An extremely strange episode that has engulfed official Washington over the last two weeks came to a truly bizarre conclusion on Friday night. And it revolves around a long-time, highly sketchy CIA operative, Stefan Halper.
Four decades ago, Halper was responsible for a long-forgotten spying scandal involving the 1980 election, in which the Reagan campaign – using CIA officials managed by Halper, reportedly under the direction of former CIA Director and then-Vice-Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush – got caught running a spying operation from inside the Carter administration. The plot involved CIA operatives passing classified information about Carter’s foreign policy to Reagan campaign officials in order to ensure the Reagan campaign knew of any foreign policy decisions that Carter was considering....
But now, as a result of some very odd choices by the nation’s largest media outlets, everyone knows the name of the FBI’s informant: Stefan Halper. And Halper’s history is quite troubling, particularly his central role in the scandal in the 1980 election. Equally troubling are the DOJ and FBI’s highly inflammatory and, at best, misleading claims that they made to try to prevent Halper’s identity from being reported.
To begin with, it’s obviously notable that the person the FBI used to monitor the Trump campaign is the same person who worked as a CIA operative running that 1980 Presidential election spying campaign.…
In 1980, the Washington Post published an article reporting on the extremely unusual and quite aggressive involvement of the CIA in the 1980 presidential campaign. “Simply put, no presidential campaign in recent memory — perhaps ever — has attracted as much support from the intelligence community as the campaign of former CIA director Bush,” the article said.…
So as it turns out, the informant used by the FBI in 2016 to gather information on the Trump campaign was not some previously unknown, top-secret asset whose exposure as an operative could jeopardize lives. Quite the contrary: his decades of work for the CIA – including his role in an obviously unethical if not criminal spying operation during the 1980 presidential campaign – is quite publicly known.…
Whatever else is true, the CIA operative and FBI informant used to gather information on the Trump campaign in the 2016 campaign has, for weeks, been falsely depicted as a sensitive intelligence asset rather than what he actually is: a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election. For that reason, it’s easy to understand why many people in Washington were so desperate to conceal his identity, but that desperation had nothing to do with the lofty and noble concerns for national security they claimed were motivating them.Intel has been politicized for a long time. And as Greenwald observes, it is not illegal under US law.
The Intercept
The FBI Informant Who Monitored the Trump Campaign, Stefan Halper, Oversaw a CIA Spying Operation in the 1980 Presidential Election
Ray Gallagher
See also
It's even worse than Greenwald reports. This is big, and you can bet that Donald Trump is going to magnify it bigly.
Zero Hedge
FBI Spy-Op Exposed, Trump Campaign Infiltrated By Longtime CIA And MI6 Asset
See also
It's even worse than Greenwald reports. This is big, and you can bet that Donald Trump is going to magnify it bigly.
Zero Hedge
FBI Spy-Op Exposed, Trump Campaign Infiltrated By Longtime CIA And MI6 Asset
Tyler Durden
He must be a Russian Spy.
ReplyDeletePeople out of govt in 1980 making some phone calls does not compare to the crimes these Obama/Clinton people were doing in 2016...
ReplyDeleteThis from Greenwald is a similar pattern to what you do Tom all the time...
ReplyDeleteWhen the Democrats are caught red handed in crimes, it is "the CIA!", then when GOP is caught doing crimes its "the GOP!"...
This from Greenwald is more of this sort of biased reporting that is trying to spin this towards the view that "it was the CIA!" instead of the Obama/Clinton Democrats...
The bias is "anti-CIA" here... wanting to blame everything on "the CIA".... instead of the individual political appointees currently running the CIA institution...
"Intel has been politicized for a long time."
ReplyDeleteNo it hasn't...
So Tom youre saying that William Webster at CIA and William Sessions at FBI had domestic surveillance on Michael Dukakis in 1988?
ReplyDeleteThe CIA and the FBI are two different beasts.
ReplyDeleteThe CIA is part of the US foreign intelligence services and operates internationally.
The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (D/CIA)...d reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI); in practice, the CIA director interfaces with the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Congress, and the White House....
The DNI is a cabinet level post that reports to the president.
The FBI is part of the DOJ. It is under the DOJ and reports to the AG.
In the UK MI5 is domestic and reports to the Home Secretary and MI6 is foreign and reports to the Foreign Secretary.
Anyone that has served in the military or government knows that they are hierarchically organized and the chain of command is "sacrosanct."
Harry Truman had a sign on his Oval Office desk that read, "The buck stops here."
I personally experienced this as a naval officer. The captain of the ship is responsible for what happens on the ship, even by a lowly seaman. This all goes on his fitness report and affects promotion. All career officers are bucking for admiral and they take the chain of command very seriously.
The same goes for government, other than political appointments. Political appointments are made by the president and the president is praised or blamed according to appointees performance.
So if the president didn't know something material, that is his failure.
This is a big reason why attempting to excuse Reagan for lack of knowledge of Irangate was BS. It happened on his watch and it was planned and executed by senior personnel.
On the other hand, JFK fired and CIA director Allen Dulles ....
ReplyDeleteI have no way of knowing what transpired during the 1988 election when Dukakis ran against former CIA director GWH Bush.
NYT
Bush and Noriega: Examination of Their Ties
Stephen Engelberg With Jeff Gerth And Special To The New York Times
I would be surprised if the CIA was neutral in this, especially when Dukakis blew the whistle on Noriega as a long-time CIA operative. It's not illegal to do this, although FISA permission is required for some domestic surveillance.
The FBI was totally politicized under J. Edgar and the CIA under Allen Dulles, who basically ran fiefdoms and acted as warlords. Did that really get cleaned up?
Zero Hedge
ReplyDeletehttps://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-17/inspector-general-finds-fbi-doj-broke-law-clinton-email-probe-refers-criminal
Tyler Durden
Looks like the beginning of another reality show, or a subplot in the currently running one. Put on some more popcorn.
A little noise that will be ignored by the corporate state media. If it does get out it will be spun into a coverup of the non-existent Russian election hack and buried in contradiction and nonsensical misleading details intended to cloud the real issue.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile Teflon Hillary will continue to receive full protection and the obfuscation of any "news" that could expose the vast criminal conspiracy she is a part of.
Youre anti-trump biased Noah:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/998256454590193665
"I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes - and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!"
2 hours ago...
and btw he already knows the answer or he wouldnt have tweeted it...
Franko, you are overwhelmingly pro-Trump biased.
ReplyDeleteI'm not biased, I hate all politicians.
As for Trump's tweet, I'm pretty sure that's not how you send a directive to the DoJ, and it's more than clear that the DoJ is severely anti-Trump.
"you are overwhelmingly pro-Trump biased. "
ReplyDeleteNoooo way...
I support (some) of his populist policies and intentions to withdraw from all of the past "nation building"...
He thinks we are "out of money!" like the rest of the morons...
I am 100% objective...
Objecive? Hahahahaha Blatantly transparent is more like it. Giving up on 4D chess already? I'm so disappointed.
ReplyDeleteOh I thought Trump said it was “40-D chest “...
ReplyDeleteTrump is going to wipe the floor with these Obama/Clintonistas...
ReplyDelete