Category: MuellerGate

There was never any “Russian collusion” by the Trump campaign, and so why was there a need for a nearly two-year-long special counsel investigation? Because when President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey in May 2017, this caused a panic among “Deep State” operatives who feared the truth about the Obama administration’s surveillance of the Trump campaign would be exposed. Therefore, to conceal this scandal — to protect the people at the Department of Justice and other agencies who had been involved in approving this political surveillance — Robert Mueller was appointed as special counsel, to manufacture a narrative of Trump wrongdoing that would distract from what really happened. That’s what it looks like to me, anyway. The Mueller investigation was actually a cover-up, and now that Attorney General William Barr has ordered an investigation of the origins of the “Russian collusion” story, Democrats and their media allies are beginning to panic:

California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff called Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into the origins of the Russia probe “un-American” in a Thursday night tweet.
“While Trump stonewalls the public from learning the truth about his obstruction of justice, Trump and Barr conspire to weaponize law enforcement and classified information against their political enemies,” Schiff wrote. “The coverup has entered a new and dangerous phase. This is un-American.”
President Donald Trump on Thursday directed the heads of the CIA, FBI, State Department and other agencies to cooperate with Barr as he investigates the origins of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
The president also released a memo authorizing the attorney general to “declassify, downgrade, or direct the declassification or downgrading of information or intelligence” regarding the investigation into whether or not the Trump campaign was surveilled unlawfully.

Schiff’s claims are a bizarre inversion of reality. How is it a “coverup” to declassify documents? Wouldn’t a “coverup” seek to conceal secrets, rather than to disclose them? And who was it that “weaponize[d] law enforcement . . . against their political enemies”? Isn’t that exactly what the Obama administration did to the Trump campaign?

Meanwhile, Ace of Spades calls attention to the case of Svetlana Lokhova, a Russian academic who is suing FBI intelligence asset Stefan Halper and several media organizations who published stories based on Halper’s claim that Lokhova was a spy. She says Halper deliberately arranged to have Lokhova seated next to Gen. Michael Flynn (at the time, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency) during dinners at England’s Cambridge University. Halper then allegedly reported the Lokhova-Flynn meetings as evidence that Flynn was “compromised.”

This manufactured evidence subsequently became part of the “Russian collusion” narrative, and was reported by the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and NBC — all of whom are named as defendants in Lokhova’s lawsuit. So you see that there was a circularity of influence (between the intelligence community, Democrat politicians and the news media) involved in creating this narrative and selling it to the public, in order to sustain political support for the Mueller probe which, as I say, was intended to conceal the truth about all this.

Over the course of the next few weeks, Americans are going to learn how they have been deceived. Even Democrat voters who despise Trump will no longer be able to ignore how the Obama administration misused U.S. intelligence as part of an effort to help elect Hillary Clinton. CNN’s ratings are already in the toilet. How many people will still be watching CNN after it becomes evident — as it soon will — that the network was complicit in this dishonest propaganda operation?

My podcasting partner John Hoge calls attention to this summary of the Mueller investigation by Victor Davis Hanson:

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s two-year, $30 million, 448-page report did not find collusion between Donald Trump and Russia.
Despite compiling private allegations of loud and obnoxious Trump behavior, Mueller also concluded that there was not any actionable case of obstruction of justice by the president. . . .
Yet Mueller’s team went down every blind alley relating to its investigation — except where Obama-era officials were likely culpable for relevant unethical or illegal behavior. . . .
The problem with the Muller investigation, and with former intelligence officials such as Brennan, Clapper, Comey and McCabe, is pious hypocrisy. Those who have lectured America on Trump’s unproven crimes have written books and appeared on TV to publicize their own superior virtue. Yet they themselves have engaged in all sorts of unethical and illegal behavior.

