Everything Michael Caputo Said in Last 24 Hours “Could Be” One Big Misunderstanding….

The original headline of this article read:

“Everything Michael Caputo Said in Last 24 hours was one big misunderstanding.”

We received an email from Mr. Caputo correcting the headline. It reads:

“Your reporting is wrong. I did NOT say this was a misunderstanding. I said it COULD BE a misunderstanding. That’s what Daily Signal wrote, too. I usually rely upon the liberal media to bend my words. I didn’t expect that from TCT. … This is the last time I read The Conservative Treehouse. You really disappointed me. You aren’t an exception to the rule at all – you vandalized me like they would at Media Matters for America. The team defending Trump doesn’t need this kind of “help.””

~ Michael Caputo 5/23/2018

Accordingly, we adjusted the headline to read:

Everything Michael Caputo Said in Last 24 Hours “Could Be” One Big Misunderstanding.

Former campaign aide Michael Caputo was on Fox News Monday Night and Tuesday afternoon with some rather dramatic claims about being targeted for exploitation by a nefarious intelligence community operative.  Apparently it was could be all just a big misunderstanding.

Misunderstanding Story – EXPLAINED HERE

Whoopsie daisy.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, NSA, President Trump, Spying, THE BIG UGLY. Bookmark the permalink.

316 Responses to Everything Michael Caputo Said in Last 24 Hours “Could Be” One Big Misunderstanding….

  1. Steve in Lewes says:

    This comment on the DW story sums this up nicely.

    Uncle Max Debra Carey • 4 hours ago
    Interesting the Daily Wire just takes the contractors’ word for it and said, ah nothing here folks! I mean, if that contractor WAS a operative for the FBI… what does the DW think he would say??? You caught me?? I was trying to set them up???

    In addition, the DW in a follow up interview with Caputo after the DW’s interviews with the other two folks, Caputo said, “This also COULD be a great big misunderstanding.” The DW headline is very misleading, COULD BE vs WAS is a huge difference.

    Liked by 16 people

    • Scott says:

      NeverTrumper Ben Shapiro of the Daily Wire strives to place stories on his little website that contradicts anything to do with President Trump. The use of “COULD” is common over there.

      Liked by 14 people

      • Steve in Lewes says:

        But my point was Caputo said ‘COULD BE’ in the follow up interview, the DW headline screamed ‘WAS’; implying that was Caputo’s words.

        Liked by 3 people

      • snellvillebob says:

        Poor Ben really wanted Ted Cruz to win.

        Liked by 5 people

        • dotherightthing4 says:

          The Ted Cruz campaign was also using Cambridge analytica. I think many of his supporters have been brainwashed. They are, in my opinion, off the rails. I know people that are so enthralled with him they have lost all reason. They have unfriended people who do not share their undying support of him and refuse to support President Trump. I find something VERY creepy about Ted Cruz.

          Liked by 12 people

          • Trumpelstiltsken says:

            What I find most fascinating is how many of the Cruz cultists disowned Cruz himself after he began cozying up to DJT. So they ousted their cult leader, but entrenched themselves even deeper into their nevertrumping cult…even to this day.

            Liked by 4 people

            • 17CatsInTN says:

              There is none so blind as he who will not see. Apt description for them.

              One of the things that my pastor preached on last Sunday was the things that we KNOW we are right about when we are, in fact, dead wrong. Saul thought, FOR SURE, he was carrying out God’s plans when he was breathing fire and murder towards the cult of Christianity that arose in the aftermath of the crucifixion and resurrection. He was absolutely convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that his vendetta was just. And, of course, God had to grab his attention on the road to Damascus and clue him in that he was, in fact, persecuting Jesus who was God Himself.

              I think this is an apt description of what we are seeing today in society, whether it is those known as Cruzbots or liberals or whatever the moniker is. What they KNOW be true isn’t. And because of their blind adherence to a false paradigm, they are breathing fire and murder down upon those who disagree with them.

              Liked by 4 people

              • Malone Hardcastle says:

                And breathing fire and murder down upon the only one who could bring about the changes they’ve always purported to espouse. Cosmic irony.

                Liked by 2 people

              • Morpheus says:

                How do you know the same thing does not apply the other way?

                What if, all of the defense we see here is dead wrong and everything put forward about Manafort, Flynn, Papadopoulos, Cohen, Kush and the rest is true?

                Liked by 1 person

                • 17CatsInTN says:

                  Well, I guess time will tell, huh? We’re still in the middle of this tale. So far, lots of chum in the water creating a feeding frenzy. Some things have already been proven true or false. Some, we’re still waiting on facts.

                  I’ve been dead wrong before, and, despite my best efforts, I may be again. When I am, I admit it, learn and move on. You? Or do you just like playing provocateur?

