Crime CIA and foreign intelligence agencies illegally targeted 26 Trump associates before 2016 Russia collusion claims: report

[White Whale]

CIA and foreign intelligence agencies illegally targeted 26 Trump associates before 2016 Russia collusion claims: report

The US Intelligence Community asked foreign spy agencies to surveil 26 associates of Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, which triggered the allegations that the former president’s cam…

nypost.com

The US Intelligence Community asked foreign spy agencies to surveil 26 associates of Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, which triggered the allegations that the former president’s campaign had been colluding with Russia, according to a report.

Former CIA Director John Brennan identified and presented the targets to the US’s intelligence-sharing partners in the so-called “Five Eyes” agencies – the intelligence-gathering organizations in the US, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – according to a report published Monday on Michael Shellenberger’s Public Substack.

The report by independent journalists Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by The Post.

They cite multiple unnamed sources, including ones close to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, led by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio).

"They were making contacts and bumping Trump people going back to March 2016,” a source told the outlet. “They were sending people around the UK, Australia, Italy — the Mossad in Italy. The MI6 was working at an intelligence school they had set up.”

A GCHQ spokesperson told the outlet that claims it was “asked to conduct ‘wire tapping’ against the then president-elect are nonsense.”

Intelligence related to the alleged surveillance effort is housed in a “10-inch binder,” according to the outlet, which Trump, 77, ordered to be declassified at the end of his presidency and could contain evidence that “multiple US intelligence officials broke laws against spying and election interference.”

Turner’s office did not respond to The Post’s request for comment.

The whereabouts of the alleged thick binder are unknown.

The Trump campaign and the CIA did not respond to The Post’s requests for comment.

The Obama administration was illegally spying on Donald Trump and his associates. Not surprising so this means Trump was correct when he Obama was spying on him.

 

[calavera2]

That's cause Trump is gay for Putin

 

[Andy Capp]

LMAO @ the New York Post.

I think I will wait for a source that isn't a solid waste processor.

Edit:
"The report by independent journalists Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by The Post."

AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA totally worth making a thread over. Way to go, TS!

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

LMAO @ the New York Post.

I think I will wait for a source that isn't a solid waste processor.

Edit:
"The report by independent journalists Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by The Post."

AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA totally worth making a thread over. Way to go, TS!

Take a breath brother, you are going off the deep end.

 

[White Whale]

LMAO @ the New York Post.

I think I will wait for a source that isn't a solid waste processor.

Edit:
"The report by independent journalists Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by The Post."

AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA totally worth making a thread over. Way to go, TS!

They are far more trustworthy than mainstream corporate journalists.

 

[calavera2]

...the pee tapes are real

 

[White Whale]

CIA Had Foreign Allies Spy On Trump Team, Triggering Russia Collusion Hoax, Sources Say

United States Intelligence Community targeted 26 Trump advisors for foreign spy agencies to “reverse target” and “bump”

public.substack.com

Last year, John Durham, a special prosecutor for the Department of Justice (DOJ), concluded that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) should never have opened its investigation of alleged collusion by then-presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and Russia in late July of 2016.

Now, multiple credible sources tell Public and Racket that the United States Intelligence Community (IC), including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), illegally mobilized foreign intelligence agencies to target Trump advisors long before the summer of 2016.

The new information fills many gaps in our understanding of the Russia collusion hoax and is supported by testimony already in the public record.

Until now, the official story has been that the FBI’s investigation began after Australian intelligence officials told US officials that a Trump aide had boasted to an Australian diplomat that Russia had damning material about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

In truth, the US IC asked the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance to surveil Trump’s associates and share the intelligence they acquired with US agencies, say sources close to a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HSPCI) investigation. The Five Eyes nations are the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

After Public and Racket had been told that President Barack Obama’s CIA Director, John Brennan, had identified 26 Trump associates for the Five Eyes to target, a source confirmed that the IC had “identified [them] as people to ‘bump,’ or make contact with or manipulate. They were targets of our own IC and law enforcement — targets for collection and misinformation.”

