Social Spying on Trump confirmed: Operation Crossfire Hurricane ***UPDATE: Comey Admits, "I Was Wrong" ***

B

bobgeese

Banned
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
29,671
Reaction score
13,883
***** For future Shartdoggers curious if the mods are fair on this site, the report isn’t even released yet, but they clearly have reached their conclusion. *****


**** Update mod btfo by the goose. Forced to change title again****

Spying on Trump confirmed: Operation Crossfire Hurricane/About that mole



Ok, there is now a plethora of evidence that has been made public that the FBI was in fact spying on the Trump campaign, and went so far as to plant a “mole” (likely Stefan Halper). There are multiple stories breaking this week, and the fbi through the NYT is trying to get ahead of it by leaking it to soften the blow, but that’s not working. So to start, here is the first story to break.

(Edit, not the first time Halper was caught spying on a presidential campaign)

https://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/07/...peration-to-gather-inside-data-on-carter.html


.....


WSJ: About That FBI ‘Source’

Did the bureau engage in outright spying against the 2016 Trump campaign?


“The Department of Justice lost its latest battle with Congress Thursday when it allowed House Intelligence Committee members to view classified documents about a top-secret intelligence source that was part of the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign. Even without official confirmation of that source’s name, the news so far holds some stunning implications.

Among them is that the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation outright hid critical information from a congressional investigation. In a Thursday press conference, Speaker Paul Ryan bluntly noted that Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes’s request for details on this secret source was “wholly appropriate,” “completely within the scope” of the committee’s long-running FBI investigation, and “something that probably should have been answered a while ago.” Translation: The department knew full well it should have turned this material over to congressional investigators last year, but instead deliberately concealed it.

House investigators nonetheless sniffed out a name, and Mr. Nunes in recent weeks issued a letter and a subpoena demanding more details. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s response was to double down—accusing the House of “extortion” and delivering a speech in which he claimed that “declining to open the FBI’s files to review” is a constitutional “duty.” Justice asked the White House to back its stonewall. And it even began spinning that daddy of all superspook arguments—that revealing any detail about this particular asset could result in “loss of human lives.”

This is desperation, and it strongly suggests that whatever is in these files is going to prove very uncomfortable to the FBI.

The bureau already has some explaining to do. Thanks to the Washington Post’s unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes’s request deals with a “top secret intelligence source” of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S. citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe. When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency. Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.

This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting. It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough. Obama political appointees rampantly “unmasked” Trump campaign officials to monitor their conversations, while the FBI played dirty with its surveillance warrant against Carter Page, failing to tell the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that its supporting information came from the Hillary Clinton campaign. Now we find it may have also been rolling out human intelligence, John Le Carré style, to infiltrate the Trump campaign.

Which would lead to another big question for the FBI: When? The bureau has been doggedly sticking with its story that a tip in July 2016 about the drunken ramblings of George Papadopoulos launched its counterintelligence probe. Still, the players in this affair—the FBI, former Director Jim Comey, the Steele dossier authors—have been suspiciously vague on the key moments leading up to that launch date. When precisely was the Steele dossier delivered to the FBI? When precisely did the Papadopoulos information come in?

And to the point, when precisely was this human source operating? Because if it was prior to that infamous Papadopoulos tip, then the FBI isn’t being straight. It would mean the bureau was spying on the Trump campaign prior to that moment. And that in turn would mean that the FBI had been spurred to act on the basis of something other than a junior campaign aide’s loose lips.

We also know that among the Justice Department’s stated reasons for not complying with the Nunes subpoena was its worry that to do so might damage international relationships. This suggests the “source” may be overseas, have ties to foreign intelligence, or both. That’s notable, given the highly suspicious role foreigners have played in this escapade. It was an Australian diplomat who reported the Papadopoulos conversation. Dossier author Christopher Steele is British, used to work for MI6, and retains ties to that spy agency as well as to a network of former spooks. It was a former British diplomat who tipped off Sen. John McCain to the dossier. How this “top secret” source fits into this puzzle could matter deeply.

