Complicated, and at some points, confusing to a non-insider. Nevertheless, Clarice Feldman’s column is, as usual, highly informative…And should further enrage the American people at the corruption and treachery at our highest levels of government that went on throughout the Obama years.
What this indicates, to me, is the utter moral bankruptcy of the Obama people. It further confirms that if they were willing to go this far to attack and attempt to destroy their domestic political opponents, they would certainly be willing to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America into some globalist, tyrannical ally of dictators and radical leftist actors around the world. (Might explain why Obama wanted to strengthen the Iranian regime, Putin’s dangerous adventurism, and its own form of ‘western Marxism’. )
Finally, all the evidence as it is leaking out and hopefully will become a raging river of damning facts about the radical leftist control of today’s Democratic party, we will confirm that John Kerry is not the bumbling fool he appears to be, but rather the treacherous traitor he has always been. DLH
Excerpt:
The ‘Election Collusion’ Was between Our Intelligence Community and Britain
As I will explain, the widespread notion that Russia and Trump colluded to beat Hillary has long been demonstrable bunk. What seems more clear each day is that there was collusion between certain members of the U.S. and British intelligence communities to spy on the Trump campaign. This may explain, in large part, the reluctance of the Department of Justice to reveal what it knows publicly. After all — with rare exceptions — the two countries’ intelligence services have long had important information gathering and sharing agreements, and exposure of this may harm the traditional reciprocal relationship.
Whether the British counterparts were hoodwinked into playing this role is still unclear. Maybe they were. On the other hand, with most of what they know about the U.S. electorate doubtless coming from the NYT and even more left-wing British media, they may well have done this willingly, believing the globalist Hillary had a sure shot at the presidency and this was a means of cementing a relationship with her.
Key Developments This Week
Congressman Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has been stonewalled by the Department of Justice respecting the details of the originating Electronic Communication (EC) on July 31, 2016, which formed the basis of the commencement of the FBI counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign. In particular, he wanted to know the identity of the person whose name had been redacted on what has been described as an FBI/DOJ source “a U.S. Citizen who has provided intelligence to the CIA and FBI”. The DOJ replied that revealing the source “might damage international relationships.” Failing to get a response, Nunes threatened to hold the attorney general in contempt of Congress and the DoJ offered a private meeting. At this meeting they were denied an opportunity to view the relevant documents, but Greg Jarrett reports they will get to see them next week:
Jarrett: Our top story, the corrupt DOJ Leaderships is still stonewalling Congress about a potential Bombshell revelation — the identity of an FBI Mole within the Trump Campaign. House Intelligence Committee members Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy will have to wait until next week to get a direct look at the very documents related to the Russia Probe.
At about the time the meeting took place, Kimberley Strassel of the Wall Street Journal dropped a bombshell, making public what we long suspected.
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.
. . . much more riveting commentary about this from Clarice Feldman
