Timothy Birdnow

I'm in a row with a liberal on Facebook who is trying to deny there was a conspiracy against Donald Trump.

Mike Cascic says:

Claims that the Hillary Clinton campaign invented a conspiracy that didn’t exist to try and get Trump defeated. This is not true. The Clinton campaign and the DNC hired a law firm, Perkins Coie, which hired an opposition research company, Fusion GPS, which hired a former British spy, Christopher Steele, to conduct research on Trump’s ties to Russia1. Steele compiled a series of memos, known as the dossier, based on his sources and contacts. The dossier contained unverified and salacious allegations about Trump and Russia, some of which have been debunked or disputed by subsequent investigations and lawsuits23. However, the dossier was not the sole basis for the FBI’s investigation into Trump and Russia, known as Crossfire Hurricane. The FBI had other reasons to open the investigation, such as information from an Australian diplomat about a Trump campaign adviser’s knowledge of Russian hacking of Democratic emails2.
DJ claims that the heads of the FBI and CIA knew that the dossier was a Hillary campaign invention and not real. This is also not true. The FBI and the CIA did not know who funded the dossier until October 2017, after the investigation had already begun2. They also did not dismiss the dossier as entirely false or fabricated. They tried to corroborate some of its claims and assess its reliability. They found that some parts of the dossier were consistent with other intelligence sources, while others were inconsistent or unconfirmed2. They also informed Trump and Obama about the existence of the dossier in January 2017, before it was leaked to the public2.
DJ claims that inventing Russian collusion was a serious insult to Russia and damaged relations with Russia. This is a matter of opinion, not fact. Some might argue that Russia’s interference in the 2016 election was a serious insult to the US and damaged relations with the US. Some might also argue that Trump’s actions and statements regarding Russia were more harmful to US interests and allies than any allegations of collusion. For example, Trump publicly doubted US intelligence agencies’ findings on Russian meddling, praised Putin as a strong leader, questioned NATO’s commitment to defend its members, withdrew from international agreements and treaties that constrained Russia’s influence, and failed to impose sanctions or respond to Russian aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere2.
DJ claims that none of the Obama era picks in US intelligence admitted that the dossier was false or that they were manipulated for political purposes. This is misleading. The Obama era officials who oversaw the investigation have repeatedly defended their actions as lawful and appropriate, based on the information they had at the time. They have also acknowledged some mistakes and errors in the process, such as the problems with the FISA applications to surveil a former Trump campaign adviser2. They have also testified under oath before Congress and cooperated with various inquiries into the matter, including by special counsel Robert Mueller and inspector general Michael Horowitz2. They have not admitted to any wrongdoing or bias that affected their decisions or judgments.
DJ claims that all of this is treason. This is false. Treason is defined by the US Constitution as "levying war against them [the United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” None of the actions described by DJ meet this definition. There is no evidence that anyone involved in the investigation levied war against the US or adhered to its enemies. There is also no evidence that anyone involved in the investigation intended to overthrow or harm the US government or its institutions. On the contrary, they were trying to protect national security and uphold the rule of law.
These are some of the flaws in DJ’s analysis. I hope this helps you understand why his claims are not credible or accurate.

I reply:

So Mike Cacic, a front company absolves all liability for the party for which it fronts? We have racketeering laws for exactly that purpose. Hillary was smart enough to farm this stuff out; made it harder to catch. Perkins Cole could claim attorney client privilege to protect her. But only a fool would doubt Hillary knew. Were she a drug dealer they would charge her under RICO statutes.

And you say the FBI and CIA knew the dossier was problematic, at a minimum. So why was it the primary source for the FISA warrant request? https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/judiciary-committee-releases-declassified-documents-that-substantially-undercut-steele-dossier-page-fisa-warrants

The FBI knew it was crap but used it anyway, and did not bother to tell the FISA judge that they used copies of it for toilet paper.

Crossfire Hurricane and Popodopoulis was a farce. He was a very low level employee, a kid really, and he was lured to meet with the appropriately named Mr. Downer, who is a shadowy figure who disappeared after this broke. It seems rather likely Downer was working for Mi6 or some other intelligence agency. That had all the earmarks of a black op.