I believe I know the name of the informant, but my intelligence sources did not provide it to me and refuse to confirm it. It would therefore be irresponsible to publish it. But what is clear is that we’ve barely scratched the surface of the FBI’s 2016 behavior, and the country will never get the straight story until President Trump moves to declassify everything possible. It’s time to rip off the Band-Aid.”



....


Ok, so Kimberly Strassel broke the story, there’s a spy planted in the Trump campaign (Likely Stefan Halper). In an attempt to get out in front of it, an article was published by the NYT.


“At least one” U.S. government informant met with Trump campaign officials in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, the New York Times reported Wednesday.

That person met “several times” with campaign national security advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, according to the report, which offered no additional information on the informant’s identity or connection with U.S. authorities.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

......


Here is Strassels response



......



So a few important points on that new NYT "Hurricane Crossfire" piece. A story that, BTW, all of us following this knew had to be coming.


1. This is DOJ/FBI leakers' attempt to get in front of the facts Nunes is forcing out, to make it not sound so bad. Don't buy it. It's bad.


2. Biggest takeaway: Govt "sources" admit that, indeed, the Obama DOJ and FBI spied on the Trump campaign. Spied. (Tho NYT kindly calls spy an "informant.") NYT slips in confirmation far down in story, and makes it out like it isn't a big deal. It is a very big deal.


3. In self-serving desire to get a sympathetic story about its actions, DOJ/FBI leakers are willing to provide yet more details about that "top secret" source (namely, that spying was aimed at Page/Papadopoulos)--making all more likely/certain source will be outed. That's on them


4. DOJ/FBI (and its leakers) have shredded what little credibility they have in claiming they cannot comply with subpoena. They are willing to provide details to friendly media, but not Congress? Willing to risk very source they claim to need to protect?


5. Back in Dec., NYT assured us it was the Papadopoulos-Downer convo that inspired FBI to launch official counterintelligence operation on July 31, 2016. Which was convenient, since it diminished the role of the dossier. However . . .


6. Now NYT tells us FBI didn't debrief downer until August 2nd. And Nunes says no "official intelligence" from allies was delivered to FBI about that convo prior to July 31. So how did FBI get Downer details? (Political actors?) And what really did inspire the CI investigation?


7. As for whether to believe line that FBI operated soberly/carefully/judiciously in 2016, a main source for this judgment is, um . . .uh . . . Sally Yates. Who was in middle of it all. A bit like asking Putin to reassure that Russia didn't meddle in our election.


8. On that, if u r wondering who narrated this story, note paragraphs that assure everybody that hardly anybody in DOJ knew about probe. Oh, and Comey also was given few details. Nobody knew nothin'! (Cuz when u require whole story saying u behaved, it means u know you didn't.)

.....


Here is fusion gps confirming there was a spy


“Fusion’s Simpson Stands by Testimony that FBI Had Spy in Trump Campaign


Simpson’s lawyer, Joshua Levy, sent a short reply letter to Senator Grassley, stating:

I am writing in response to your letter, dated January 11, 2018, in which you have asked about the August 22, 2017 testimony from our client Glenn Simpson that Christopher Steele in the fall of 2016 said he believed the FBI had another source within the Trump organization/campaign. Mr. Simpson stands by his testimony.”



https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-campaign-fbi-spy-glenn-simpson-stands-by-testimony/

...



Remember when folks here were claiming the Obama administration wasn’t spying on Trump?


Quick update, second spy confirmed.

 
Last edited:
Mod Merge Update Index:
This post was not created nor is maintained by @bobgeese


<TrumpWrong1>

The Goose creatith, and the goose maintainith. Carry on.