                  Liked by 1 person

            • Landerelmarmot says:

              I supported Ted Cruz in the primary and ultimately chose not to cast a vote in the Presidential election. It is a decision that I regret. My principal concern with the Trump candidacy was that I didn’t believe him to be an authentic conservative, (he was a Democrat for most of his life). I have been very impressed with President Trump’s leadership overall and I understand that I’m not going to get everything that I want from a policy perspective from any President. I think most people on CTH would agree that Cruz’s roots in conservatism are much deeper than Trump’s but I do think that the electorate chose wisely and selected President Trump based largely on his proven ability to get results. On principles, I have more in common with Cruz than Trump, but I happily acknowledge that Trump will deliver far more policy in line with my principles than Cruz could have. Trump is just plainly the better man for the moment, and I regret that I didn’t see that in time to cast a vote for him.

              Liked by 3 people

              • Mark McQueen says:

                Early on I thought much the same. Then I realized Cruz’ conservative credentials were based solely on his Congressional voting record (much like Mike Lee). Then it became apparent, principle wise, Cruz and I were nothing alike. As for Lee, it’s apparent he can’t be bothered ’cause he might have to get his suit of shining armor dirty.

                Liked by 1 person

              • James Bell says:

                DJT 2020

                Liked by 2 people

              • MfM says:

                I used to like Cruz, but his citizenship status made him a no-go for president. My spouse was like you and it took months of me talking to him and having him read things to get him to start seeing the light.

                I knew that if Cruz was nominated by the Republicans that the Democrats would take him down easily by harping on his citizenship. So it really annoyed me that he was even running knowing the one issue that he had zero defense on.

                Liked by 2 people

              • CountryclassVulgarian says:

                Most of the loud “authentic conservatives” who are now rabid Trump hating NeverTrumpers were never authentic or conservative. I find it fascinating when conservatives condemn Trump for having been a democrat. Why is that such an awful thing? Don’t we want a lot of former democrats to see the error of their ways and join us? Wasn’t Ronald Reagan, the king of conservatism a democrat? Is it wrong to turn away from the destructive policies of the democrat party? What is the point of conservatism if we reject people for changing their minds?

                Liked by 3 people

              • dotherightthing4 says:

                I live in Texas and initially donated to Cruz. Then the solicitations were relentless. After he won his Senate seat, he never responded to letters of concern regarding issues. All other representatives respond in a timely and thorough manner….yet he has time to constantly solicit money. Additionally I belong to one group in Houston and at one point an important issue was being discussed. One member ask the President of the group if we could get Senator Cruz to speak to us. He responded that the group had reached out to his office 13 times and gotten no response. It appears he only has time for you if it is regarding money to his coffers. There is more but I will stop for now. I find him staged and phony.

                Liked by 1 person

          • Ken says:

            Ask Ben Carson what Ted really is all about.

            Liked by 2 people

            • MfM says:

              The debate where Ben didn’t hear his name and the various other candidates pushed past him and Trump stayed with him… was honestly a turning point for several people I know when I showed it to them.

              Liked by 2 people

          • Interesting explanation of Lyin’ Canadian Ted’s creepy face: “Neurologist explains why it’s hard to look at Ted Cruz’s creepy ‘unsettling’ face”

            “The answer as to why so many people dislike the Texas Republican instinctively is one that intrigued Dr. Richard E. Cytowic, a professor of neurology at George Washington University.

            Writing in Psychology Today, Cytowic noted that Cruz’s “atypical expressions” left him “uneasy,” and that he was not alone among people who have watched Cruz up-close and from afar.

            “Note how many colleagues and former associates ‘loathe’ him. A Bush alumnus told the New York Times’ Frank Bruni, ‘Why do people take such an instant dislike to Ted Cruz? It just saves time.’ Former Senate Majority leader Bob Dole says, ‘Nobody likes him,’ while Rep. Peter King sees ‘malice.’” Cytowic wrote. “According to The Washington Post, screenwriter Craig Mazin, Cruz’s former Princeton roommate, has called him a ‘huge asshole,’ and ‘creepy.’ He’s Tweeted, ‘Getting emails blaming me for not smothering Ted Cruz in his sleep in 1988.’ The distaste for Cruz even extends beyond the US: Germans say Backpfeifengesicht, meaning a face in need of a good punch.”

            According to Cytowic, the distaste for Cruz’s face starts with his smile.

            “As a neurologist it is my business to notice things out of the ordinary and probe them,” he wrote. “Senator Cruz’s countenance doesn’t shift the way I expect typical faces to move. Human faces can’t help but broadcast what we feel, what we may be thinking, and even what we may intend.”

