The NY Times story about #CrossfireHurricane is additional evidence that they’ve gone full Pravda. They’re so desperate to provide air cover for one of the most destructive spying operations in American history that they’ll sacrifice any remaining credibility they have left.
— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) May 17, 2018
Soooo @realDonaldTrump was correct that the Obama WH was trying to "rig the election" against him & "Jumpin' Jim" @Comey trolled Trump by naming Russia op 'Crossfire Hurricane' – now is not the time for the President to have any "Sympathy for the Devil"
— Tony Shaffer (@T_S_P_O_O_K_Y) May 17, 2018
The New York Times has published a very lengthy missive regarding background muck and mire prior to the Mueller investigation while the Obama administration was still in full-throttle power and weaponizing law enforcement and intelligence agencies against the Trump campaign in order to bolster and protect a Hillary Clinton campaign and possible presidency. Not the Time’s words, but it is what this boils down to. And the Times inadvertently confirms what we have suspected all along on this bullshit. The fact is, the NYT has pushed out this latest puppy-training fodder ahead of the highly anticipated, and damning, IG report to try and buffer that explosion when it comes probably early next month.
The NY Times began stage 2 yesterday. Stage 1, the Russian collusion fairytale, is officially dead. Stage 2, covering up the #Obamagate spying scandal, now begins. More on my podcast today.
— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) May 17, 2018
“Guess what? The election was being rigged against him, by the Obama administration and law enforcement and intelligence agencies! … A handful of rogue FBI agents! ~ Mark Levin
FBI cleared the decks for Hillary despite her serial felonies under the Espionage Act and then immediately genuflect and go after Trump with this cabal of FBI agents. That’s what the New York Times piece revealed yesterday whether or not they realize it. https://t.co/BjYhj6K0el
— Nick Short 🇺🇸 (@PoliticalShort) May 17, 2018
This NYT story says that FBI was worried that if it came out they were spying on Trump campaign it would "only reinforce his claims that the election was being rigged against him." Yes, I can imagine that would reinforce those claims. I mean, !!! !!! !!! !!!
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) May 16, 2018
— Fox News (@FoxNews) May 17, 2018
Levin referred to a report at the New York Times earlier that day which outlines the origins of the FBI’s secretive probe into what it suspected were the Trump campaign’s dealings with the Kremlin. According to the story, what was then known as “Crossfire Hurricane” amongst the handful of agents involved, began months before election day.
The story serves to further vindicate Levin, who was widely attacked as a conspiracy theorist for his assertions that publicly-available evidence clearly suggested that the Trump campaign had been surveilled.
Trump is back to accusing his predecessor of spying on him https://t.co/Nq82JpAl6S
— Chris Megerian (@ChrisMegerian) May 17, 2018
With evidence, no? https://t.co/58t52OpwDW
— Instapundit.com (@instapundit) May 17, 2018
Mollie Hemingway @ The Federalist: 10 Key Takeaways From The New York Times’ Error-Ridden Defense Of FBI Spying On Trump Campaign – It’s reasonable to assume that much of the new information in the New York Times report relates to leakers’ fears about information that will be coming out in the inspector general report.
Here are a few quick takeaways.
1. FBI Officials Admit They Spied On Trump Campaign…
2. Terrified About Looming Inspector General Report…
3. Still No Evidence of Collusion With Russia…
4. Four Trump Affiliates Spied On…
5. Wiretaps, National Security Letters, and At Least One Spy…
6. More Leaks About a Top-Secret Government Informant…
7. Ignorance of Basic Facts…
8. Insurance: How Does It Work?…
9. Eavesdropping, Not Spying, And Other Friendly Claims…
10. Affirms Fears of Politicized Intelligence…
Andrew C. McCarthy: Spinning a Crossfire Hurricane: The Times on the FBI’s Trump Investigation
The quick take on the 4,100-word opus is that the Gray Lady “buried the lede.” Fair enough: You have to dig pretty deep to find that the FBI ran “at least one government informant” against the Trump campaign — and to note that the Times learned this because “current and former officials” leaked to reporters the same classified information about which, just days ago, the Justice Department shrieked “Extortion!” when Congress asked about it.
But that’s not even the most important of the buried ledes. What the Times story makes explicit, with studious understatement, is that the Obama administration used its counterintelligence powers to investigate the opposition party’s presidential campaign.
