom_swift. | May 19, 2018 at 11:49 pm

    “These guys are really not very good at this stuff. But they didn’t think they’d have to be”

    Even with Trump in office they still think they don’t have to be. DoJ isn’t going to prosecute itself.

    What I don’t get is since DoJ is part of the executive branch, why doesn’t Trump play hardball and send in Secret Service agents to take the evidence? That way they can’t destroy the records (aka evidence, assuming they haven’t already been destroyed). If you can’t find anything, order them to produce it, then fire them for insubordination when they don’t.

    rdm in reply to tom_swift. | May 20, 2018 at 6:05 am

    ‘If he got revealed his life would be in danger because we would have to kill him before he talked”

    kenoshamarge in reply to tom_swift. | May 20, 2018 at 8:59 am

    They don’t want to release information to those who have a right to it because that might interfere with their leaking it to their chosen media folks who will gleefully slant everything to support the leftstream media narrative.

Revealing the identity of the informant might lead to Arkancide.

Let NYT ,Brennan ,Clapper and Comey talk.
They are not tightening the thread,they are tightening the rope.

“The informant was not a spy just monitoring the campaign”. Limbaugh described a possible scenario of manufacturing the whole story to entrap and, as a judge said, maybe “compose” the right story for the needs of the Deep State.

As one drains the swamp the slime, muck, and swamp critters become more densely packed … as in it gets worse before it can get better.

Once upon a time the FBI was respected based on admiration. Now that respect is predicated on fear. Hate to think that FBI, GRU, KGB, NKVD, and Cheka will turn out to be just a similar bunch of letters.

“The Justice Department is refusing to provide access to the information lawmakers need to confirm their suspicions — arguing that doing so would endanger the person’s life.”

Endangered by whom?

I frequent LI because there seem to be a lot of lawyers here and I have no legal expertise. I keep hearing this is 100 times worse than Watergate, and agree, since it’s the Democrat FBI/DoJ attacking the out-of-power Party’s presidential candidate (and then the sitting President). But could someone help me explain the actual laws that have been broken for which the perps can be prosecuted?

DINORightMarie | May 20, 2018 at 1:04 am

The day this NYT article came out, May 16th, Mark Levin went through it for his entire radio show, exposing the spying, the illegalities, the works. It is almost 3 hours long, but worth it. Rush covered it THE NEXT DAY (as your quote indicates), as did Kimberly Strassel the WSJ.

Listen here – via TheRightScoop: Listen to the whole thing at the bottom, not just the short blurb.


VaGentleman | May 20, 2018 at 1:09 am

The FBI was there to protect Trump like the Watergate burglars were there to test security at the DNC.

Next they will tell us that the Holocaust was really Hitler’s effort to save the Jews.

Jefferson Alexander | May 20, 2018 at 3:58 am

Woodrow Wilson said that segregation was not humiliating but a benefit & that blacks should be grateful for it.

Thanos uses the same reasoning to justify wiping out half the universe in Avengers: Infinity War; he’s doing mankind a favor.

Domestic violence abusers tell their victims they’re abusing them because they love them so much.

Our nation is trapped in an abusive relationship with Leftists.

The Left and the Dumb-o-crats are utterly contemptible. They will use any and all rationales to justify and to defend brazen and indefensible illegalities, and, of course, to protect the sainted Obama, just as they’ve done since 2008.

What if I told you that both the NYTs and WaPo articles were written by FBI/CIA operatives and given to NYTs/WaPo to print?

6 months ago I would have found such a scenario to be tin foil hat territory. Now it’s Occam’s Razor.

Do you really think the FBI and CIA would trust the Media to protect them with spin? They are incompetent.

These people are the slimiest of the enemies of the United States — they are traitors. And they are many: Media, politicians, bureaucrats, and the leftist voters who support them.

The 2nd Amendment is the one barrier they fear. They call for “gun control” but never “crime control.” Crime is to be exploited to attack the 2A. Crime prevention tools are detection, denial, actions to defer (i.e. armed people), and displacement (my target is harder than my neighbor). Do they want to ban fire or tools from Home Depot? Comey, NYT, et al, are raging a war. They would “suspend” the Constitution including the 2A in a minute if they thought they could pull it off. Instead they are bitter that they must rage war like they are — against an outsider and the deplorables who elected him. They hate us and the USA. And the GOPe makes me sick. I thank God for the 2A and the few in DC who are trying to get us back on course.

