Thread by @KingMakerFT

A few days ago the Washington Post’s official Fact Checker, @GlennKesslerWP , published an analysis with the headline “How the Right Embraced the False Claim that Hillary Clinton ‘Spied’ on President Donald Trump.” Mr Kessler explained, correctly, that Durham’s latest filing

didn’t really say Hillary SPIEF, and according to Michael Sussmann’s lawyers, the data Sussmann brought to the CIA in February 2016 was collected when Obama was president. In other words, someone, maybe not Hillary. was targeting Trump and his associates as they were in or near

the White House or other executive offices forming part of the Executive Office of the President (EOP). So when would that have been? Since the DNS data presented by Sussmann to the CIA could be associated with Trump or his associates, and since it also originated in or in the

vicinity of the EOP, the most likely time frame would be the transition. So while Fact Checker Kessler called out right wing media for getting some things wrong about Durham’s theory of the, Kessler hid the lede. He didn’t tell us that Durham has evidence that Joffe used

sensitive, proprietary data obtained by his company under a govt contract, to surveil the cell phone and internet activities of Trump and his team after the election, during the transition. That’s called spying. WaPo trumpets the fact that Durham never said Hillary ordered it.

But as is the case with most national media, Mr Kessler and his editors exhibit a striking absence of curiosity. “Who ordered the spying on an incoming president?” they should have asked. Was it Obama? Durham doesn’t say. However, he does drop a rather large bombshell about

what was going on. The cherry-picked results of this surveillance was given to lawyer Sussmann, so he could present this Trump Russia narrative to the CIA. Why the CIA? The WaPo once again displays their lack of curiosity. And it is most definitely curious, because the CIA lacks

authority to collect domestic Intel. That’s the FBI’s job. The CIA is responsible for foreign spying. Yet Sussmann, or whoever was directing him, decided to bring this freshly obtained intelligence- that had been obtained using a govt contract to retrieve data in or near the EOP

while targeting the internet activities of President-elect Trump and his associates- all Americans. These are all things beyond the CIA’s purview, to paraphrase Bob Mueller. So why take it to the CIA, after Trump’s inauguration? And why did three or more CIA agents or employees

take the meeting? And then, what did the CIA do with this data and related intel? Unfortunately, our national, legacy press have no curiosity about mysteries such as this.

If they were curious, they might want to explore a little more deeply the genesis of this NYT article, published on February 14, 2017, less than two weeks after the CIA meeting: nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/…

The article’s lede sentence referred to “phone records and intercepted calls” of Trump campaign members. It’s been reported that the NYT is the CIA’s favorite go-to publication when someone in the CIA wanted to leak something. Which raises a question that WaPo didn’t bother to

ask: Did Sussmann bring the cherry-picked sensitive data to the CIA, was it for the purpose of having the CIA leak it? And finally, one can’t leave this topic without asking the obvious question: Did Sussmann discuss future spying on Trump snd associates?