FBI ‘protection’ of Trump in 2016 is a laugh
Talk about ungrateful – for some reason President Trump doesn’t appreciate how the FBI tried to help him out in 2016 by inserting a spy, I mean informant, into his campaign.
As the Washington Post headline explained this charitable deed: “The FBI didn’t use an informant to go after Trump. They used one to protect him.”
Of course they did. The crooked G-men are there to protect you, Mr. President. I should know, because they’ve been “protecting” me, off and on, since 1975. And they’re such good people – the feds prefer to remain anonymous. They want no credit for their charitable deeds.
After the first time they visited me, unannounced, on deadline, in the city room of the newspaper I worked for, the feds filed a report saying they hadn’t confronted me. Then, for 20 years, the bent G-men claimed they hadn’t written a report about the visit, er, non-visit, until it turned up on the Bureau’s own website as part of a file on their improper and illegal COINTELPRO activities during the 1970’s.
And now, after basically denying that they were snooping on Trump, the corrupt FBI is admitting that they did it – but they did it for all the right reasons. Right?
“He should be glad to know,” a former FBI agent writes in the Post, “that the FBI appears to have been trying to thwart a hostile country’s efforts to infiltrate his campaign.”
The New York Times agreed: “FBI Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims.”
Oddly, they forgot to protect the Hillary campaign in the same generous fashion, even though the wife of Andrew McCabe, the Bureau’s number two in more ways than one, took hundreds of thousands of dollars from Hillary’s cronies.
See, the Russian collusion represented “a grave national security threat,” the Post said, or it would have, except it was total nonsense, made up by paid agents of the Hillary Clinton campaign. But to gin up fake evidence, Hillary’s operatives in the Justice Department dispatched an obese septuagenarian with a nose like a pickle to infiltrate the Trump campaign.
This same Washington Post told us Thursday night that the man with a nose like a pickle could not be identified because it “could endanger him… exposing him could have severe consequences… the stakes are so high.”
That was last Friday. Monday night the Post named him. His name is Stefan Halper. No one has murdered him — yet. So much for the “severe consequences.”
For his work, Halper was paid at least $400,000 in public funds. What were he and the feds doing, you ask, other than not “spying?” New York magazine says the corrupt cops just “tried to ferret out” information. Slate calls the FBI’s oppo research on behalf of the Democrats an “inquiry.” The Post on occasion has used the verb “eavesdrop.”
Bottom line, the Famous But Incompetent FBI was trying to go KGB, but as always, they were more like the Keystone Kops – that is, if the Keystone Kops were on the pad.
The Post harrumphs that there will be “devastating consequences” if the FBI ever has to explain why it decided to begin violating the First Amendment rights of the GOP (but not the Democrats). Devastating consequences indeed. An indictment is always a disappointment, as those of us who have been under protection by the FBI like to say.
In the Post, the former agent explained how the FBI would have liked to have told Trump that Pickle Nose was there to protect him from the Russians.
But the problem was, if, God forbid, news had leaked out about their selfless public service on his behalf, “the Justice Department would not have been able to reveal publicly that the purpose of the investigation was to counter Russia, not target the campaign itself.”
Because the Democrats in the FBI and the CIA would never, ever leak anything to hurt Donald Trump. You know, like the stories about, say, the golden showers, or Michael Cohen’s visit to Prague, or the $11 billion bribe the Russians offered Carter Page – none of which were true, but hey, when did that ever stop CNN?
By the way, a couple of weeks ago, the Washington Post and the Times won Pulitzer Prizes for their, uh, dogged pursuit of… Russian… something or other. Maybe someday we’ll be able to come up with one word to describe how the FBI went banana republic in 2016-17.
Maybe we can call it… Obamagate.