Posted on 05/19/2018 4:32:28 AM PDT by Magnatron
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.
The role of the informant is at the heart of the newest battle between top law enforcement officials and Mr. Trump’s congressional allies over the F.B.I.’s most politically charged investigations in decades. The lawmakers, who say they are concerned that federal investigators are abusing their authority, have demanded documents from the Justice Department about the informant.
Law enforcement officials have refused, saying that handing over the documents would imperil both the source’s anonymity and safety. The New York Times has learned the source’s identity but typically does not name informants to preserve their safety.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I agree about protesting, but it takes organization, money and a lot of otherwise unemployed individuals to generate a protest. We on the right generally have access to fewer of the type that can be hustled over to a protest on practically a moment's notice.
Let's hope so. But it depends on recruitment, promotion, and appointment with those goals in mind. Is it too late? For example, one might have said something like this about educators at one point in time. Or even judges.
That dog will not hunt...the coming boom is going to be sonic.
Corrupt Intelligence Apparatchik Leaks “Informant” Name (Stefan Halper) and Defensive Perspective To New York Times…
Definitely a new form of protest has to evolve. For now that is the voting booth.
So why didn't they send spies when Bobby Boy went to Moscow with yellow cake samples?
“Gee... we weren’t spying on you. How could you suggest such a thing? We were just investigating what you were doing.”
The FBI should be dismantled. It has no reputation left.
The people behind this should be hung for treason.
...and AGAIN, nobody will go to prison for this..
They’ll just appoint another counsel to waste a year of taxpayer dollars to figure out how to make sure this doesn’t happen again... blah, blah, blah...
This is BS. We should be hanging people publicly.
Stefan Halper told Sputnik:
3 Nov 2016: Sputnik: Clinton Best Option for US-UK ‘Special Relationship’ – Ex-White House Official
The victory of Hillary Clinton, who is more experienced and predictable than her Republican rival Donald Trump, in the US presidential elections will be more beneficial for the US-UK relations, former White House official Stefan Halper told Sputnik
“I believe [Hillary] Clinton would be best for US-UK relations and for relations with the European Union. Clinton is well-known, deeply experienced and predictable. US-UK relations will remain steady regardless of the winner although Clinton will be less disruptive over time,” Halper, who served as deputy assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs and senior adviser to the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice, said.
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201611031047032702-clinton-us-uk-cooperation/
The FBI didn’t use an informant to go after Trump. They used one to protect him. [WasPo garbage]
So the narrative has shifted from "Trump is crazy, there was no spy," to "Trump is crazy, they weren't spying on him, they were protecting him."
If that is so, then why the Mueller investigation?
“Used an informant to investigate”
That’s what’s known as “spying.”
Dumbsh*ts.
So the spinners have been war gaming this scenario for the past year and their opening salvo is it was a legit to save the Republic! Slam that crap right down their necks.
Great point. I doubt you will get an answer from these scumbag Journos. They are fully complicit before and after the fact.
Oh look. Trump was right.
Oh look. Trump was right.
Some of the media reporting seems to be engaging in a word game.
What is an informant, oh no it was a “confidential source”?
Uh I guess a confidential sources is a “prostitute” in their minds, a way to dress up “informant” which I guess everyone knows to be some lower term.
Bump!
I am certain that had President Bush taken the very same approach with the presidential campaign of Barak Hussein Obama, the NYT would have been just fine with that, right?
OK. Fine. And what did they learn?
Gee... we weren’t spying on you. How could you suggest such a thing? We were just investigating what you were doing without telling you and then privately reporting it to your political opponents, self-servingly leaking harmful parts to the press and using the information to lie to our courts in order to wiretap ALL of your communications.”
Clarified it a bit!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
