[LonePalm]

Refer back to the letter here.

Consider paragraph 1.
At the request of a foreign Head of State/Government, Barack 0bama, the GCHQ (British equivalent of NSA) had been collecting intelligence on the Donald Trump campaign. This is the equivalent of Theresa May asking NSA to collect Signals Intelligence on Jeremy Corbin or Nigel Farage in the middle of Parliamentary elections.

That they did so means that it had to have been approved by Theresa May. There is no way ANY Home Secretary (Secretary of State) would approve this without the PM's knowledge and approval.

Now consider paragraph 2.
The head of GCHQ is asking the Home Secretary for permission to continue the Signals Intelligence collection. Only now it is of an incoming, allied, Head of State/ Government. Since he doesn't state otherwise Mr. Hannigan must think this is a good idea? Really? No qualms or concerns at all sir?

That the IOCCO (Interception of Communications Commissioner's Office) approved the SI collection only means that the collection is legal under BRITISH law. It doesn't mean that he thinks it is a good idea. That is a political question.

Consider paragraph 3.
Do you REALLY think that the head of a major intelligence agency would a) Out a source in a letter, b) misidentify the name of that source, and c) misidentify the origin of that source? His name is Christopher Steele and he worked for MI6 (think CIA) vice MI5 (think FBI counter intelligence).

Consider paragraph 4.
The translation here is, "We need you to spy for us because if we did it, PDJT might learn about it, and we might end up in prison."

Lastly, paragraph 5.
Again, Mr. Hannigan seems to think this is a good idea with no downside risk to Britain. REALLY?

Can you imagine an NSA Director, any director, making such a request?

Taken all together, this just screams, FAKE. Hope this helps.

WWG1WGA

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

[generally]

Good points, all.

Just playing devil’s advocate here, not saying you’re wrong.

My weak refutation of some of them is :

1. They never thought she would lose.
1.b. They thought they had a backup plan to get rid of him when she lost.
2. These people are stupid.
3. The smart ones would not sign their names to such letters. (Kind of like the FISA warrants? 0vomit’s name is not likely on them. He had “his people” sign them.)

>> Can you imagine an NSA Director, any director, making such a request?

Before Q/Trump, I could not. Now I can imagine a LOT of things.