Unknown details about the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign and raw intelligence related to the IC’s surveillance of the Trump campaign are in a 10-inch binder that Trump ordered to be declassified at the very end of his term, sources told Public and Racket.

If the top-secret documents exist proving these charges, they are potentially proof that multiple US intelligence officials broke laws against spying and election interference.

Explaining Russiagate Exposé

www.youtube.com

Here Matt explains the Russia expose.

 

[Andy Capp]

They are far more trustworthy than mainstream corporate journalists.

I intended to place equal emphasis on the "has not be confirmed by the Post" part, just an oversight.

Even the NY Post, which takes anonymous tips from Trump's lawyers and runs stories based on them wouldn't run this story without that disclaimer. What does that suggest to you?

 

[Andy Capp]

CIA Had Foreign Allies Spy On Trump Team, Triggering Russia Collusion Hoax, Sources Say

United States Intelligence Community targeted 26 Trump advisors for foreign spy agencies to “reverse target” and “bump”

public.substack.com

Last year, John Durham, a special prosecutor for the Department of Justice (DOJ), concluded that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) should never have opened its investigation of alleged collusion by then-presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and Russia in late July of 2016.

Now, multiple credible sources tell Public and Racket that the United States Intelligence Community (IC), including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), illegally mobilized foreign intelligence agencies to target Trump advisors long before the summer of 2016.

The new information fills many gaps in our understanding of the Russia collusion hoax and is supported by testimony already in the public record.

Until now, the official story has been that the FBI’s investigation began after Australian intelligence officials told US officials that a Trump aide had boasted to an Australian diplomat that Russia had damning material about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

In truth, the US IC asked the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance to surveil Trump’s associates and share the intelligence they acquired with US agencies, say sources close to a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HSPCI) investigation. The Five Eyes nations are the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

After Public and Racket had been told that President Barack Obama’s CIA Director, John Brennan, had identified 26 Trump associates for the Five Eyes to target, a source confirmed that the IC had “identified [them] as people to ‘bump,’ or make contact with or manipulate. They were targets of our own IC and law enforcement — targets for collection and misinformation.”

Unknown details about the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign and raw intelligence related to the IC’s surveillance of the Trump campaign are in a 10-inch binder that Trump ordered to be declassified at the very end of his term, sources told Public and Racket.

If the top-secret documents exist proving these charges, they are potentially proof that multiple US intelligence officials broke laws against spying and election interference.

Explaining Russiagate Exposé

www.youtube.com

Here Matt explains the Russia expose.

LOL so from unverified claims in the NY Post, they've moved on to Substack where they don't have to verify anything prior to publishing either. Seriously, now: what conclusion do you draw from that, pray tell?

 

[AWilder]

this is it

 

[White Whale]

LOL so from unverified claims in the NY Post, they've moved on to Substack where they don't have to verify anything prior to publishing either. Seriously, now: what conclusion do you draw from that, pray tell?

Matt Taibbi has won awards for journalism and writing NYT best selling books and he is not a Trump fan.

 

[Andy Capp]

Matt Taibbi has won awards for journalism and writing NYT best selling books and he is not a Trump fan.

That doesn't counter anything I said. If it were any more than rumor and speculation and if he's such a respected journalist, why would he have taken it to the New York Post--who disclaimed they couldn't verify the claims--and/or Substack first?

Are you going to dodge this question for a third time?

 

[Andy Capp]

My prediction is that the entire report is full of half truths, exaggerations, and rumors with nothing to back them up.

 

[Darkballs]

So multiple intelligence agencies found that dozens of trump associates were colluding with Russia, and your take away is that we should be mad at them for bringing this to light?

Piss off.

 

[White Whale]

That doesn't counter anything I said. If it were any more than rumor and speculation and if he's such a respected journalist, why would he have taken it to the New York Post--who disclaimed they couldn't verify the claims--and/or Substack first?

Are you going to dodge this question for a third time?

Would New York Times publish this story? Do you think the journalists that researched this didn't fact check it? John Brennan lied under oath about the Steele dossier.

Why do you think they wouldn't ask other countries to spy on political opponents?