There appears to be controversy over the scope of the IG investigation into this matter, and whether or not it pertains to "spying". This IG investigation was responsible for Barr's decision to launch a separate criminal inquiry by Durham, so there is overt overlap of their purview. From the Wiki on "Operation Crossfire Hurricane":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossfire_Hurricane_(FBI_investigation)
Wikipedia said:
2019 Inspector General report[edit]
An inspector general report on the origins and conduct of Crossfire Hurricane was expected to be publicly released on December 9, 2019. On November 22, 2019 The Washington Post reported that, according to two anonymous US officials, the IG report "provides a mixed assessment of the FBI and Justice Department’s undertaking of a probe that became highly politicized and divided the nation." According to these officials, the inspector general is expected to find that the opening of Crossfire Hurricane was legally and factually justified. In addition, according to these sources, as well as anonymous sources for the The New York Times, the report clears James Comey and his deputy Andrew McCabe, as well as top counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, of accusations they acted out of malice toward Trump. Moreover, both The Post and The Times state that, according to these sources, the IG report will rebut claims of political conspiracy that Trump and his allies have circulated over the preceding two years. However, these sources also say that a low-level FBI attorney, Kevin Clinesmith, was found to have altered an email that was used to prepare a warrant renewal to wiretap Carter Page, and was referred to US attorney John Durham for possible criminal prosecution for making a false statement to investigators. In addition, The Times states that sources expect the report to construe the warrant request process as "sloppy and unprofessional," to criticize a New York FBI case agent, and to criticize poor coordination efforts between the FBI and DOJ during the investigation. The Washington Post reported that despite the problems found with the warrant request process, the warrant still had a proper legal and factual basis. Sources for The Times caution that the report is still not complete.[53][54]
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossfire_Hurricane_(FBI_investigation)#Counter-investigations
Wikipedia said:
Counter-investigations[edit]
Since March 2018,[94] the Justice Department's Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, has been investigating the origins of the FBI's Russia investigation, the informants used, and the process followed to authorize surveillance of Carter Page.[51]

As of May 2019, Attorney General William Barr is conducting an investigation into the origins of the FBI probe, whether surveillance was adequately predicated, potential overreach by FBI or Department of Justice (DOJ) leadership, and whether the Steele dossier was part of a Russian disinformation campaign.[95][96] Barr assigned John Durham, the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, to lead the investigation.[97]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
bobgeese said:
Spying on Trump confirmed: Operation Crossfire Hurricane/About that mole



Ok, there is now a plethora of evidence that has been made public that the FBI was in fact spying on the Trump campaign, and went so far as to plant a “mole” (likely Stefan Halper). There are multiple stories breaking this week, and the fbi through the NYT is trying to get ahead of it by leaking it to soften the blow, but that’s not working. So to start, here is the first story to break.


.....


WSJ: About That FBI ‘Source’

Did the bureau engage in outright spying against the 2016 Trump campaign?


“The Department of Justice lost its latest battle with Congress Thursday when it allowed House Intelligence Committee members to view classified documents about a top-secret intelligence source that was part of the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign. Even without official confirmation of that source’s name, the news so far holds some stunning implications.

Among them is that the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation outright hid critical information from a congressional investigation. In a Thursday press conference, Speaker Paul Ryan bluntly noted that Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes’s request for details on this secret source was “wholly appropriate,” “completely within the scope” of the committee’s long-running FBI investigation, and “something that probably should have been answered a while ago.” Translation: The department knew full well it should have turned this material over to congressional investigators last year, but instead deliberately concealed it.

House investigators nonetheless sniffed out a name, and Mr. Nunes in recent weeks issued a letter and a subpoena demanding more details. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s response was to double down—accusing the House of “extortion” and delivering a speech in which he claimed that “declining to open the FBI’s files to review” is a constitutional “duty.” Justice asked the White House to back its stonewall. And it even began spinning that daddy of all superspook arguments—that revealing any detail about this particular asset could result in “loss of human lives.”

This is desperation, and it strongly suggests that whatever is in these files is going to prove very uncomfortable to the FBI.

The bureau already has some explaining to do. Thanks to the Washington Post’s unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes’s request deals with a “top secret intelligence source” of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S. citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe. When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency. Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.

This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting. It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough. Obama political appointees rampantly “unmasked” Trump campaign officials to monitor their conversations, while the FBI played dirty with its surveillance warrant against Carter Page, failing to tell the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that its supporting information came from the Hillary Clinton campaign. Now we find it may have also been rolling out human intelligence, John Le Carré style, to infiltrate the Trump campaign.

