No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
Late Tuesday afternoon, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham released a letter from Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Ratcliffe. The DNI’s statement clarifies that the new disclosure about Hillary Clinton and the Russia hoax is in fact, “not Russian disinformation.” Ratcliffe in his letter was responding to Senator Graham’s request for intelligence community information regarding the FBI’s handling of Operation Crossfire Hurricane, the Obama’s administration’s FBI and Justice Department op to falsely show Donald Trump was involved with Russia to influence the outcome of the November 2016 President Election.
In his letter and subsequent comments to further clarify his letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee, DNI Ratcliffe provided the following declassified information to the committee:
“In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee. The Intelligence Community does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”
The DNI letter further stated that:
“According to his handwritten notes, former Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan subsequently briefed President Obama and other senior national security officials on the intelligence, including the ‘alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.’”
“On 07 September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding ‘U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’”
As a further follow-up, Director Ratcliffe will make this information available in a classified setting, meaning DNI Ratcliffe will meet privately behind closed doors with the SSCI to provide the classified version of his report and to validate the intelligence sources and methods that support the information.
So, what does this all mean to non-intelligence professionals and experts? It means that the latest information provided by DNI Ratcliffe shows there is a double standard by the FBI regarding allegations against the Clinton campaign, Trump, and Russia. It is important to understand that what is considered critical information that was provided was accurate or not — is not the question. The question is how did the FBI use or not use the information.
Did the FBI investigate the allegations against Clinton with the same depth and intensity that they did for Trump? If not, why not? If so, what was the scope of the investigation? If none, why was that?
Of course, the anti-Trump mainstream media is already saying that DNI Ratcliffe’s disclosed intelligence on Hillary Clinton is “Russian disinfo,” a follow on statement by the Office of the DNI further clarified that the new disclosure is in fact, “not Russian disinformation.” As a career intelligence professional let me point out that — to be clear, it is how the information is assessed and used. The DNI noted that this is not ‘Russian disinformation’ and has not been assessed as such by the Intelligence Community. Ratcliffe further wrote in a statement that, “I’ll be briefing Congress on the sensitive sources and methods by which it has obtained in the coming days.”
As background, most realize after nearly four-years of various investigations by the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate, the Mueller investigation and the Impeachment revealed that the “Russia Collusion” hoax involving Donald Trump allegedly colluding with Russia to commit election fraud was a smear campaign concocted by previous Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
To provide further background, it was in 2016 that Hillary Clinton, as reported, approved of a plan to spin a scandal connecting Donald Trump with Vladimir Putin in “hacking the Democratic National Committee.” After which Clinton then was reported to have briefed the Obama-Biden White House.
There will be a debate over the relevance and credibility of the intelligence information with the political-left and supporters of the Obama administration that Ratcliffe’s disclosure was baseless.
What must be understood and what must be clear is “why the information had previously been rejected” by both Democratic and Republican members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Why was it not used by Rep. Adam Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee? Why was it not introduced and used by the Mueller investigation? And certainly, why was it not addressed in the Impeachment process? Was it because it lacked any factual basis, or because of the information was in fact accurate and was politically explosive?
Again, the DNI stated and clarified, the Hillary intelligence is ‘not Russian disinformation’ and was obtained through ‘sensitive sources and methods’ which will address whether the “Russian intelligence analysis” refers to intelligence activities conducted by the U.S. or by Russia.
This clarification relates to and to which I can attest, as well — according to DNI Ratcliffe, U.S. intelligence agencies in late July 2016 “obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis” which indicated that Clinton had approved of an offensive plan to link Trump to Russia. Ratcliffe noted that the U.S. intelligence community “does not know the accuracy of this allegation, or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”
However, most are not aware that in September of 2016, U.S. intelligence officials also forwarded an investigative referral on Clinton purportedly approving “a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections” in order to distract the public from her email scandal. That referral went to former FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok.