Popodopoulis could not, at his level, have known anything. He was told "I have dirt on Hillary" and figured he should be a good soldier and see what it was. That was all.

You know full well that goes on all the time in politics. So did the FBI and CIA. They were looking for something to justify spying on Trump.

There was no evidence Trump or his camp knew of or had anything to do with hacking of Hillary's e-mails (which I suspect was not done by the Russians but was made to look so, probably by our own CIA). Also, you have apparently forgotten that the Awan brothers stole a bunch of documents from the Democrats in Congress and that was originally blamed on the Russians too. Then it became apparent that it was the people the Democrats put in to work with their computers.

Oh, I know; the CIA has confirmed it was the Russians who hacked Hillary's e-mails, nad the DNC computers too! In case you are incapable of grasping the point, they were the ones running this operation on Trump in the first place. Their word in any of this is worthless.

You say:

"The FBI and the CIA did not know who funded the dossier until October 2017, after the investigation had already begun"

And your proof? Their word?

You forget that this dossier had been floating around D.C. for a while when John McCain, who hated Trump, finally got wind of it and ran it to the FBI, but do you not think they didn't already have it? Steele was Mi6, part of the "five eyes" and so the CIA had that well before 2019.

And at least one Russian intelligence agent - Igor Danchenko - played a pivotal role in the creation of the dossier, so who were the Russians supporting?

They would have no reason to support Trump, who wanted energy independence (hurting Russian oil and gas), a strong U.S. military, wanted to pull us out of many of the entangling alliances which have been sucking us dry of cash, wanted to wind down the multiple international wars, and make NATO stand on it's own. None of these things served Russian's purposes.

Yes, it WAS damaging to U.S./Russian relations. Nobody likes being framed.

You say:

"Some might also argue that Trump’s actions and statements regarding Russia were more harmful to US interests and allies than any allegations of collusion"

Like what exactly? Joking about how maybe the Russians could find Hillary's 30,000 lost e-mails?

Uh, Trump had every reason to doubt Intelligence claims as they were spying on him and had run a black op on him, friend. And praising Putin as a strong leader? That is what international leaders do and he wouuld have been irresponsible to pick a fight with Putin before he even took office. I guess you missed it but Joe Biden has praised Xing Jinping in similar fashion. And Barack Obama offered praise for Putin on occasion. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/obama-offers-praise-of-putin-120127 You do not seem to grassp how diplomacy works.

How, pray tell, did the Paris Accord constrain Russia? Or the Iran nuclear deal? You do know that both were promoted by Russia, and in fact the Paris Accord was heavily promoteed with Russian dark money.

What was Trump suppposed to sanction? The Russians invaded Crimea during the Obama Presidency, for instance.

"mistakes were made" is not an admission but rather an excuse.

BTW Mueller and Brennan and the rest have LIED in front of Congress, and repeatedly with no consequences Mike. I guess you missed that. You seem to have forgotten James Comey's perjury there, for instance. Why shoulld we believe their claims now?

I agree; it does not meet the formal definition of treason, although it comes perilously close. It most definitly IS a violation of the oaths taken to defend the Constitution. It was abuse of power, evidence tampering, witness tampering, vote tampering, and a host of other crimes. It does come perilously close to adhering to an enemy.

"There is also no evidence that anyone involved in the investigation intended to overthrow or harm the US government or its institutions."

Oh? "No. No he won't. We'll stop it,” Those were the exact words of Peter Strzok to his girlfriend Lisa Page when asked if Trump might win. You don't think that consitutes evidence of malicious intent by the intelligence community?

"On the contrary, they were trying to protect national security and uphold the rule of law"

Now here you had just gone on and on about how DJ was attempting to read minds, and then you boldly read THEIR minds and declare them innocent.

There is every reason to believe they were not just doing what they thought was in America's interest. Or they would have put a stop to it as soon as the evidence showed they were wrong and apologized. But no, they double downed on it, even signing a letter saying the Hunter Biden Laptop story was Russian Disinformation when they in fact HAD THE FREAKING LAPTOP and knew it was true. So they showed themselves liars then and yet we are to believe they weren't lying before?

I have some great swampland for sale cheap Mike!

Mike, you have to really, really, really want to believe a lie to buy what you are selling.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1743 words, total size 11 kb.