Which would lead to another big question for the FBI: When? The bureau has been doggedly sticking with its story that a tip in July 2016 about the drunken ramblings of George Papadopoulos launched its counterintelligence probe. Still, the players in this affair—the FBI, former Director Jim Comey, the Steele dossier authors—have been suspiciously vague on the key moments leading up to that launch date. When precisely was the Steele dossier delivered to the FBI? When precisely did the Papadopoulos information come in?

And to the point, when precisely was this human source operating? Because if it was prior to that infamous Papadopoulos tip, then the FBI isn’t being straight. It would mean the bureau was spying on the Trump campaign prior to that moment. And that in turn would mean that the FBI had been spurred to act on the basis of something other than a junior campaign aide’s loose lips.

We also know that among the Justice Department’s stated reasons for not complying with the Nunes subpoena was its worry that to do so might damage international relationships. This suggests the “source” may be overseas, have ties to foreign intelligence, or both. That’s notable, given the highly suspicious role foreigners have played in this escapade. It was an Australian diplomat who reported the Papadopoulos conversation. Dossier author Christopher Steele is British, used to work for MI6, and retains ties to that spy agency as well as to a network of former spooks. It was a former British diplomat who tipped off Sen. John McCain to the dossier. How this “top secret” source fits into this puzzle could matter deeply.

I believe I know the name of the informant, but my intelligence sources did not provide it to me and refuse to confirm it. It would therefore be irresponsible to publish it. But what is clear is that we’ve barely scratched the surface of the FBI’s 2016 behavior, and the country will never get the straight story until President Trump moves to declassify everything possible. It’s time to rip off the Band-Aid.”



....


Ok, so Kimberly Strassel broke the story, there’s a spy planted in the Trump campaign (Likely Stefan Halper). In an attempt to get out in front of it, an article was published by the NYT.


“At least one” U.S. government informant met with Trump campaign officials in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, the New York Times reported Wednesday.

That person met “several times” with campaign national security advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, according to the report, which offered no additional information on the informant’s identity or connection with U.S. authorities.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

......


Here is Strassels response



......



So a few important points on that new NYT "Hurricane Crossfire" piece. A story that, BTW, all of us following this knew had to be coming.


1. This is DOJ/FBI leakers' attempt to get in front of the facts Nunes is forcing out, to make it not sound so bad. Don't buy it. It's bad.


2. Biggest takeaway: Govt "sources" admit that, indeed, the Obama DOJ and FBI spied on the Trump campaign. Spied. (Tho NYT kindly calls spy an "informant.") NYT slips in confirmation far down in story, and makes it out like it isn't a big deal. It is a very big deal.


3. In self-serving desire to get a sympathetic story about its actions, DOJ/FBI leakers are willing to provide yet more details about that "top secret" source (namely, that spying was aimed at Page/Papadopoulos)--making all more likely/certain source will be outed. That's on them


4. DOJ/FBI (and its leakers) have shredded what little credibility they have in claiming they cannot comply with subpoena. They are willing to provide details to friendly media, but not Congress? Willing to risk very source they claim to need to protect?


5. Back in Dec., NYT assured us it was the Papadopoulos-Downer convo that inspired FBI to launch official counterintelligence operation on July 31, 2016. Which was convenient, since it diminished the role of the dossier. However . . .


6. Now NYT tells us FBI didn't debrief downer until August 2nd. And Nunes says no "official intelligence" from allies was delivered to FBI about that convo prior to July 31. So how did FBI get Downer details? (Political actors?) And what really did inspire the CI investigation?


7. As for whether to believe line that FBI operated soberly/carefully/judiciously in 2016, a main source for this judgment is, um . . .uh . . . Sally Yates. Who was in middle of it all. A bit like asking Putin to reassure that Russia didn't meddle in our election.


8. On that, if u r wondering who narrated this story, note paragraphs that assure everybody that hardly anybody in DOJ knew about probe. Oh, and Comey also was given few details. Nobody knew nothin'! (Cuz when u require whole story saying u behaved, it means u know you didn't.)

.....