DNI’s Ratcliffe’s letter adds to mounting scrutiny of the DOJ’s initial investigation into Trump’s campaign and Democrats’ influence on foundational information from the Steele Dossier.
So, what prompted the DNI’s letter? Last week, Attorney General William Barr penned a letter to Senator Graham stating that the source of the infamous Steele dossier — which informed the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign — was under investigation for suspected contact with Russian intelligence officers.
Attorney General Bill Barr wrote:
“In connection with your Committee’s investigation of these matters and ongoing hearings, you have been asking us to accelerate this process and to provide any additional information relating to the reliability of the work of Christopher Steele and the so-called ‘Steele dossier,’ as long as its release would not compromise U.S. Attorney John Durham’s ongoing criminal investigation.”
“A footnote in the Inspector General’s report contains information, which up till now has been classified and redacted, bearing on the reliability of the Steele dossier.”
The FBI has declassified the relevant portion of the footnote, number 334, which states that ‘the Primary Sub-source was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his or her contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers.’
Under AG Barr, the Justice Department has been reviewing the process Obama’s DOJ undertook in order to probe the origins of the Russia investigation. It is likely, this stemmed from a footnote in the DOJ Inspector General’s report contains information, which up till now has been classified and redacted, bearing on the reliability of the Steele dossier. The FBI has declassified the relevant portion of the footnote, referenced as number 334, which states that ‘the Primary Sub-source was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his or her contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers.’
With regard to former CIA Director John Brennan, handwritten notes by Brennan, say that Brennan briefed Obama on “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
The FBI opened its investigation of possible Trump-Russia collusion on July 31, 2016 — five days after Clinton allegedly hatched the plan — targeted against one of Trump’s campaign advisers George Papadopoulos allegedly telling an Australian diplomat that Russia had damaging information on Clinton.
After which, two-months before the 2016 election, Ratcliffe noted that U.S. intelligence officials “forwarded an investigative referral to then FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding ‘U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections ‘as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’”
Comey will testify in Congress Sept, 30 in the third Senate oversight hearing related to the investigation, appearing before the Senate judiciary committee as part of its oversight into the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
So, bottom line — the key take-aways are:
1) Hillary Clinton manufactured a Russian Collusion scheme against Trump
2) CIA Director John Brennan briefed Obama.
3) FBI Director Comey was fully briefed.
DNI Ratcliffe’s release of the highly classified evidence, adds an extraordinary twist clearly showing and revealing that the FBI and CIA had for the most part known all along the Russia collusion allegations were a dubious political dirty trick to start the takedown of Donald Trump, starting as a candidate, as President-elect and as the current sitting President.
It also revealed the multi-phased agenda implement to in part to cover-up and distract from Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, and put a spot light on how Hillary continued to play a role as an Obama administrations fake narrative developer, from the Russian Reset, the Benghazi fake video story, to a bullshit narrative about Trump’s Russia Collusion hoax.
Image: White House Photo
Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner or legal expert.
While we endeavor to keep this information up to date and correct, the information provided by America Out Loud, its website(s), and any properties (including its radio shows and podcasts) makes no representations, or warranties of any kind, expressed, or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to its website(s) or the information, products, services or related graphics and images contained on the website(s) for any purpose.
The opinions expressed on the website(s), and the opinions expressed on the radio shows and podcasts, are the opinions of the show hosts and do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or policies of anyone or any entity we may endorse. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
At no time, nor in any event, will we be liable for any loss, or damage, including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss of data or profits arising out of, in an association of, or connection with the use of this website.
Through this website, users can link to other websites that may be listed. Those websites are not under the control of America Out Loud or its brands. We have no control over the nature, content, or availability of those sites. America Out Loud has no control over what the sites do with the information they collect. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation, nor does it endorse the views expressed with or by them.
Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, America Out Loud takes no responsibility for, nor are we, and will not be liable for being temporarily unavailable due to technical difficulties beyond our control. America Out Loud does not sell, trade, nor market email addresses or other personal data.