Deep State & Media Operatives Now In Full On Cover Up Mode As Illegal Spying On Trump Campaign Revealed
The Obama era Intelligence community was determined to punish Donald Trump and his supporters for challenging the political status quo. They didn’t actually think Trump would win though. So what was initially a punishment operation turned into a search and destroy operation that pitted the Deep State and its media cohorts against a duly elected President of the United States? That attempt is now being uncovered in real time which in turn has led to a flurry of cover-up activity from such powerful players as the New York Times. And not only are they desperate to save their own skins but even more importantly protect the man at the very top of this political conspiracy food chain – Barack Obama himself.
Above: Former FBI Director James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan are believed to all have played significant roles in the attempt to illegally influence the 2016 Election and subsequent attacks on a newly-elected president’s administration. Brennan’s role is said to have been particularly important.
“John Brennan should get a good lawyer.” That’s the advice from former U.S. attorney Joe diGenova who laid out the stunning extent of the Deep State operation against Donald Trump:
“We know that Hillary Clinton was illegally exonerated. We knew that a year ago,” the former prosecutor said.
“We know that there was a substantial effort to frame the current president of the United States with crimes by infiltrating his campaign and then his administration with spies that the FBI had set upon them.”
“We have learned that the crimes were committed by the FBI, senior members of the Department of Justice, John Brennan, Mr. [James] Clapper, Mr. [James] Comey and others associated with the Democratic Party,” he continued. “And Donald Trump and his associates committed no crimes.”
“Categorically and unequivocally, it has been proved that the FBI, in violation of all guidelines, all legislation — and I believe they committed crimes in doing so — purposely sent people into the Trump campaign to plant false information, then force that information to be forwarded back to CIA, and then funneled to the FBI, to be used as false information in FISA applications,” he said.
“Everybody involved in that process, who knowingly participated, committed a crime,” DiGenova concluded.
He explained that “criminal referrals have already been made.”
“And I suggest that Mr. Brennan, who loves to make comments about the process, get himself a good lawyer, not a good writer,” DiGenova said.
This weekend the New York Times is spewing one article after another in an attempt to explain away the evidence of Deep State collusion to unduly influence the 2016 Election and destroy a new administration. The NYT is actually pushing an argument that the Deep State was trying to “protect” Mr. Trump’s campaign from the Russians even as the overwhelming evidence says otherwise.
President Trump has often described the Mueller investigation as the “Biggest political witch hunt” in history.
All evidence, including that of illegal spying on the Trump campaign, is proving Mr. Trump right.
For decades those like Bill and Hillary Clinton, James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, and yes, Barack Obama, have ignored laws they apparently feel don’t apply to them.
America now waits to see if that is finally going to change.
That’s what talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh is saying after Barack Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, claimed it was a “good thing” if the reports that the Obama administration had someone spying on the Trump campaign are true.
Clapper said in a CNN interview the Obama administration’s FBI “may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but, you know, the focus here … is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing.”
His comments came after the New York Times reported the FBI had a spy embedded in the Trump campaign.
Limbaugh charged on his Friday program: “No, you were spying on Trump. You were trying to find evidence that Trump was conspiring with the Russians, not that Russia was conspiring with Trump.
“That’s what you wanted to prove. And if you could, if you could have gotten close to it, I know these people would have said so. This is total obfuscation. ‘No, we weren’t looking at the campaign. No, no, no. We were looking at the Russians because, of course, the Russians were going to try to instantiate themselves in the campaign or influence their leverage,’ blah, blah, blah, blah. These guys are trying to double back and cover their tracks, lying through their wooden teeth about what they were doing.’
“So we’ll just say that the next time there’s a presidential race, we’re gonna vouch for a spy being in the Democrat campaign. It’s a valuable thing. We need to have informants in there, Mr. Clapper, to see to it that foreign actors don’t instantiate themselves, as you say, into the campaign and tamper with our precious electoral process.”
He was just warming up.
“You know, here’s another thought. And this is how I know that the snake Clapper is lying. Clapper tells CNN ‘Oh, no, no, no, we weren’t interested in the Trump campaign, our spy. We think it was a good thing the FBI had a spy to look for pernicious activity from the Russians, the Russians tampering with our electoral process. It was a good thing they had a spy in that campaign, not to look at the Trump campaign, but to look at the Russians.’
“Mr. Clapper, then why didn’t you put a spy in the Hillary campaign? She was interacting with the Russians. She was rigging the DNC primary. She did hire a guy to write a phony opposition research with Russian agents on Trump. The Hillary campaign was intertwined with the Russians for months. Why didn’t you have a spy in her campaign, if it was the Russians you were really interested in? Why not look at how Hillary was working with them?”