Here is fusion gps confirming there was a spy


“Fusion’s Simpson Stands by Testimony that FBI Had Spy in Trump Campaign


Simpson’s lawyer, Joshua Levy, sent a short reply letter to Senator Grassley, stating:

I am writing in response to your letter, dated January 11, 2018, in which you have asked about the August 22, 2017 testimony from our client Glenn Simpson that Christopher Steele in the fall of 2016 said he believed the FBI had another source within the Trump organization/campaign. Mr. Simpson stands by his testimony.”



https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-campaign-fbi-spy-glenn-simpson-stands-by-testimony/

...



Remember when folks here were claiming the Obama administration wasn’t spying on Trump?
Click to expand...
Lawless!
 
Makes sense, that is how all criminal organizations are brought down.
 
LOL. This story is poorly written crap, and doesn't show any wrongdoing at all.

National review.
<36>

House Intel Committee

<36><36>
 
A bit about the likely spy Stefan Halper


On September 13, 2016 Papadopoulos accepted a meeting with Stefan Halper.

Halper approached Papadopoulos unbidden. Papadopoulos had no prior contact with Halper.

Halper, who has connections to CIA & UK Intelligence, asked Papadopoulos: “George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?”


Halper has a close association with former MI6 Head Richard Dearlove.

Halper had previously invited Carter Page to attend a July 2016 symposium held at Cambridge regarding the upcoming election.


Page attended the symposium just four days after his July 2016 Moscow trip. Page met with Halper during the London visit. Page’s Moscow trip would figure prominently in the Steele Dossier…

Halper also requested – and attained – a meeting with another, unknown, Trump Campaign member on September 11, 2016 – two days before the Papadopoulos meeting.

Halper “offered to help the campaign” but did not mention the Papadopoulos meeting to the second staffer – nor the staffer meeting to Papadopoulos.

Curiously, despite the offers of campaign help, on November 3, 2016, Halper publicly stated that Clinton would be the best option for US-UK relations.


Halper had contact with both Papadopulos and Carter Page. Halper has connections to UK Intelligence and US Intelligence. Halper met with Carter Page just days after Page’s Moscow trip.


A lengthy article with timeline and much more info

https://www.themarketswork.com/2018...-joseph-mifsud-alexander-downer-papadopoulos/


Obama Administration paid Stefan Halper $282,295


Stefan Halper held an interview with BBC Radio 4 (criticizing Trump) on May 17, 2017.

This is the same day the DOJ announced Robert Mueller as the Special Counsel.
 
Nunes is the President's puppet. His actions amount to obstruction of justice, and I hope Mueller brings charges. Anyone cheering this on, or believing it, is a sickening buffoon.
 
HomerThompson said:
LOL. This story is poorly written crap, and doesn't show any wrongdoing at all.

National review.
<36>

House Intel Committee

<36><36>
Click to expand...


Funny how you left out the WSJ, oh and its about to blow up because Trump just tweeted about it so the major networks will be forced to cover it.


Homer eternally btfo, he’ll never recover.
 
My money is on Sater being the informant. He's worked with the FBI before as an informant. Helped tRUmp with the Bayrock deal.

If tRUmp didn't associate himself with career criminals, engage in financing with dirty banks, engage in suspicious activity that looks a lot like money laundering then his campaign never would have been under surveilance and Carter Page wouldn't have been under FISA in 2016 when plenty of tRUmp campaign officials were listed under incidental collection.
 
Don’t engage in illegal activities and you don’t have to worried about being investigated.
 
bobgeese said:
Funny how you left out the WSJ, oh andits about to blow up because Trump just tweeted about it so the major networks will be forced to cover it.


Homer eternally btfo, he’ll never recover.
Click to expand...

InB4 more gif spam.
 
I'm only going to type this once.

THE FBI INVESTIGATION WAS ALREADY ONGOING AT THE TIME OF THE EVENTS YOU'RE USING AS EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, AND THE FBI.

The word you clowns are looking for is "informant", not "spy".
 
HereticBD said:
InB4 more gif spam.
Click to expand...


That’s literally the bulk of @HomerThompson posting. Hot dog gifs.

And he’s too scared to account bet me because he’s afraid he’ll lose his illustrious status as the “hot dog gif guy”

You have to give him credit though, he NEVER gets tired of losing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,254,494
Messages
56,650,452
Members
175,334
Latest member
dubhlinn

Share this page

Back
Top