Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Yesterday the New York Times confirmed what many of us who don’t rely on the New York Times for news have known for a long time: The Obama Administration spied on the Trump presidential campaign.
WASHINGTON — The conversation at a London bar in September 2016 took a strange turn when the woman sitting across from George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, asked a direct question: Was the Trump campaign working with Russia?
The woman had set up the meeting to discuss foreign policy issues. But she was actually a government investigator posing as a research assistant, according to people familiar with the operation. The F.B.I. sent her to London as part of the counterintelligence inquiry opened that summer to better understand the Trump campaign’s links to Russia.
Some will still insist pathetically that “a government investigator posing as [someone she is not]” is not a spy. Those people are partisan hacks and should not be taken seriously. As Attorney General Bill Barr stated in testimony before the senate this week, “spy” is a perfectly good English word that means exactly what it means and there’s no reason to use any other word. Senator Sheldon Boofhouse (D-RI), just a day before the New York Times revealed to its uninformed readers that Obama spied on Trump, attempted to pretend that “authorized surveillance” is somehow different than “spying.” It’s not. The Obama administration spied on Trump’s presidential campaign.
The New York Times could have published its article, titled “F.B.I. Sent Investigator Posing as Assistant to Meet With Trump Aide in 2016,” at any point in the last few years, but its editors chose to wait until all hope of salvation from Robert Mueller had been dashed before revealing the truth.
In fact, the point of the article is not to reveal truth but to launder information, to soften the blow, ahead of what the New York Times and others believe is coming: a reckoning. The Department of Justice’s Inspector General, Michael E. Horowitz, is widely expected to be near releasing a report on how the FBI defrauded the FISA court in 2016 in order to get the warrant to conduct its spying on the Trump campaign. “Authorized surveillance” (spying) isn’t so “authorized” if the court that authorized it was lied to in the process. In additional, Attorney General Barr has stated his intention to investigate whether the spying of the Trump campaign by the Obama Administration was “adequately predicated.”
Adam Goldman, Michael S. Schmidt, and Mark Mazzetti are the three named writers on the New York Times article, but the real author is the deep state, which is attempting to shape the narrative ahead of Horowitz’s report and Barr’s investigation.
The decision to use Ms. Turk in the operation aimed at a presidential campaign official shows the level of alarm inside the F.B.I. during a frantic period when the bureau was trying to determine the scope of Russia’s attempts to disrupt the 2016 election, but could also give ammunition to Mr. Trump and his allies for their spying claims.
You see, the FBI was so alarmed that they just had to lie to the FISA court and throw George Popadopoulos’s Rights out the window. Picayune things like the Constitution and the laws of the United States don’t matter when unelected deep state apparatchiks are alarmed that someone they don’t like might become president. It’s too bad that this proof that Obama spied on Trump will give Trump ammunition to say that Obama spied on him.
What we are going to find out, I predict, is that the spying started much sooner than the “official” date of July 31 (2016), that Trump’s was not the only presidential campaign spied on, that Obama was fully aware of it, and that several foreign nations were involved in the effort (colluded, you might say).