That is, there was no criminal predicate to justify an investigation of any Trump-campaign official. So, the FBI did not open a criminal investigation. Instead, the bureau opened a counterintelligence investigation and hoped that evidence of crimes committed by Trump officials would emerge. But it is an abuse of power to use counterintelligence powers, including spying and electronic surveillance, to conduct what is actually a criminal investigation.
The Times barely mentions the word counterintelligence in its saga. That’s not an accident. The paper is crafting the media-Democrat narrative. Here is how things are to be spun: The FBI was very public about the Clinton-emails investigation, even making disclosures about it on the eve of the election. Yet it kept the Trump-Russia investigation tightly under wraps, despite intelligence showing that the Kremlin was sabotaging the election for Trump’s benefit. This effectively destroyed Clinton’s candidacy and handed the presidency to Trump.
It’s a gas, gas, gas!
It’s also bunk. Just because the two FBI cases are both referred to as “investigations” does not make them the same kind of thing.
The Clinton case was a criminal investigation that was predicated on a mountain of incriminating evidence. Mrs. Clinton does have one legitimate beef against the FBI: Then-director James Comey went public with some (but by no means all) of the proof against her. In is not proper for law-enforcement officials to publicize evidence from a criminal investigation unless formal charges are brought.
In the scheme of things, though, this was a minor infraction. The scandal here is that Mrs. Clinton was not charged. She likes to blame Comey for her defeat; but she had a chance to win only because the Obama Justice Department and the FBI tanked the case against her — in exactly the manner President Obama encouraged them to do in public commentary.
By contast, the Trump case is a counterintelligence investigation. Unlike criminal cases, counterintelligence matters are classified. If agents had made public disclosures about them, they would have been committing crimes and violating solemn agreements with foreign intelligence services — agreements without which those services would not share information that U.S. national-security officials need in order to protect our country.
In the scheme of things, though, the problem is not that the FBI honored its confidentiality obligations in the Trump case while violating them in the Clinton case. The scandal is that the FBI, lacking the incriminating evidence needed to justify opening a criminal investigation of the Trump campaign, decided to open a counterintelligence investigation. With the blessing of the Obama White House, they took the powers that enable our government to spy on foreign adversaries and used them to spy on Americans — Americans who just happened to be their political adversaries…
Byron York: One year down, and it’s still Mueller time
The Federalist: One Year In, The Russia Investigations Keep Leading Back To The Investigators – What was once a no-downside case for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office has now become one with little upside. … And Obama/ Hillary!
What if the FBI just warned Trump during the election that the Russians were trying to infiltrate his campaign? Wouldn’t that have been easier?
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) May 17, 2018
Mueller's office finally gave the unredacted Rosenstein memo which allegedly justifies pre-2016 charges against Manafort to the federal judge overseeing Mueller's trial. The underlying memo itself is sealed. pic.twitter.com/tib5Ue5wvx
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 17, 2018
Cambridge professor Stefan Halper had numerous contacts with Carter Page, stretching from July 2016 to Sept 2017, much longer than previously known. Halper was who contacted George Papadopoulos out of the blue and flew him to London to meet. https://t.co/NBS4LyNXwQ @dailycaller
— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) May 17, 2018
The agenda-driven MSM has a fucking Hell of a lot invested in this collusion/ Anti-Trump Resistance bullshit…
How outrageous can it get? With one hand, the government claims it can’t release information concerning its spying on the Trump campaign (even claiming Congress is extorting it), and with the other leaks crucial information about this very thing to friendly news media outlet.
— David Limbaugh (@DavidLimbaugh) May 17, 2018
Breitbart’s Nolte: Why a Desperate CNN Used ‘Trillion’ in a Mueller Headline
Meanwhile: An excellent question…
Rand Paul wants Gina Haspel to disclose whether the CIA spied on any presidential candidates in 2016. The specificity of his questions suggests he wasn’t asking for no reason. https://t.co/gIIlkX9pAy
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 17, 2018
we are now officially at the “I was sure he was guilty so I dropped a gun with his prints on it at the crime scene” level of deep state anti-trump scheming https://t.co/E0JM2gqEaC
— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) May 17, 2018
Jim Treacher @ PJM: Maybe Everybody Should Stop Freaking Out Over MAGA Hats
The Federalist: Bombshell: FEC Records Indicate Hillary Campaign Illegally Laundered $84 Million – The mainstream media took no notice of a federal court filing that exposes a $84 million money-laundering conspiracy Democrats executed during the 2016 presidential election