This editorial appears in the January 18, 2019 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
FBI Targeting of Trump Comes Under Growing Attack
Jan. 14—There is a building furor from all sides of the political spectrum about the FBI targeting of Donald Trump as a Manchurian candidate traitor following the firing of James Comey. Some people absolutely get the fact that it is the British who are behind this targeting. It’s our job to escalate the furor. As of this writing, Part I of my Three-Part Series on “The British and the Coup Against the President” has 3700 social media shares.
John Dowd, the storied Washington, D.C. criminal attorney who represented the President in the initial rounds of the Mueller probe, put the matter succinctly in an interview with Fox News:
Little did I know that it appears that they were all in it together. I mean Rosenstein, Comey, Mueller, McCabe, the whole crowd, and they were out to get this president no matter what. I don’t think they sincerely believed anything about Russia . . . This is our worst nightmare, that someone with that kind of power would then decide to go after the President. I mean, it’s a coup. That’s what it is, an attempted coup by Comey and his crowd. And the evidence is all over there. I take the New York Times article as an admission of their bad behavior.
Dowd otherwise commented that the United States must appear now to the world as a banana republic rather than a nation of laws.
Dan Bogino, the very popular Fox News commentator, picked out articles from May 2018 for his Twitter and Web audience, highlighting the British role in the aforesaid coup, and honing in on Richard Dearlove specifically. May of 2018 was when the initial revelations appeared concerning Stefan Halper and Richard Dearlove, further exposed now in LaRouche PAC’s three-part expose.
In a piece also published on foxnews.com, Victoria Toensing and Joseph diGenova, state:
A stench has been emanating from the J. Edgar Hoover Building (FBI headquarters) for over two years. It landed Saturday on the front page of the New York Times in an article citing “former law enforcement officials” claiming they had to deal with explosive implications that President Donald Trump was “knowingly” or “unwittingly” working for Russia. Thus, the story goes, there was a basis to begin the Russia collusion investigation. . . .
In fact, “The Gray Lady” was covering the derrieres of the Obama Administration officials involved in the cabal to frame Trump, who now fear an imminent Special Counsel finding that during the 2016 campaign there was no collusion between Trump and the Russians. The article is intended to convey the following message: Even though there was no evidence to support the allegations, those making the decision to investigate Trump did so in good faith.
DiGenova, the former U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., and Toensing, a former head of the Justice Department Criminal Division’s Fraud Unit, go on to completely lambast the bad and very dirty cops at the top of the FBI, noting,
The New York Times story was created to obfuscate the real criminal conspiracy: violation of Title 18 of U.S. Code Section 242, which prohibits any person under color of law (i.e., Obama Administration personnel) to deprive another of “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution.” Such legal protection includes being free from a criminal investigation based on false charges . . .
Perhaps the bizarre January 20, 2017 email Susan Rice wrote “to herself” purporting to document a January 5, 2017 meeting with President Obama, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, FBI Director Comey and Vice President Joe Biden, gives a clue as to some of those conspirators. The meeting discussed the Steele dossier and Russian collusion, but curiously Rice stressed that the former president said every aspect should be handled “by the book.” Yet, Strzok had told his FBI colleague and paramour Lisa Page not to worry about Trump being elected because “We’ll stop it.”
Obama’s statement to Rice is what prosecutors call a false exculpatory statement, something which happens all the time in white collar prosecutions of lawyers where very guilty people consciously create a paper trail exonerating themselves from guilt.
Finally, Glenn Greenwald really nails it in a January 14 article for the Intercept.
Greenwald takes the lapdog media to task for insisting that the targeting of the President for a security investigation is “unprecedented,” thereby erasing from American history the numerous previous chapters concerning an out-of-control FBI. In particular, Greenwald cites the unending J. Edgar Hoover investigation of FDR’s Vice President, Henry Wallace—later a post-War third-party presidential candidate—for his peacemaking efforts and direct defiance of the British Empire. Greenwald cites the following passage from a September 1946 Wallace speech which, apparently, especially inflamed Hoover:
Make no mistake about it—the British imperialist policy in the Near East alone, combined with Russian retaliation, would lead the United States straight to war unless we have a clearly defined and realistic policy of our own.
Neither of these two great powers wants war now, but the danger is that whatever their intentions may be, their current policies may eventually lead to war. To prevent war and insure our survival in a stable world, it is essential that we look abroad through our own American eyes and not through the eyes of either the British Foreign Office or a pro-British or anti-Russian press . . .
We must not let our Russian policy be guided or influenced by those inside or outside the United States who want war with Russia. . . .