            “I have rarely, if ever, seen a conventional smile from Senator Cruz. In a natural smile the corners of the mouth go up; these muscles we can control voluntarily as well. But muscles circling the eyes are involuntary only; they make the eyes narrow, forming crow’s feet at the outside corners,” he continued. “No matter the emotional coloring of Senator Cruz’s outward rhetoric, his mouth typically tightens into the same straight line. If it deviates from this, the corners of his mouth bend down, not upwards.”

            https://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/neurologist-explains-why-its-hard-to-look-at-ted-cruzs-creepy-unsettling-face/

            Liked by 1 person

            • For those who don’t wish to click on the link, here is the rest:

              “Downturned expressions usually signal disagreeableness or disgust. But I honestly don’t know because such an expression is rare in the context of public presentations that are meant to win people over. He may well be unaware that the message of his body language is incongruent with his words,” he said before concluding, “Google ‘Ted Cruz smiling,’ and judge for yourself. For the record I am not a Democrat. I’m at a loss to verbalize what unsettles me so when I watch the freshman senator. But it leaves me cold.”

              (H/T Mediaite)

              Liked by 1 person

          • law4lifeblog says:

            There’s a reason they’re called Cruzlims.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Kenji says:

            I believe the Cruz campaigns target audience are Evangelical Christians. I consider myself one of those people … however … I am NOT STUPID … and when Cruz got on his knees and thanked God after winning the Iowa (or some Bible Belt State) … I was permanently OFF Cruz. No, I am not “embarrassed” to show public reverence for God … but like ALL conservatives with a brain … I know this “demonstrable Christianity” wouldn’t fly in the General Election. Cruz proved himself to 100% Christian, and 10% tactical candidate. God inspired me to VOTE for a WINNER … even if he were a SINNER. For crying out loud … look at Christ’s Disciples!!! A ragtag bunch of common sinners; tax collectors, and common “businessmen” of the day. So Immediately AFTER Cruz demonstrably thanked Jesus for his win … I was OFF Cruz. Sorry … we Christians have RESIST wearing Jesus on our sleeves. It is far more important to have a “receptive vessel” of a POTUS … than a fakir who panders to one narrow group of Christians. And guess what? WE WON!!! And America is getting GREAT again!

            Liked by 2 people

          • SkyPhoenix says:

            Dotherightthing4: it gets even creepier. I was asked to lead a prior-existing state-wide nonprofit that was supposedly focused on traditional family values (traditional marriage, anti-abortion, and religious freedom). There were a lot of connections with other organizations across the country, with names you would readily recognize.

            It turns out that at a national level, this effort was financially backed by the Koch brothers, among others. The organization had me install Cambridge Analytica on my computer. They wanted me to meet with area church pastors – the bigger the better. I was to tell them that if they gave me a church directory I could let them know what proportion of their congregation was not registered to vote. To acquire that information , I was to enter all names and addresses from their church directory to Cambridge Analytica (abbreviated CA) which, because CA was a third party, could be used for political purposes later.

            I believe that CA info was used by the Cruz campaign in Iowa when they sent out flyers featuring aspects of the voting record for the mailing recipient’s neighbor. CA combines database and GPS information to reveal everything from credit card purchases to past election data and determines which persons are the best candidates for, e.g., persuasion to vote for a particular candidate. It can print out a neighborhood map with voting info superimposed regarding neighborhood residents for door-to-door campaigning.

            I never collected any names or addresses for them. I never asked any of the dozens of pastors with whom I met for their church directory. It was too creepy. The Board let me go once they found out that I wasn’t collecting data for them. By then, the feeling was mutual.

            They were very strongly in favor of Ted Cruz. They sent in his father, Raphael, to speak at our fundraising dinner. BTW, IMO the father was much creepier than the son. He said that he was one of the rebels in Cuba that overthrew the Batista government. And you know what happened in Cuba after that; it became a Communist country.

            Anyway, shortly after that time, VSG Donald Trump announced on the escalator and i was so happy and hopeful that he would become our President. I wouldn’t touch Ted Cruz with a ten-foot pole after that experience.

            Liked by 1 person

        • 17CatsInTN says:

          If I have nothing else to be grateful for in my lifetime, there at least two things for which I am VERY thankful: Hillary lost; Ted lost. If either one of them had won, I would have had to find a new country to live in. Of course, I do know Ted would not have had a snowball’s chance of beating Hillary.

          Liked by 5 people

        • cali says:

          @snellvillebob: Is Ben also asking “What Happened”? 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

      • RJones says:

        Agree. Shapiro has been downplaying this affair all along. I heard him say at some point, ” People don’t care about this scandal.” Isn’t that what a pedo would say?