Without regard to Mueller’s failure to find any evidence of the fictitious “Russian collusion,” Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) are acting as if obstruction of justice is a proven fact, raising the question of how an innocent man’s effort to prove his innocence can obstruct justice. If you’re not a witch, and yet you’ve become the target of a witch-hunt, is it wrong to try to stop the witch-hunt? You’re never going to see anyone make that point on CNN, but then again, unless you’re stuck in airport, you’ll probably never see CNN at all.

Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) have still not recovered from Attorney General William Barr’s testimony Wednesday that he believes “spying did occur” in 2016, and that he intends to investigate the Obama administration’s surveillance of the Trump campaign. That word “spying” seemed to have a traumatic effect on Democrats, and their media allies immediately began to spin this as Barr promoting a “conspiracy theory,” even though it is just a plain statement of known facts: Yes, the FBI targeted Trump campaign officials for surveillance, based on the Steele dossier commissioned by the Clinton campaign.

Last May, after it was revealed that the FBI had used an informant, Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, to spy on Trump campaign aides Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, I wrote this:

Here’s the thing: FBI officials didn’t expect Hillary to lose. As we know, text messages between two high-ranking FBI officials discussed an “insurance policy” to prevent Trump from becoming president. Because they expected Hillary to win, they also expected to be able to prevent this taxpayer-funded espionage from becoming public knowledge.
And then Trump won.
Democrat operatives — in the Clinton campaign, in the Obama administration, in the federal bureaucracy, and in the media — panicked at the thought of what the newly-elected president might do (e.g., expose the corruption at the Justice Department) used information from the Steele dossier as a pretext for the Mueller “investigation.” Yet there was never any actual “Russian collusion” to investigate, and the purpose of appointing a special counsel was . . . what? To create a phony “scandal”? To undermine the legitimacy of the new administration? To cover up wrongdoing by the Obama administration and the FBI?

The Mueller investigation was part of a cover-up, intended to prevent the public from becoming aware of the (potentially criminal) domestic espionage operation against the Trump campaign. So now, after two years, Mueller has concluded his phony investigation without producing evidence of the (non-existent) “collusion,” and there’s a new attorney general with no conflicts of interest to prevent him from investigating exactly what kind of shenanigans went on at the DOJ during the Obama years. Can you understand why Democrats are freaking out?

Patricia McCarthy writes:

When A.G. Barr stated he would be investigating the “spying” on the Trump campaign, the Democrats on the committee were shocked, truly stunned. How dare he suggest such a thing? These folks, for over two years, have had their heads deep in ostrich sand. They are apparently completely unaware, or pretend to be, of the massive amounts of actual proof that the Obama administration illegally attempted to eliminate Trump from the running by trying to plant its own spies in the campaign and surveil under prohibited pretexts. Part of this plan was to create and amass fake evidence to be used against him. As almost everyone knows by now, the “Russia Collusion” hoax was just that, a hoax, devised by persons with power in the FBI, the DOJ, the NSA and the Obama administration. Once Hillary lost the election, her minions, such as the disreputable Rob Mook, were right there to get the claim out that she lost because “the Russians hacked the election.” Yeah, right. No way. Not a chance. Did she know then that her supporters in the Obama administration, the FBI, and the DOJ had already implemented a stratagem to undo his victory? Probably. That would explain her leap to blame her loss on “the Russians.”

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.) The most common-sense interpretation of what we know is that the spying on the Trump campaign was conducted with the approval of then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and, at least, the tacit approval of President Obama himself. So all the media and congressional Democrats who have spent the past two years hyping up the phony “Russian collusion” narrative will now find their demands for a thorough investigation come boomeranging back at them.

Max Bergmann worked in the State Department and Sam Berger worked in the White House during the Obama administration, and both of them are now on the payroll of the George Soros-funded/John Podesta-founded Center for American Progress. They lay out out a five-point argument that special counsel Robert Mueller has all the evidence he needs to prove Trump colluded with Russia. Rather than summarize their argument, I’ll just remind you that all these people are so smart that they were certain Hillary Clinton would be elected president.