The more we learn about the early days of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s “collusion” with Russia, the more this whole thing stinks. In recent days, we’ve not only learned that the Obama administration attempted to infiltrate the campaign with an informer – Cambridge professor Stefan Halper – but we’re beginning to see the intelligence community slowly and subtly push back the start date of the investigation. Not only that, the initiating spark of that investigation keeps morphing into something new every time the previous one gets snuffed out.
If we had a responsible media looking into this shifting narrative, the alarm bells would be sounding from coast to coast. Instead, because trendsetters like The New York Times and the Washington Post are fully entrenched in the “Well of COURSE Trump is guilty” mindset, everything the Obama law enforcement agencies did is excused as being par for the course. But as far as we can tell, literally nothing they did was by the book, standard, or justified by the evidence they had before them.
Strangely enough, the FBI seems unable or unwilling to mark a definitive start date to the investigation. The official document procured by the House Intelligence Committee has a start date of July 31, 2016, but no one is even bothering to pretend that this was actually the beginning of the investigation. Most of Obama’s lackeys pin the start of the investigation to “late spring” of that year, but it’s still not clear what actually compelled the FBI to start looking into the matter.
Was it the Steele dossier – a piece of Clinton-funded opposition research with (as far as we can tell) very little relation to fact? The FBI and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper insist that the dossier had nothing to do with it.
Was it Carter Page’s trip to Moscow?
Was it George Papadopoulos’s drunken conversation with an Australian diplomat?
What started this investigation? Why is this so difficult to figure out?
There is no reason for this stuff to remain shrouded in mystery unless the cloak of secrecy is intended to shield the Obama administration from charges of illegal spying.
The Papadopoulos story – the one we’re really supposed to believe – makes no sense, given that no one even knew the DNC’s servers had been hacked at the time he spoke to the Australian diplomat. Nor does it make sense that the FBI would wait until January 2017 to speak to Papadopoulos. NOR does it make sense that the FBI would initiate a counterintelligence investigation without letting Trump know, “Hey man, your people are falling into a Russian trap.”
What would make sense is that the Obama team, scared to death about what a President Trump would do to their leader’s legacy if he were to defeat Hillary Clinton, went to extraordinary lengths to spy on, set up, and investigate their political adversaries. The only other possibility is that they are withholding a MAJOR piece of evidence from the public and Congress – a piece of evidence that landed in their laps early on and justified the rest of their bizarre and illegal machinations.
If that evidence exists, now would be a good time to let the world in on it.