Posted on 12/30/2017 8:20:51 PM PST by mojito
Immediately following confirmation by Senator Lindsey Graham about the origin of the 2016 FBI Counterintelligence Operation against candidate Donald Trump, The New York Times, via Clinton’s favorite voice Maggie Haberman, pushes out an article attempting to cloud, obfuscate and justify the joint FBI and DOJ surveillance operation against Trump.
The timing, content and presentation of the disinformation is transparent in the intended motive. More and more people are recognizing the FBI application to the FISA court was based on political information, the Steele Dossier, assembled by political operatives and used by political operatives within the DOJ National Security Division and FBI Counterintelligence Division.
As such, now the people at risk within the FBI and DOJ attempt to shift the focus away from the political document known as the “Steele Dossier” and toward the useful distraction of a short-term volunteer Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos.
This approach, originated by the current sense within the intelligence community, indicates all dossier scrutiny is directly over the target; and the leadership knows the risk. This is why the upper-tier management of the FBI and DOJ have refused prior questions about the Dossier’s use. The DOJ/FBI officials know the outline of how the dossier was assembled implicates them in a verifiable conspiracy.
As to the substance of the NYT justification it is absurd on its face.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
We're going to find out soon: Right before this Slimes story hit, Lady Lindsay Graham said on Fox that he had seen some of the FISA materials, that he was "disturbed" by them, and recommended a special prosecutor look into them. I don't think the timing here is coincidental.
Ignorance is bliss?
And if the WaPo had already tried to claim in June that the only hacking of the DNC was by Russians, a story which was basically planted by the DNC, then it's very likely the same people behind that scheme would also try to tie Trump to the Russians.
While I see that as very likely, I don't think Strzok was any kind of mastermind. He was more like a meathead with enough liberal bias to go along with the scheme. The masterminds were more likely as you inferred the ones sending millions of dollars to Crowdstrike, Perkins Coie, and Fusion GPS.
Who exactly, it's not clear yet. But if FISA applications can only be signed by the AG (or Deputy AG?), it's someone operating up around that level, or higher. Probably one of the Clintons, or Obama, or one of their closest advisors.
FISA applications can be approved by any of the US District Court Judges appointed to the FISC by the Chief Justice of the USSC.
The applications leaving the DOJ. Didn’t we hear one of the reasons from the whining left that Trump wasn’t supposed to fire Sally Yares because she was the only one left that could sign them until his new AG was appointed?
just shows we have been paying attention.
They write these articles as if the Internet\WWW doesn’t exist.
Internet\WWW has a long memory and makes liars of us all.
sorry... I FUBARd something posting the first. see post #24.
heh heh
The DAG is responsible for dealing with the FISA court, but can’t OK surveillance on their own, that’s for sure.
Every bureaucracy devolves duties on to the ‘Acting’ official in the case of vacancies at the top, and there is ALWAYS an ‘Acting’ official regardless.
Notice is it says “applications”. Applications aren’t permission. That has to come from the FISA court.
Yet another nothing-burger from the NYT.
OK. I misunderstood your point a bit.
The “Dossier was not the cause of the investigation” meme is taking hold.
They will all have to retract next week because the truth is out there and this is such an obvious attempt to divert from the truth. The truth hopefully will land some people in jail.
Graham said he was disturbed by the FISA materials that he has seen, then he played golf with Trump. They know exactly what’s going on. I expect Graham to come out and refute this stupid article written by Clinton’s buddy.
wow, the first several (i stopped reading after a getting the gist) NYT-”pick” comments are uniformly pro-hillary and anti-trump.
apparently, someone in the deep state is *still* harboring dreams of invalidating the 2016 presidential election!
Yes, but lies are offensive to every conservative.
Yeah, I know. I have an in law, who watches TV all the time. No sense in trying to explain anything.
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.