Posted on 05/19/2018 7:25:54 AM PDT by FtrPilot
Who connects the FBI investigation into Trump and Russia, the snapping up of British nuclear knowhow and a reality TV star who makes dresses for the UK prime minister?
Step forward, mystery professor Joseph Mifsud of the London Academy of Diplomacy, originally from Malta, who mixed with Britain's foreign secretary and ex-CIA people, but who also helped connect Team Trump with the Russians.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
The WP/NYT articles point to Stefan Halper, while trying to portray him as a good guy trying to ferret out Russian interference.
What's missing is the CIA agent provocateur. Who planted the information that Russia had Clinton's missing e-mails? The answer is Joseph Mifsud.
From the BBC article: "In April 2016 in the run-up to the American election, Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos says Mifsud told him that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails, according to court documents."
Also in the article is this gem: "That conversation, which Papadopoulos carelessly relayed to an Australian over drinks in a posh London bar, was reported to American officials weeks later when emails hacked from the Democratic Party were leaked."
Note: the Australian is actually Alexander Downer, Australia's High Commissioner to Great Britain, who cannot be compelled to testify.
We are now finding out that Stefan Halper tried to get George Papadopoulos to admit that he (Papadopoulos) had information regarding Russia having Clinton's e-mails. Papadopoulos never admitted that to Halper. So, Halper is not the CIA agent provocateur. He is or was going to be the CIA source that Papadopoulos was working with the Russians and a counter-intelligence operation was needed.
My guess is that the CIA needed two intel sources to justify the counter-intel recommendation (EC). Halper was one and the Australia Ambassador was the other. The trail that John Brennen left is that the intelligence to initiate the counter-intel recommendation did not come through official intel channels.
On April 22, Devin Nunes stated: “There Were No Official Intelligence Channels Used To Start Trump Investigation”
Sundance at Conservative Treehouse has excellent analysis at:
There is no doubt that the recent Washington Post and NY Times articles, which admit spying on the Trump campaign, were writen to provide 'top cover' for high ranking Obama DOJ/FBI officials. When the indictments are unsealed, the squealing will include 'Political Persecution...we were just doing our job of protecting the presidential election from Russian interference'.
It’s all treason but good luck trying to explain this to the average Joe who has one eye on the Royal wedding and the other on a fly on his nose.
Either that or the Australian diplomat did not really tell the CIA what they claim he said. Why would the CIA be trying to get Papadopoulos to say he’d talked to Russians if he’d already said that to Downer?
“Australia’s High Commissioner to Great Britain, who cannot be compelled to testify.”
Sure he can. Just issue a subpoena and tell the Aussie government that relations depend on their cooperation. They’ll crack and deliver him to us on a platter.
L
The Brit and Aussie intelligence agencies as well as there alumni have very, very dirty hands along with our own dull but dangerous former director of the CIA, John Brennan.
The German hierarchy tried that same 'just following orders' defense at Nuremberg. Didn't work there either.
Dearlove Connections – UK Intel Firm Hakluyt, Alexander Downer, Stefan Halper & Papadopoulos
https://www.themarketswork.com/2018/05/09/dearlove-connections-uk-intel-firm-hakluyt-alexander-downer-stefan-halper-papadopoulos/
If I was working to protect Trump from Russian interference in the election what is the very first thing I would do?
Easy answer: I WOULD TELL TRUMP WHAT I WAS UP TO.
I’m pretty sure that never happened. LOL.
That is not what the statement of offense Papadop pleaded to says:
On or about April 26, 2016....The Professor told defendant PAPADOPOULOS that on that trip he (the Professor) learned that the Russians had obtained "dirt" on then-candidate Clinton. The Professor told defendant PAPADOPOULOS, as defendant PAPADOPOULOS later described to the FBI, that "They [the Russians] have dirt on her"; "the Russians had emails of Clinton"; "they have thousands of emails."
Obviously, the difference is critical. If Papadop had advance knowledge of hacking the DNC and Podesta, that would merit suspicion.
But if Papadop merely heard a claim that the Russians had Hillary's emails, that would be different - for a year prior to that, at least since Hillary's March 2015 press conference in which she basically admitted to using what she called a "personal email account," there was lots of speculation or assumptions that her unsecure bathroom server was certainly penetrated by foreign intelligence and her emails taken.
But if instead of merely a rumor that the Russians had Hillary's emails from her unsecure server, this becomes advance knowledge by Papadop of the future release of Podesta and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's emails which no one publicly knew of in April 2016, then Comey and Brennan can pretend that Papadop was a foreign agent of Russia engaged in a conspiracy to hack Podesta and the DNC and try to justify spying on a US citizen in the Trump campaign.
My heartfelt fear is both the media and government officials will continue to obfuscate and downplay the activities of these people.
The current narrative seems to be, 'sure, there may have been an informant but considering how 'dangerous' the prospect of a Trump presidency would be, spying on the Trump campaign was necessary'.
Without arrests and prosecutions even knowing who was involved will make little difference.
The Deep State Swamp will protect their own.
Always remember Hillary, Comey, and 'no intent'.
‘we were just doing our job of protecting the presidential election from Russian interference’
The planned-for narrative in case it all blew up in their faces.
Remember 0bozo telling the Russians - if they were doing something to interfere in the election, to “cut it out”?
I thought to myself, ‘that’s some bad acting right there.’
bump
The Steele dossier was just part of the plot to reinforce what the informants were reporting. Smacks of a CIA operation.
I’d love to see DJT deliver a series of national addresses outlining, in small doses, the extent of this mess. Unless this is addressed and remedied, I hold little hope going forward.
I keep up with this stuff, more than most....obfuscate is the word. I can’t say I’m hopeful.
It sounds like it took two agents; one to plant the information and one to “reap” the information and swear to it. So, Mifsud, Halper. Then, considering that the “Australian ambassador” is Clinton-Foundation, maybe we have three.
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.