FBI-Intelligence Agencies: Deterring Foreign Adversaries or Suppressing Domestic Political Opponents?
There’s an old Wendy’s Commercial that featured a little old lady demanding to know “Where’s the beef?” In these congressional hearings, the Mueller “investigation”, and all the vitriol that has been thrown about, we have to ask “Where’s the beef?” Where is the truth? Has the mission of the FBI-Intelligence Agencies moved from deterring foreign adversaries to suppressing domestic political opponents? It certainly looks that way.
Why the “confessions” of Trump campaign members are suspect: if we’ve never been interrogated by Federal agents, especially seriously hostile Federal agents who have already made up their minds, then we can’t know what kind of lies + pressure were placed on people like Michael Flynn or the others to “confess.”
Strzok and “laughing off” the questions
The other day, Peter Strzok, the agent who blatantly told his lover that they would stop Trump from being President, sat “smug and defiant” in front of a closed door Congressional panel and “laughed off” their questions, according to Fox. He refused to answer some questions as well. This coming from a guy who was escorted out of the FBI building the week prior and reportedly lost his security clearance. The only thing he did say was that he “regretted” sending the texts.
In other words, he’s not sorry he sent the texts because of his anti-Trump sentiments, he’s sorry because he got caught. No lesson learned. But why would he act like that? Does he firmly believe nothing is going to happen to him?
Since his appearance was “classified” we can’t get to the transcript yet, although there are members calling for its release. We’ll see.
Fabrication of evidence?
John D. OConnor, the attorney who revealed Mark Felt as Watergate’s ‘deep throat,’ wrote an op-ed for The Daily Caller that asks some important questions. After receiving a phony “tip” from a spurious organization, Comey, Brennan, and Clapper may have fabricated the entire Russian “collusion” idea. Their focus changed from foreign threats to the political opponents of the Obama administration.
“The ”Russian collusion” inquiry began in December 2015 (not, as claimed, on July 31, 2016), with a tip from GCHQ to Brennan that Putin wished to financially support a Donald Trump presidential candidacy. Nothing has yet emerged, in subsequent FISA warrant applications or elsewhere in leaks, to suggest that the tip was anything but phony. But on December 28, 2015, after Brennan had hurriedly formed a special “inter-agency” group, one of Comey’s top aides Peter Strzok was attempting to get approval for “LUREs,” Fedspeak for spies, inferentially to penetrate the Trump campaign. All of this would have been well and good if there had been a solid basis to suspect criminal activity by the Trump campaign. But, it now appears, rather than dismiss the inaccurate tip as disinformation, the FBI tried to manufacture evidence where none had existed, hoping real wrongdoing would eventually be found. Thus started an investigation without a crime, long a Comey specialty.” Read more at the Daily Caller here.
The “stand down” order
When they learned there might be some “Russian interference” in the upcoming Presidential election, Susan Rice reportedly issued a “stand down” order.
Daniel Greenfield wrote in part:
“If Russian interference in the election represented the crisis that we are told it did, why did Obama fail to take any meaningful action?
The White House’s own cybersecurity people wanted an aggressive response before being told to stand down. Obama issued a bloodless warning to Russia while his people deliberately crippled our offense.
Democrats and the media blamed the Russian hacking on Trump. But it was Susan Rice who had told the cybersecurity team to “knock it off” and Obama’s people who hadn’t wanted him to be “boxed in” and forced to respond to Russian actions…
…The 2016 election is really the story of two deep state intelligence operations that dovetailed neatly with each other. One was an ongoing Russian operation that took advantage of a weak president to sow chaos in America and Europe. The other was a domestic political operation utilizing counterintelligence resources in the United States and Europe to spy on, undermine and try to bring down Trump.
Contrary to claims made by Obama operatives, the Russian operation was not new. Russian hackers and spies had done enormous damage to America’s intelligence community. But they had succeeded so well because the mission of the intelligence community had shifted from deterring foreign adversaries to suppressing domestic political opponents.” Read more of Daniel Greenfields’ article here.
The FBI and intelligence community are compromised to the hilt, having been infiltrated with Communist/Marxist/Socialist influence for 8 years under Obama. Though I’m sure there are agents at the local levels who just want to do their jobs without political interference, the trust is deeply broken at this point.
“Obama’s people had spent eight years dismantling political norms and undermining America. The KGB deep state conspirators in Russia and their leftist counterparts in Washington D.C. had emerged from the same ideological school. Their aims and allegiances had diverged…” Daniel Greenfield