This is THREAD 2 of 3.
THREAD 1: covers the correction-worthy ERRORS in the May 16 @nytimes "Crossfire Hurricane" article
THREAD 2 (this one) covers all of the things that were legit, never-before-reported BOMBSHELLS, but buried/de-emphasized by the NYT
THREAD 1: covers the correction-worthy ERRORS in the May 16 @nytimes "Crossfire Hurricane" article
THREAD 2 (this one) covers all of the things that were legit, never-before-reported BOMBSHELLS, but buried/de-emphasized by the NYT
Before we begin, it's worth noting how unusual that behavior should be for so-called "journalists". Look at how @MZHemingway, @ChuckRossDC, @LeeSmithDC (and many others) handle exclusive, new information - they present it up front, clearly identified, with "SCOOP" or "EXCLUSIVE"
The NYT doesn't do that here. It slips BOMBSHELL info into the middle of sentences. Buries 3 of them in para 42/65/68. Doesn't ask Q's or explore the details. Why? You'd have to ask them but my guess is their leaky sources had a game plan & NYT stenographically went along with it
BURIED BOMBSHELL 1: There was "at least one" informant (er, spy) targeting the Trump campaign
The NYT drops into paragraph 42 that there many have been additional spies other than Stefan Halper (who they don't name but leak biographical information they know can identify him)
The NYT drops into paragraph 42 that there many have been additional spies other than Stefan Halper (who they don't name but leak biographical information they know can identify him)
Since the @nytimes article, we now suspect AT LEAST ONE of these spies approached Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo, at LEAST a month BEFORE the FBI Downer interview. Likely with no more probable cause than he'd worked in & had family ties to Russia:
Some questions the @nytimes didn't ask: where is GEORGE NADER? Why did the FBI interview JOSEPH MIFSUD in Feb '17 (AFTER the 1st PAPADOUPOLOS interview) and THEN let him leave the United States, if he's a "classic cutout for the Russians" hacking the US, as @RepAdamSchiff says?
BURIED BOMBSHELL 2: National Security Letters (NSL's) were used against the Trump campaign
This is the second huge story in para 42, which has almost no details & is never mentioned again. NSL's come with gag orders & even JUDGES can't expose them except for limited reasons...
This is the second huge story in para 42, which has almost no details & is never mentioned again. NSL's come with gag orders & even JUDGES can't expose them except for limited reasons...
...so, who authorized this disclosure? The FBI/DOJ? Or is it another straight up felony? (from media & DOJ complaining about leaks). Also, why were the FBI using NSL's at all - was it because they were being *repeatedly* turned down for warrants, even by the pliant FISA court?
Also on NSL's: a major claim in the media prior to the election (ultimately from the Steele Dossier) is that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen visited Prague to facilitate “collusion”. But Cohen plausibly denied visiting Prague, a denial backed up by his passport & social media metadata
But NSLs can demand data from "banks" AND "travel agencies": eff.org/issues/nationa…. Did the FBI use them to check this Cohen claim? As no proof has ever been given, I suspect the FBI may KNOW this claim is false but left it out there to protect the dossier & attack a US citizen
BURIED BOMBSHELL 3: The FBI confirmed the existence of the Counterintelligence Investigation (CI) into the Trump campaign to the NYT on Oct 31
This one is in para 68 - whoever leaked it is confirming someone probably committed a felony or major DOJ/FBI rule violation on Oct 31
This one is in para 68 - whoever leaked it is confirming someone probably committed a felony or major DOJ/FBI rule violation on Oct 31
The Trump investigation was a CI operation. The very *existence* of it is classified. Even criminal investigations should not be disclosed except in very limited circumstances. Disclosure requires high level DOJ approval AND is "confined to the Director (Comey) & Deputy (McCabe)"
@Comey *deliberately* didn't tell the "Gang of Eight", the most senior congressional leaders with TOP SECRET clearance the CI investigation existed (theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/03/20/it-…)*, and even then only with top DOJ approval (fbi.gov/news/testimony…)
*H/T @TheLastRefuge2
*H/T @TheLastRefuge2
And @Comey testified under oath on Sep 28 '16 that the FBI doesn't confirm the existence of investigations, even saying "I don't think so" when asked if the Trump Russia situation represented "extraordinary circumstances". That's only 4 weeks before FBI officials did exactly THAT
BONUS - this also ain't true. The Oct 31 story repeated many of the “facts” that the NYT thinks would have “devastated” the campaign: that a "broad" investigation existed, "scrutinized Trump advisors" (naming Page, Manafort & Stone), even a fake "secret channel of communication"
BONUS 2. The NYT now claims this Oct 31 story downplayed Trump/Russia, & let colluding Trump off the hook. Well, its STILL TRUE that there is "no clear link", after nearly two years of investigation, and barely anyone read this story - typical Russia hysteria was far more rampant
BURIED BOMBSHELL 4: Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates signed the first FISA warrant against @carterwpage
It was known that Yates, Boente and Rosenstein had signed the FISA warrants on the DOJ side, but not WHICH ORDER. This was only known to DOJ and Congressional investigators
It was known that Yates, Boente and Rosenstein had signed the FISA warrants on the DOJ side, but not WHICH ORDER. This was only known to DOJ and Congressional investigators
This is ANOTHER piece of information that was REDACTED in the @HouseIntelComm reporting, after FBI/DOJ classification review. And leaked again to the @nytimes. Is someone trying to set up @DevinNunes as a leaker? Hey, @RepAdamSchiff, you spoken to the NYT lately? Say, last week?
And, knowing now that the "bulk" of the 1st FISA warrant against @carterwpage likely relied on the Steele dossier, this could expose YATES to serious questions about why there was no verification of the dossier, its sources AND supposedly "Russian" sub-sources, as per procedures
BURIED BOMBSHELL 5: The initial FBI engagement with Alexander Downer "broke diplomatic protocol"
Why did the FBI have to break any "protocol"? What are they? Exactly when did Downer first talk to someone about this conversations with PAPADOUPOLOS? Is Downer ever going to talk?
Why did the FBI have to break any "protocol"? What are they? Exactly when did Downer first talk to someone about this conversations with PAPADOUPOLOS? Is Downer ever going to talk?
BURIED BOMBSHELL 6: The CI investigation was ONLY opened on the Trump campaign, not the Russia attack on the US in general
This is right in the headline, but totally downplayed. Why did the FBI, which should have been investigating RUSSIA, ONLY investigate the Trump campaign?
This is right in the headline, but totally downplayed. Why did the FBI, which should have been investigating RUSSIA, ONLY investigate the Trump campaign?
Hilary Clinton's campaign paid a foreign British spy - Christopher Steele - to dig up dirt on @realDonaldTrump, and he supposedly got his information from RUSSIANS TIED TO THE KREMLIN. What if that was *disinformation* to sow chaos? Instead of investigating THAT, the FBI used it!
How many FBI resources were used to spy and investigate Trump, rather than protecting the US from the Russia attack? Don't ask the @nytimes because they never even ask. Also, @AndrewCMcCarthy covers this far better than me so give him a read for more: nationalreview.com/2018/05/crossf…
Okay that's a wrap for THREAD 2 of 3.
I'll post THREAD 3 soon, which is going to go through the @nytimes article line by line (yep - at least 50 tweets). You'll see a dozen more errors, misrepresentations & outright falsehoods are in this embarrassment to journalism
/ENDS
I'll post THREAD 3 soon, which is going to go through the @nytimes article line by line (yep - at least 50 tweets). You'll see a dozen more errors, misrepresentations & outright falsehoods are in this embarrassment to journalism
/ENDS
