Previous post
Next post
If you watched the Inquisition of the Acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire, today, you may be forgiven if you thought that Grand Inquistor/Representative Adam Schiff had lost his darn mind. The other Democrats on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence were similarly vicious. This whole thing was kicked off by a whistleblower complaint that smells really, really bad.
In case you need to be caught up, Deanna wrote a great post on the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky that the whistleblower heard about that so upset him/her. You can read it here. And, Nina had the early read on the hearsay that caused this person to file the complaint. I waited with Diet Coke in hand for the complaint to be unclassified this morning. First read through, I thought it smelled. Second read through, I thought it smelled really, really bad. If you haven’t read the whistleblower complaint, it’s right here.
Then, this evening, The New York Post put up a column by a former CIA official who has actually worked on these heads of states-type phone calls. Fred Fleitz was actually considered for the Director of National Intelligence after Dan Coats left. From his article:
My suspicions grew this morning when I saw the declassified whistleblowing complaint. It appears to be written by a law professor and includes legal references and detailed footnotes. It also has an unusual legalistic reference on how this complaint should be classified.
From my experience, such an extremely polished whistleblowing complaint is unheard of. This document looks as if this leaker had outside help, possibly from congressional members or staff.
Inquiring minds may want to ask who funded this expensive document? Reminds me of another document used against the President.
I may not have any experience with National Security or the Intelligence Community, but I feel like I have seen this movie before. You know “Steele Dossier, The Sequel”. Yes, we have seen this before:
And, then there is this from the article:
Moreover, it looks like more than a coincidence that this complaint surfaced and was directed to the House Intelligence Committee just after Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), an outspoken opponent of President Trump, expressed numerous complaints in August 2019 accusing President Trump of abusing aid to Ukraine to hurt Joe Biden. This includes an August 28 tweet that closely resembled the whistleblowing complaint.
Why, yes, it does look a lot like Shifty Schiff’s tweet:
Trump is withholding vital military aid to Ukraine, while his personal lawyer seeks help from the Ukraine government to investigate his political opponent.
It doesn’t take a stable genius to see the magnitude of this conflict.
Or how destructive it is to our national security. https://t.co/X4yhTS2q1Z
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) August 29, 2019
Too convenient by half, I say. Just like the Steele Dossier. As I was writing this article, the New York Post put up another article calling the whistleblower complaint Steele Dossier 2.0:
Steele hadn’t gathered or witnessed any of this evidence first-hand. Rather, he relied on anonymous sources, many of them third-hand. “Source B asserted that the Trump operation was both supported and directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin,” Steele wrote. “Source A confided that the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents,” including Hillary Clinton, Steele claimed.
Oh yes, that is why this seems like a bad movie remake.
Finally, from the Fred Fleitz article:
I refuse to believe that the leaking, timing and presentation of this complaint is coincidence. I don’t think the American people will buy this either.
I’m more worried, however, that this latest instance of blatant politicization of intelligence by Trump haters will do long term damage to the relationship between the intelligence community and US presidents for many years to come.
Yes, that is my worry. The President of the United States will have to hide his phone calls to safeguard other heads of states.
Meanwhile, for as long as Trump is President, please God, until January 20, 2024, we will be forced to watch the torture of good people by Torquemada Schiff.
Photo Credit: Pixabay.com/BlueBudgie/Pixabay License
Russell lucas, SR says: Betting old Hillary wrote the report. One down and several to go. Harris and Sanders are next.
GWB says: to investigate his political opponent
Ah, but he is NOT Trump’s political opponent. He is a potential political opponent, until such time as the Democrat convention next year. And if all potential political opponents are off-limits for criminal investigation, then… well, I’m a potential political opponent of every politician in this country, at all levels. Now, how to embezzle me some gov’t funds……………
David says: I posted this on another thread, but it needs to go here, too.
Quick follow up on something about the whistleblower. They state that a report can be filed “without direct knowledge” of the situation. Here’s the problem – the material is classified. You must be ‘read-on’ to compartmentalized information; if it is being heard second-hand by individuals not authorized first-hand knowledge then there’s a security breach. That’s a federal crime and not reporting it as such is ALSO a federal crime. Cringe-worthy or not, discussing classified material at the water cooler is not allowed, period. There should be at least three (leaker, speaker w/direct knowledge, and recipient), if not EVERYONE in that office under criminal investigation for mis-handling classified material. Note that if the whistleblower was eavesdropping in a secure area he must either a) report the breech or b) is committing espionage with intent to share to unauthorized persons (18-36 months per count under military rules).
Let me put it this way. One or more people committed felonies and have admitted it under oath. The complaint is an admission of guilt as written – he received unauthorized classified material and both disseminated and did not inhibit further dissemination of said materials. There’s no provision for whistle-blowing, as he did not (from the complaint) confirm that the IG involved had legal access to the materials.
Sorry for the rant, but this hacks me off.
Kathy says: Thank you, David. Not living in that world, I just felt that something that you describe so well was going on. You turned that feeling into knowledge and I have good reasons to be hacked.
4 Comments