Rightguide
Prof Triggernometry
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2017
- Posts
- 56,451
Everything we said about Trump being framed was true. There was never any Russian collusion. The Durham Report makes it clear the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation had no legal predication and should never have been opened. That means the Mueller Investigation was never needed or properly predicated either. The whole thing was dreamed up by Hillary Clinton, the Democrat Party, The Obama Administration, and corrupt officials in the government to interfere with the election and to subvert the presidency of Donald Trump. If the left and the media is now saying there was "no great reveal" it's because they knew it was a lie all along and were willing partners in this perfidy against the American people and the duly elected President. Every leftist here was on that bandwagon and swearing up and down to the truth of it all. Now, everyone knows how they were played by the media, the deep state, and by their own lack of intellectual rigor. You can read the report here: https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf
Here is s snippet from the opening statement on Crossfire Hurricane:
As set forth in greater detail in Section IV, the record in this matter reflects that upon
receipt of unevaluated intelligence information from Australia, the FBI swiftly opened the
Crossfire Hurricane investigation. In particular, at the direction of Deputy Director Andrew
McCabe, Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok opened Crossfire
Hurricane immediately. 22 Strzok, at a minimum, had pronounced hostile feelings toward
Trump. 23 The matter was opened as a full investigation without ever having spoken to the
persons who provided the information. Further, the FBI did so without (i) any significant review
of its own intelligence databases, (ii) collection and examination of any relevant intelligence
from other U.S. intelligence entities, (iii) interviews of witnesses essential to understand the raw
information it had received or (iv) using any of the standard analytical tools typically employed
by the FBI in evaluating raw intelligence. Had it done so, again as set out in Sections IV.A.3.b
and c, the FBI would have learned that their own experienced Russia analysts had no information
about Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials, nor were others in sensitive
positions at the CIA, the NSA, and the Department of State aware of such evidence concerning
the subject. In addition, FBI records prepared by Strzok in February and March 2017 show that
at the time of the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI had no information in its holdings
indicating that at any time during the campaign anyone in the Trump campaign had been in
contact with any Russian intelligence officials. 24
The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane
during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated
intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving
possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign. As
described in Section IV.B, in the eighteen months leading up to the 2016 election, the FBI was
required to deal with a number of proposed investigations that had the potential of affecting the
election. In each ofthose instances, the FBI moved with considerable caution. In one such
matter discussed in Section IV.B.l, FBI Headquarters and Department officials required
defensive briefings to be provided to Clinton and other officials or candidates who appeared to
be the targets of foreign interference. In another, the FBI elected to end an investigation after
one of its longtime and valuable CHSs went beyond what was authorized and made an improper
and possibly illegal financial contribution to the Clinton campaign on behalf of a foreign entity
as a precursor to a much larger donation being contemplated. And in a third, the Clinton
Foundation matter, both senior FBI and Department officials placed restrictions on how those
matters were to be handled such that essentially no investigative activities occurred for months
leading up to the election. These examples are also markedly different from the FBI' s actions
with respect to other highly significant intelligence it received from a trusted foreign source
pointing to a Clinton campaign plan to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin so as to
divert attention from her own concerns relating to her use of a private email server. Unlike the
FBI's opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw,
uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan,
the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical
personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information. This lack of
action was despite the fact that the significance of the Clinton plan intelligence was such as to
have prompted the Director of the CIA to brief the President, Vice President, Attorney General,
Director of the FBI, and other senior government officials about its content within days of its
receipt. It was also of enough importance for the CIA to send a formal written referral
memorandum to Director Corney and the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's
Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action. 25 The
investigative referral provided examples of information the Crossfire Hurricane fusion cell had
"gleaned to date."26
Here is s snippet from the opening statement on Crossfire Hurricane:
As set forth in greater detail in Section IV, the record in this matter reflects that upon
receipt of unevaluated intelligence information from Australia, the FBI swiftly opened the
Crossfire Hurricane investigation. In particular, at the direction of Deputy Director Andrew
McCabe, Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok opened Crossfire
Hurricane immediately. 22 Strzok, at a minimum, had pronounced hostile feelings toward
Trump. 23 The matter was opened as a full investigation without ever having spoken to the
persons who provided the information. Further, the FBI did so without (i) any significant review
of its own intelligence databases, (ii) collection and examination of any relevant intelligence
from other U.S. intelligence entities, (iii) interviews of witnesses essential to understand the raw
information it had received or (iv) using any of the standard analytical tools typically employed
by the FBI in evaluating raw intelligence. Had it done so, again as set out in Sections IV.A.3.b
and c, the FBI would have learned that their own experienced Russia analysts had no information
about Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials, nor were others in sensitive
positions at the CIA, the NSA, and the Department of State aware of such evidence concerning
the subject. In addition, FBI records prepared by Strzok in February and March 2017 show that
at the time of the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI had no information in its holdings
indicating that at any time during the campaign anyone in the Trump campaign had been in
contact with any Russian intelligence officials. 24
The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane
during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated
intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving
possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign. As
described in Section IV.B, in the eighteen months leading up to the 2016 election, the FBI was
required to deal with a number of proposed investigations that had the potential of affecting the
election. In each ofthose instances, the FBI moved with considerable caution. In one such
matter discussed in Section IV.B.l, FBI Headquarters and Department officials required
defensive briefings to be provided to Clinton and other officials or candidates who appeared to
be the targets of foreign interference. In another, the FBI elected to end an investigation after
one of its longtime and valuable CHSs went beyond what was authorized and made an improper
and possibly illegal financial contribution to the Clinton campaign on behalf of a foreign entity
as a precursor to a much larger donation being contemplated. And in a third, the Clinton
Foundation matter, both senior FBI and Department officials placed restrictions on how those
matters were to be handled such that essentially no investigative activities occurred for months
leading up to the election. These examples are also markedly different from the FBI' s actions
with respect to other highly significant intelligence it received from a trusted foreign source
pointing to a Clinton campaign plan to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin so as to
divert attention from her own concerns relating to her use of a private email server. Unlike the
FBI's opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw,
uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan,
the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical
personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information. This lack of
action was despite the fact that the significance of the Clinton plan intelligence was such as to
have prompted the Director of the CIA to brief the President, Vice President, Attorney General,
Director of the FBI, and other senior government officials about its content within days of its
receipt. It was also of enough importance for the CIA to send a formal written referral
memorandum to Director Corney and the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's
Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action. 25 The
investigative referral provided examples of information the Crossfire Hurricane fusion cell had
"gleaned to date."26
“Right”guide 