        Liked by 2 people

      • You are right. Shapiro is a rabid NeverTrumper. Never, never, never trust a NeverTrumper….even a so called “reformed” NeverTrumper!!

        Liked by 2 people

    • Kintbury says:

      I think the fact that Mueller never talked to Caputo’s pal and witness says it all. He was already aware of it. Why interview your own spy?

      Liked by 2 people

  2. KBR says:

    Notice that although Ben Shapiro of Daily Wire and his cronies KNOW who the contractor is, they are not saying.

    Also note that DW says that “the unnamed contractor” says
    “during a BUSINESS MEETING while trying to drum up business with a TECH COMPANY.”

    Doesn’t anybody but me wonder:
    1) Which TECH COMPANY?
    2) Would that be an “Intelligence Tech company” aka IT company?
    3) Was the TECH COMPANY an IC contractor?
    4) The “UNnamed Contractor” claims-or-lies that he is not IC-gov-connected (maybe simply because he did not get the “business” he was trying to “drum up?”)
    5) Was the TECH COMPANY among those who “wiped it with a cloth?”

    Later Ben Shapiro and cronies and/or “the contractor” suggest that the “BUSINESS MEETING” was no business meeting just casual convo overheard (at the Kentucky Derby???) Clearly there is a LIE here or there, by Unnamed Contractor or by DW or by both.

    The CONTRACTOR, unnamed, is clearly a liar/BSer, as his story changes in this article, right before our eyes. Yet Daily Wire article posits this unnamed CONTRACTOR is the one whom is most believable?

    Who is this, and does he contract to do Wetwork, or something? Because all UNNAMED CONTRACTOR has to do to keep HIS name out of the press is ask, (or maybe threaten, who knows?)

    So, BIG SCOOPY DOO, Ben.

    (As we all know, even Ben Shapiro’s very initials are BS.)

    As for Caputo, IDK
    1) if he had a misunderstanding, from the first,
    about what really happened and how it happened

    2) if he had a misunderstanding, just prior to the BS-DW interview,
    about the potential Wetwork-consequences” of his failing to say “it was a misunderstanding” NOW

    Liked by 4 people

    • dotherightthing4 says:

      Mueller’s team told Caputo they would “be watching him.” It could be they have threatened him.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Jederman says:

        Given how explicit he had been, and the specific talk about emails, that was my first reaction too. Seems odd that he would go on national TV with very direct comments and within 24 hrs try to create wiggle room.

        Some’s boot remains on his neck is my guess too.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Happy go lucky says:

        Exact same thought I had, except not Mueller. Seems to me the “government contractor “ is likely a never Trump republican with deep pockets. Caputo was threatened to shut up, and Never Trump Ben Shapiro (*spit*) was dispatched for a tidy cleanup. Back slaps all around ‘cause it’s just a little misunderstanding among friends doncha know, and don’t make us send another piece of that sniper rifle to your wife, Caputo.

        Liked by 1 person

    • KBR- excellent post. I trust CAPUTO over BS and Govt. contractor any day.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. I trust Caputo over Gubmint Contractor any day of the week.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. KBR says:

    Fake news advice:

    ALWAYS believe the UNNAMED SOURCE above persons willing to be named.

    Liked by 9 people

    • Sharpshorts says:

      Articles written that include “unnamed sources” or someone in “a position to know” or an “official speaking under condition of anonymity” always remind me why they are called stories.
      I try to consider the possibilities presented while understanding they are fiction unless or until they can be proven to be fact – ie: nothing burgers until the meat is found.

      Liked by 5 people

      • cdquarles says:

        They’re stories because some person is telling a story, whether orally or written. The story will have varying amounts of truth and obfuscation, depending on the source. Named sources are more trustworthy prima facie because you can verify them more easily than unnamed sources. So yes, using anonymous sources make it easier to control the narrative by interested and/or conflicted parties.

        Like

  5. Michelle says:

    Ok but the “new” story sounds even weirder. Why would a govt employee need to contact the campaign with such a suggestion, and why would it need several calls or texts thru an intermediary to try to convince someone to do it? Just say it and be done.

    Liked by 5 people

    • JoAnn Leichliter says:

      Nice catch, Michelle!

      Like

    • dotherightthing4 says:

      From what I read, the FBI was trying to “dirty up” or “taint” people already in the campaign. This way they could say they these people were compromised and that would justify surveillance. The IC set them up to make them look dirty even though they weren’t. The government was creating a story and manipulating the characters for the intended outcome.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. Bob Thoms says:

    He hasn’t retracted anything, right?

    Like

  7. How many times did they dangle, shove, or make available Hillary’s emails and no one at President Trump campaign actually bit?

    “Take these dang things so we can leave fingerprints of Russian hacking ordered by Trump & Putin.”

    I have to chuckle that the fox was outsmarted in BIGLY.

    Liked by 5 people

  8. Mezzz says:

    I was all over the previous Caputo thread saying to not take anything Michael Caputo says at face value. He makes his living off disinformation and political dirty tricks. I assume that is necessary when your opponents use the same tactics. I hope he (and the rest of his crew) are doing this in service of the President and not to undermine him.

    Obviously there is a deeper game happening but all the posts on here talking as if he was some nieve, innocent they were going to send $75 to on his new gofundme Page was too much.

    Roger Stone, Michael Caputo, Sam Nunberg, Paul Manafort. Long term swamp creatures trying to help drain the swamp??? Who knows. But my primary point is confirmed within 12 hours….

    Don’t take anything this crew says at face value.

    Liked by 1 person

    • L. Gee says:

      First of all, I’ll take a wait-and-see approach to Caputo, but he is starting to come down on the shady side of life thus far. I pointed out when he first started talking about this that I found it strange that he was just NOW coming out with this information. I said it reeked too much of the #MeToo charade, and now this.

      The question is why is he trying to unsay what he said before–or is he? And if he is trying to crawfish, WHY?

      For me, here’s the take-away: Be very, VERY careful who you send your hard-earned money to!!! Thankfully, he didn’t get a dime from me!

      Liked by 2 people

      • L Gee- I was thinking the same thing about the money angle. I bet many are sorry they contributed. Wonder if they can get their money back?

        Like

        • singingsoul says:

          Seneca the Elder says:
          “L Gee- I was thinking the same thing about the money angle. I bet many are sorry they contributed. Wonder if they can get their money back?”
          ___________________________________
          I practice this rule that works well when donating. I give and do not expect a thank you and do not regret because when I give I give freely without strings attached. I also do not give what I cannot afford to loose.
          I give with a happy heart and if the other person is not who presented himself /herself who they are they live with it not I.
          I believe Caputo is honest and has been through the ringer. People need to be scared when one sees the KGB tactics Mueller’s team has been using.

          Liked by 8 people

          • L. Gee says:

            I, on the other hand, prefer to watch and wait and carefully vet the person before I give up my hard-earned money to them. I have so little of it to go around these days that I want to make every dime count.

            Plus, I don’t like being screwed over . . . but to each his own!

            Like

      • donna kovacevic says:

        Well he got my donations but then again I will leave the judging to my Lord.I am only human and felt it was the right thing to do when someone is in need and do not regret it at all.

        Liked by 3 people

        • VickyD says:

          Same here, Donna. The man almost lost his home due to the legal costs of defending himself against Mueller’s witch hunt. The Gestapo-like tactics used by Mueller and his team in this out-of-control investigation to get Trump is destroying the lives of some innocent people on the periphery (again, look at what they did to Michael Flynn), and the snakes are doing it knowingly. Hell, who’s to say they couldn’t do the same to you or me if they wanted to, and why, simply because we’re Deplorables? That is what’s so scary, and that is why I donated; and however Michael Caputo’s story turns out, I absolutely do not regret it. He put his butt on the line to support Trump, so I supported him. (added note: according to a follow-up letter this past Mon. from Caputo to those who donated, all of his legal bills are now paid and he’s using any excess donations to help other Trump associates caught up in Mueller’s investigation with their legal fees. Just a line? Maybe, but he seems sincere, and I take him at his word.) Caputo may have been a bit paranoid with his initial take on the possible “second informant” thing (though not surprising after the emotional wringer he’s been put through by Mueller), but my gut tells me he’s pro-Trump, and that means he’s ok in my book. As you say, we’ll let God make the call.

          Liked by 1 person

    • JoAnn Leichliter says:

      These folks live and work in that grey area. Caputo’s background, however, with its numerous, longstanding (and quite legal) involvement with Russia and Russian entities certainly does make him the perfect target if you want to plant “Russian collusion” in the Trump camp. There is neither loyalty nor integrity among swamp dwellers, so it would hardly be a surprise to find them willing to sacrifice one–or more– of their own.

      Liked by 4 people

  9. I did NOT say this was a misunderstanding. I said it COULD BE a misunderstanding. That’s what Signal wrote, too. I usually rely upon the liberal media to bend my words. I didn’t expect that from TCT.

    This interaction needs to be investigated by the new DoJ inquiry, not by one phone call from a a Signal journalist. Would you expect this guy to just drop his pants over the phone to a reporter? “Oh, darn. You caught me. Here’s the whole plot, tabbed and alphabetized.”

    This is the last time I read The Conservative Treehouse. You really disappointed me. You aren’t an exception to the rule at all – you vandalized me exactly like they would at Media Matters for America. The team defending President Trump doesn’t need this kind of “help.”

    Liked by 8 people

    • roubaix says:

      If that is really you, realize that we have to be skeptical of everything in order to find the truth of the matter. It was a bold claim and now it seems uncertain.

      Like

    • Sandra-VA says:

      Sundance linked to the Daily Wire story… and made no judgement.

      There are people here who are skeptical. It is how truth gets revealed.

      People here also donated to your legal fund, bigly, and were very happy to receive emails from you with thanks. We were all happy to hear how you helped others with their legal bills.

      The truth will come out, it always does. Hang in there!

      Liked by 8 people

    • L4grasshopper says:

      Fake account.

      Like

    • Mark McQueen says:

      I don’t think you’ve read all the posts have you? I have..most of them anyway. I don’t see a consensus here and I don’t see any BIAS in CTH reporting a story by DW. I don’t read the DW and there aren’t many friends of Mr. Shapiro here. BUT we deserve to see the other side of the story.

      Liked by 1 person

    • L. Gee says:

      Sir, you are certainly not helping your cause! In fact, you just notched up another mark in the negative column in my books.

      Since you aren’t reading here anymore, I guess you won’t see my helpful advice: SHUT UP, ALREADY! Because all you’re doing is insulting many of the generous people who opened their wallets and sent you money (not mine, thank God)!!

      Like

      • Sandra-VA says:

        I would like to hear what he has to say. He has a right to defend against those who are maligning him.

        Liked by 5 people

        • CopperTop says:

          So here is where I arrived after the Smith review. A FOIA should be EASY to obtain to read Smith’s documents. He was a private citizen who is now deceased and his atty complied with a HOUSE request to get them (we know these via benefit of the former GCHQ techie talking all about it on law fare ). There should be nothing secret and certainly this is in the public interest

          Like

        • L. Gee says:

          A defense is one thing. Coming here and attacking Sundance for is something entirely different–and very stupid if he expects people to continue supporting him in any form or fashion!

          Like

      • Fools Gold says:

        Almost everyone here seeks truth, facts, and justice and also wants to help Trump drain the damn swamp! Amazing how some commenters admit they have donated their dollars to help this guy out and then he supposedly just tells Sundance and us to GFY. My answer is GFY fake Mike. This ain’t CNN and your not wanted here.

        Like

    • wheatietoo says:

      Michael, if that is really you…please let this be a ‘learning experience’ about talking to the DailyWire.

      The DailyWire is Ben Shapiro’s outfit and he is a rabid NeverTrumper.
      You cannot be certain that they will quote you accurately…in fact, you can pretty much guarantee that they won’t.

      Sundance and the Treehouse are not your enemies.
      Many of us here hated to hear of what you had gone through, and donated to your defense fund.

      Liked by 4 people

    • I want to thank Sundance for the correction. I also want to apologize for my visceral reaction. I read this blog because the skepticism informs me – the posts and the comments. I open it every morning to inform my TV appearances and I would be far less informed without it. I have to get comfortable with allies being skeptical about me, too, I guess. I’ll work on that.

      Frankly I’m looking forward to falling back into anonymity when this investigation is over – if it ever ends. Until then, I have a responsibility to defend the presidency and my friend, The President. I won’t shirk it.

      Thank you Sundance again, and everyone.

      Liked by 5 people

      • jello333 says:

        Oh wow, THANK YOU Michael! I went to bed last night kinda depressed after seeing how upset you were, especially you stating that you’d never read the Treehouse again. I understand why you were upset, but at the same time I’ve known Sundance for years now and I trust the guy 1000%. Other than people (like you, Michael) who know and work with President Trump personally, Don will never have a stronger supporter in the world than Sundance. And so it hurt last night when I saw your reaction, even though considering what you’ve been through I don’t blame you for not being sure who you can trust. But I’ll just say again: You can absolutely trust Sundance…. many of us (including myself) have come to trust him on a personal basis too, even aside from CTH.

        Liked by 2 people

  10. JMC says:

    I think Caputo became frightened that the DW knew the names of his friend Kirk Bell the intermediary and also knew the identity of the “government contractor”. So he walked it back a little. The fact that the “government contractor” spoke about the emails at a Dem congressperson’s home is interesting. The meetings Caputo had after this with Bell are also telling.

    Liked by 4 people

  11. Michael Celani says:

    Same MO as Halper: dangle the emails in front of Trump people and wait for a bite.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. TheWanderingStar says:

    All I want to know is, where is suspicious cat????

    That cat should have been all over this! Caputo has gone kaput; Exit stage left.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. John Q Public says:

    You will forgive me if I do not believe this “contractor.”

    Liked by 4 people

  14. dufrst says:

    No shock hear. Caputo is an attention seeker.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. daizeez says:

    Caputo claims House & Senate Intel Committees were not interested. I find that very hard to believe especially on the House side. The entire story seems a bit odd. He seemed to be saying the informant wanted to speak to FOX News then goes over to DW to spill the story? To me, stories from both Caputo and Carter Page are odd.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. MsB says:

    I get the feeling SOMEONE is using Caputo in a “good white hat way.” I think someone encouraged him to go out and do interviews . Part of the plan to trip up the bad Guys in some way. Just a gut feeling. But something is fishy about this “misunderstanding “.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. LULU says:

    “Claims of second Trump campaign informant challenged”

    Former Trump adviser Michael Caputo’s suggestion that a second government informant may have been snooping on the president’s 2016 campaign came into question overnight, as two other individuals involved in the flagged discussions downplayed their role.

    Caputo had told Fox News, in two televised interviews, that he was approached in 2016, likening the situation to revelations that another government informant made contacts with several other Trump advisers in the early stages of the Russia probe.

    Caputo told Neil Cavuto Tuesday on “Your World” that he was approached in early May 2016 by an intermediary “who had been talking to a government official” looking to connect with the Trump campaign — purportedly to hand off Hillary Clinton-related emails.

    But when contacted by Fox News, the individual who supplied the information – a government contractor – denied having ever contracted for an intelligence agency and downplayed the interaction as “cocktail party talk about where to go do opposition research.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/23/claims-second-trump-campaign-informant-challenged.html

    Like

  18. churchmouse says:

    Caputo seems to be involved with the Russian American Chamber of South Florida. These tweets were sent to Tracy Beanz:

    Like

    • Zippy says:

      From the following, you can see why Caputo would have been targeted by the conspiracy:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Caputo

      Reagan Administration and Bush campaign

      During the Reagan Administration, Caputo helped support the president’s agenda in Central America.[1] He worked with Oliver North to foment propaganda as part of Reagan’s public relations efforts in South America and in Central America.[2] After his work for the Reagan Administration, he worked for President George H.W. Bush for his campaign in the 1992 United States presidential election.[2] His position was director of media services on the 1992 Bush campaign.[3] Prior to his work on the Bush campaign, he served the United States House of Representatives as assistant director of the Radio and Television Correspondents’ Association.[3]

      Russia media consultant

      After the fall of the Soviet Union, Caputo established residence in Russia in 1994.[3][2][4] He served as an adviser to Boris Yeltsin.[1] In his capacity of advising Yeltsin in 1995, he was employed with the United States Agency for International Development.[3][5][1] He served as president of The Florence Group from 1994 to 1999, and stated he “played a pivotal role in electing Boris Yeltsin to his second term as President of the Russian Federation.”[6] He was employed by Moscow-headquartered subsidiary of Gazprom, Gazprom-Media.[7][5][4] Caputo was contracted for Gazprom in 2000 to perform employment for Russian leader Vladimir Putin.[3][5] His task was to increase the standing of the public relations value of Putin, specifically with regards to Putin’s support level in the U.S.[7][5][4] He moved back from Russia to the U.S. in the year 2000.[2] After returning to the U.S., he was called by his former mentor Roger Stone who convinced him to move to Miami Beach, Florida, and then Caputo founded his media advising company Michael Caputo Public Relations.[2] Caputo moved back to Europe in 2007 while advising a politician’s campaign for parliament in Ukraine.[2]

      Liked by 4 people

      • churchmouse says:

        Thanks for that very helpful information! It explains a lot.

        ‘ … you can see why Caputo would have been targeted by the conspiracy …’ Indeed!

        Liked by 4 people

      • TheWanderingStar says:

        You can’t make this sh!t up.

        Do the IC guys just have a template that they use to set up an op? Then it just become a game of fill in the blanks with the right set of characters? Is it just that easy?

        Like

    • Sandra-VA says:

      Is it illegal to be of Russian origin in America?

      Liked by 1 person

      • J Gottfred says:

        I hope not. I adopted two boys from Sevastopol in the Crimea in 2001. With Putin’s invasion that part of the Ukraine is now Russia. Both have turned out great, but I get worried about that black limo with the dark tinted windows that keeps parking out front…..

        Liked by 2 people

      • churchmouse says:

        Of course not, but it can be seen as an opportunity by some — the hypocritical Left — to attack him as an easy target.

        His past history does not reflect well in that respect.

        Liked by 1 person

  19. Non=combative. says:

    Most everyone has a dark side. Was Caputo duped or the duper. Or like Clapper said, “just a mistake”. Surely NSA has the data…

    Liked by 1 person

  20. TheUnknownPatriot says:

    Or was Caputo actually the plant we’ve been hearing about? Something is off with his story. Did they just use him to muddy up the waters with this story?