 

[Andy Capp]

Would New York Times publish this story? Do you think the journalists that researched this didn't fact check it? John Brennan lied under oath about the Steele dossier.

Why do you think they wouldn't ask other countries to spy on political opponents?

I'm not questioning why or whether they would or wouldn't do it. I'm questioning whether the positioning of the events and their supposed illegality is what actually happened in the real world as opposed to the imaginations of people still still pushing the ridiculous notion that investigating the Trump Campaign for their apparent involvement with hostile foreign entities was not warranted. I'm not surprised you have trouble telling the difference.

So, to clarify, I'm saying it's very likely a fly on the wall would have considered their decision-making to have been perfectly reasonable and in the best interests of the USA, and that the evidence for that being untrue is a bunch of unsupported hogwash.

Edit: and I note, third time around you still ducked the question. What a tool.

 

[N13]

Brennan wouldn't do that.

 

[Copper Burner]

I'm not questioning why or whether they would or wouldn't do it. I'm questioning whether the positioning of the events and their supposed illegality is what actually happened in the real world as opposed to the imaginations of people still still pushing the ridiculous notion that investigating the Trump Campaign for their apparent involvement with hostile foreign entities was not warranted. I'm not surprised you have trouble telling the difference.

So, to clarify, I'm saying it's very likely a fly on the wall would have considered their decision-making to have been perfectly reasonable and in the best interests of the USA, and that the evidence for that being untrue is a bunch of unsupported hogwash.

You make some of the dumbest arguments on sherdog. Look at you kick and scream like a toddler because facts are not something you can handle.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

There are people on this very forum that still believe in russiagate. They are so convinced that they are even willing to support all-out war in Ukraine because they still think Putin stole Hillary Clinton's preordained coronation.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

My prediction is that the entire report is full of half truths, exaggerations, and rumors with nothing to back them up.

So multiple intelligence agencies found that dozens of trump associates were colluding with Russia, and your take away is that we should be mad at them for bringing this to light?

Piss off.

lol look at these retards

Trump was right: 'Russian collusion' was a hoax. Good luck regaining public's trust.

Special Counsel John Durham slams the FBI’s investigation – dubbed Crossfire Hurricane – of Trump campaign for its “serious lack of analytic rigor.”

www.usatoday.com

Trump was right: 'Russian collusion' was a hoax. Good luck regaining public's trust.​

https://www.wsj.com/articles/finally-can-we-ask-who-really-colluded-with-russia-press-durham-sanctions-fbi-c79d74a4

Finally, Can We Ask Who Really Colluded With Russia?​

If the crime is promoting distrust in institutions, the evidence is strongest against the FBI and media.​

The Russia collusion hoax: unpatriotic? - Washington Examiner

The report of special counsel John Durham is, or ought to be, devastating for anyone who has put any credence in what has now been definitively revealed to be the Russia collusion hoax.With a painstaking examination of the evidence (1,753 footnotes!), Durham establishes conclusively that there...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

The report of special counsel John Durham is, or ought to be, devastating for anyone who has put any credence in what has now been definitively revealed to be the Russia collusion hoax.

With a painstaking examination of the evidence (1,753 footnotes!), Durham establishes conclusively that there was no basis for the FBI to have begun its Crossfire Hurricane investigation of ties between the Trump campaign and Russia in July 2016. The Bureau acted on “raw, unanalyzed and uncorroborated intelligence” and without checking with intelligence entities.

Durham Report: The FBI is as bad as you feared, maybe worse

More black marks against FBI agents’ adherence to the law.

thehill.com

Durham Report: The FBI is as bad as you feared, maybe worse​

NY Times columnist admits he was 'wrong' about Trump's supporters, says Russian collusion story was a 'hoax'

New York Times columnist Bret Stephens published an op-ed Thursday admitting he was wrong about Trump voters and expressing regret for calling them "appalling."

www.foxnews.com

NY Times columnist admits he was 'wrong' about Trump's supporters, says Russian collusion story was a 'hoax'​

and....there are a million more stories like this. How can anyone continue to fall for Russian collusion at this point?