Limbaugh’s conclusion: “But of course they weren’t looking for the Russians, because I think they’ve known from the get-go the Russians didn’t affect the outcome of this election. Remember, if Hillary had won, you’d a never heard about the Russians, other than whatever steps they took to destroy Trump, which I think they would have done. Even if Trump had lost, I think they would have made moves to further destroy this guy, to send the message to any other outsiders, ‘Don’t even think about trying this. Look what we’ll do to you.’”
He said: “You people have done more to damage the integrity of the American electoral process than Vladimir Putin could in his dreams! And I’m not joking.”
Real Clear Politics reported Clapper’s comments to CNN’s Don Lemon.
The former DNI said that if someone was spying on Trump, “that’s a good thing because the Russians posed a threat to the very basis of our political system.”
Clapper: It’s ‘A Good Thing’ FBI Was Spying On Trump Campaign
May 19, 2018 by JULIA NISTA
Former Director of Intelligence James Clapper said Thursday night on CNN that it was “a good thing” there was an FBI informant spying on the Trump campaign.
Clapper admitted the FBI “may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign,” referring to President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. He explained away the possibility of an FBI informant spying on the campaign as the bureau was trying to find out “what the Russians were doing to try to substantiate themselves in the campaign or influence or leverage it.”
Obama’s Director of National Intelligence then went on to say, “So, if there was someone that was observing that sort of thing, that’s a good thing.”
He also stated he believes “it’s hugely dangerous if someone like that is exposed because the danger to that person” and the potential “reluctance of others to be informants for the FBI” could possibly devastate the FBI.
Current and former officials — apparently so fearful that an FBI informant’s identity and role would be outed by congressional Republicans — confirmed both to the New York Times and theWashington Post in an attempt to offer their own narratives first.
Both outlets offered details that readily identify the informant — but do not name him, citing concerns for his safety and warnings from U.S. intelligence officials.
The details, however, match a person described in the Daily Caller as Stefan Halper, a Cambridge professor and longtime Washington, D.C. fixture who worked for three Republican administrations and has links to U.S. and British intelligence.
The Times and Post are the first outlets claiming to have confirmed his identity, and to describe him in such detail as to match the description of Halper.
The accounts also indicate the FBI lied about when they first began surveilling the Trump campaign, or might have done so, without any particular intelligence.
FBI officials have said they began investigating the Trump administration on July 31, 2016, after stolen Democratic National Committee emails were released on July 22, 2016, prompting Australian officials to come forward with information they received from Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos months earlier.
“…when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts, according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role.”
However — the problem with that account is that the FBI informant had approached Trump campaign adviser Carter Page before that email release on July 22, 2016, and before the Australians came forward with the information, supposedly after that.
The informant first approached Carter Page at a Cambridge symposium on the U.S. presidential election in London on July 11-12, 2016. Page was invited to the symposium in June 2016 by an unnamed doctoral student at Cambridge who knew Halper, according to a source.
That timeline — of Page being approached by the informant before the Australian tip off — was confirmed to the Post, which wrote:
“In mid-July 2016, a retired American professor approached an adviser to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign at a symposium about the White House race held at a British university.
“The professor took the opportunity to strike up a conversation with Carter Page, whom Trump had named a few months earlier as a foreign policy adviser.
“But the professor was more than an academic interested in American politics — he was a longtime U.S. intelligence source. And, at some point in 2016, he began working as a secret informant for the FBI as it investigated Russia’s interference in the campaign, according to people familiar with his activities.”
The timeline of events indicate that the current and former officials lied about when their investigation of the Trump campaign started, and why.
Some have speculated that former CIA Director John Brennan had launched a spy operation on the Trump campaign as early as April 2016, but it is not clear what might have prompted him.
The leakers confirmed to the Times and the Post that the informant had also reached out to Papadopoulos in the ensuing months after he reached out to Page.
The Post revealed that the informant had also approached Trump campaign adviser Sam Clovis, offering help to the campaign:
“In late summer, the professor met with Trump campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis for coffee in Northern Virginia, offering to provide foreign-policy expertise to the Trump effort. In September, he reached out to George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign-policy adviser for the campaign, inviting him to London to work on a research paper.”
The Post notes the informant’s role raises questions about how he first became involved in the case, the extent of the information he provided, the actions he took to obtain intelligence for the FBI, and whether his interaction with Page was for the FBI or for another agency, such as the CIA.
Details about the informant began leaking to the Times and the Post after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes inquired about the informant last month.
Officials initially went to the White House to try to stop Nunes from receiving the information, according to the Post. After first denying his request, last week, Justice Department officials briefed Nunes and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC).