Thread by @KellyScaletta

*Thread on the FBI Informant*

Let's take an honest, objective view of the whole "FBI informant" story and consider whether, based on what we know, the FBI did anything wrong.

1. Did they "plant a spy" in the Trump campaign?

Even the Wall Street Journal editorial (which is pro-Trump) says no. There was no "spy." There is an informant.

2. Then what's the difference between a "spy" and an "informant."

Massive. It's not mere semantics, as is what the FBI was investigating at the time--which was Russia, not the Trump campaign, per Asha Rangappa.

chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/c…

3. Does who was being investigated matter?

Obviously, it's a massive difference into the type of investigation because it means the TARGET is different. In other words, the informant was informing on RUSSIA, not Trump.

4. If they were investigating Russia, why didn't they tell Trump about it?

They did.

nbcnews.com/news/us-news/f…

5. If they were investigating Russia, why were they meeting with members of the Trump campaign?

Becasue members of the Trump campaign were meeting with Russian agents. nytimes.com/2018/05/21/opi…

We now know, beyond any doubt, that Russia did try and meddle in the election, that Trump was warned about it, and that members of his campaign had a plethora of meetings linked to the Kremlin.

As the investigation developed, the FBI found the Trump campaign was complicit. The lied, under oath. They hid meetings. They tried to communicate with Russia secretly. Trump's former NSA has been indicted. His former campaign manager has also been indicted. And so on.

We also have Trump--during the FBI investigation--firing the head of the FBI for not putting an end to the investigation. That's not even an accusation. That's what Trump SAID he did.

6. So why is all that important?

Becuase it's the only way all we know makes sense. The FBI was investigating Russia to start, and only Russia. That's why BEFORE the election they kept it quiet--extremely quiet--even to the point of denying it.

As the investigation conitnued, it became more apparent the Trump campaign didn't just beneift from the Russian interference, they participated in it.

The alternative explanation that pro-Trumpists have espoused is illogical. They suggest that the FBI was just doing all of this as some sort of "backup plan" if Trump won. That makes no sense at all.

First, if they were so pro-Clinton, why would they announce that her investigation was being re-launched two weeks before election day? Why wouldn't they keep THAT silent?

Second, why would saying Trump was under investigation be the "backup plan?"

That would be the stupidest thing in the hsitory of history. Using your BEST case on a far-flung scenario that you were going to get a Republican Congress to impeach their own parties President, when no POTUS has ever been impached and convicted.

That would be like having the game-winning dunk lined up, and then throwing the ball to someone at midcourt to take a rushed one-footed, off balance, contested 3-point shot. It would just be dumb.

And if you want to convince me that somehow they'd been secretly goading the Trump administration into conspiring with Russia all for this big setup for a backup plan, and were briliant enough to pull all that off, then they can't be THAT dumb.

The whole "spy" thing doesn't work becuase it wasn't a spy. It was an informant, cooperating with an investigation into Russia. And, as several reports have stated, the FBI literally acted in the BEST interest of the Trump campaign. If anything they swung the election TO him.