    Fen in reply to TX-rifraph. | May 20, 2018 at 7:05 am

    This is a good litmus test. Remember Bridget Gabriel’s observation that historically “the peaceful majority is irrelevant. It’s the radical minority in the driver’s seat. Apply that here – how many on the Left are against Team Obama weaponizing the FBI to spy on Trump’s campaign during the election? That’s the same number that would be bothered if conservatives were rounded up for the re-education camps. The only reason we are still free is because we are armed to the teeth.

kenoshamarge | May 20, 2018 at 9:02 am

The contempt the leftstream media and the DOJ and FBI have for the people of this country is evident when they think the public will believe this swill.

Sadly, far too many will.

Henry Hawkins | May 20, 2018 at 10:48 am

Mafia operatives would visit neighborhood businesses and ‘offer’ protection against theft or damage for a monthly fee. This is where the saying, “nice business you got here, be a shame if something happened to it,” came from. Payment was mandatory. Police call it a protection racket.

Now the FBI is providing ‘protection’ to targeted campaigns by embedding undercover informants and operatives – and they’re not even charging for this service!

J. Edgar would be so proud.

The obama administration and all the little minions, including the Main slime media, really have earned one award.
The newly created Twilight Zone award.

Far too many people are still looking at the pre- and post-election Obama administration activities as individual incidents. And, this is a good thing for perpetrators of these activities. But, one has to step back and look at all the dots. The picture that they produce is horrifying.

At the center of this picture we have a small group of people at the highest level of the Obama administration who engaged in both improper and illegal activities in order to influence a Presidential election. To date, we have not categorically identified everyone who was involved in this, but it is all centered around then President Barack Obama. One layer out from that, we have the Clintons and the Clinton posse. The actions of the central group were geared to directly benefit this posse and were financed and likely coordinated in conjunction with this group. Next we have the layer of people who were and still are providing protection for the inner layers of this picture. This layer consists of a number of former and current high level employees of the federal bureaucracy as well as members of the Legislature, the entire Democrat political party and 95% of the national media. One more layer out, we have other members of the Obama administration who have been engaged in improper and even illegal actions with regard to other fields of endeavor [this included illegal IRS actions and previous illegal FISA abuses]. Beyond that you have the current Establishment power structure. when you step back far enough, what you see is a picture of a gigantic RICO enterprise of which the Obama Administration was the heart. Even if the RICO Act does not apply, technically, these activities were still violation of the spirit of the act. In other words, the Obama Administrations were an ongoing criminal enterprise.

And that is why much of what is happening today is happening at all. It is largely designed to protect high ranking members of the Obama administrations as well as President Obama himself and other politicians and members of the national Establishment. Removing Trump is a desirable achievement, as it would allow the Establishment to regain control of the Executive branch of the federal government, by the Establishment, and would seriously hamper the populist anti-Establishment moment in this country. But, the main thrust of the actions against Trump are to protect those involved in activities preceding and during the 2016 campaign. As evidence is released which further verifies that illegal activities occurred and the identities of those involved, the Establishment has become more and more desperate. This is evidenced by the increasingly outrageous actions of Mueller, the FBI/DOJ, the media and now the whole stupid, manufactured Stormy Daniels kerfuffle.

As more dots are added, the picture will become clearer and will horrify more and more citizens. Unfortunately, the Establishment has had 50 years to indoctrinate nearly 50% of the population into supporting its activities. How this will end is by no means assured. And, it could actually destroy this country.

harleycowboy | May 20, 2018 at 4:32 pm

I’m confused. How do you apologize for something that didn’t happen

pilgrim1949 | May 21, 2018 at 1:41 pm

Ahh…..brings back visions of ye olden days…

We had to destroy the village to save it.

Or is this MSM’s version of “protective custody” — in a solitary confinement cell so that no one can hurt you?

Truth be told, that actually IS their preferred “end game” for those who object to their benevolent Utopian tyranny.