    Liked by 1 person

  21. JTwig says:

    Did I miss the part where Michael Caputo actually walks back his statement? All I read was a person who claims to be the contact, asked not to be named, says it was all a miss-understanding, and the reporter just repeating what he says verbatim. Man, I should have studied journalism in college. It would sure beat having to work and think for 8-12 hours a day.

    Liked by 4 people

  22. Zippy says:

    This error reveals something – Mueller & team didn’t investigate because they knew he wasn’t one of their set-up guys.

    Like

  23. TreeperInTraining says:

    Ah, yes.

    Everything that happened from the begining of the campaign up until now was all a big misunderstanding.

    See…they all LOVED Trump, the Constitution, the rule of law and the country so much that they were forced to spy, smear, unmask, leak and set plants…almost the same grand treatment these same organizations have to Dr. King back in the day…because they loved him, too and just wanted to protect him.

    White hats, all…..

    Come on, man!

    Liked by 1 person

    • cdquarles says:

      The thing is, though, back in Dr. King’s day, the Communists were trying to co-opt his movement, and they partially succeeded. (I knew people who were there … they’re dying off rapidly). {Consider Jesse Jackson’s history, for instance.} Joe McCarthy was right. The infiltration and subversion, though date to the late 19th Century’s “Progressive Party” here in the USA. These folk couldn’t succeed as a ‘minor’ party, so they took over the Ds and the Rs. The Ds were easy. They’ve been the party of subjugation here since their founding. No, the Ds are not Jeffersonian. The Rs were not as easy to suborn, but they succeeded with Teddy, cousin of Franklin. They have not succeeded completely with that subornation, for lots of the R grassroots remain loyal to the founding’s philosophy. Thus the breakout of candidates such as Harding/Coolidge, Eisenhower, Reagan and Trump. Hmm, just about 30 years between each one … :).

      Liked by 2 people

  24. Sandra-VA says:

    In view of all the revelations going on about Halper et al, why wouldn’t Caputo ponder on interactions that occurred in that same time frame? He told the committess and Mueller what happened… because they wanted to know about “muh Russia and emails”.

    Now, he recalls the instance and wonders if he could have been approached as well… and says so!

    Maybe it was nothing, but he recalled it.

    I do not fault Caputo for sharing his experience, even if it turns out to be a misunderstanding. It is another ping.

    Liked by 4 people

    • benifranlkin says:

      good answer

      Liked by 1 person

    • J Gottfred says:

      “I do not fault Caputo for sharing his experience, even if it turns out to be a misunderstanding. It is another ping.”

      So true, Sandra. One has to remember that a FISA warrant was granted for similar specious arguments. For me the jury is still out on Caputo,but in no way do I regret donating to his legal fund. If anything this makes me all the more upset for what O down to Mueller have done to this country….just who do they think they are and what gives them the right to destroy a person.

      Like

  25. Lizzyp says:

    Interesting side note- I’m wondering if the larger issue will end up getting more MSM attention than it has, since they can now present it as a ‘those nutty right wingers spent hours yesterday freaking out about what they claimed was a second spy! Look how desperate they are!”

    Like

  26. jeans2nd says:

    Working from Tues night Cavuto-Caputo interview –

    00:54 “I was approached by an intermediary, who had been talking to…a former gov official, who told him (the intermediary ) that they (the former gov official’s organization) had Hillary Clinton related emails at that government organization, and that they (the gov organization) wanted to get them (Clinton emails) to the Trump campaign.”
    Why? Why the Trump campaign? Why not the FBI?

    04:54 “I have the telephone number of the former government representative who was trying to give those (Clinton emails) to us…he (former gov rep/official)’s kind of gone silent, we can’t find him…”

    Benji found the unfindable? An unfindable who now wants his name withheld?
    Oh, ok.
    Now Caputo’s “former gov offical ” is a contractor? A military contractor? Why the change? Is this really the same guy?

    Why would Caputo, who knows fully what dirty tricks transpired during campaign, work with Benji?
    That Jeff Whatsits, head of Cruz’s campaign, is a well-known filthy dirty guy. We all knew what Jeff Whatsits was doing. And it was not good.

    Benji, could you not have worked in “he grabbed my arm,” “he knocked me down”? Your narrative would have been sooo much more believable.
    Phooey.

    As for Tracy Beanz – apologies, but no. Incorrect conclusion. imo

    A white hat, a true white hat, puts his name and face behind his words, like William Binney, Kevin Shipp, Dr. Steve P., and John Kiriaku (sp?), who even went to jail for several years to accomplish truth-telling.

    A white hat does not hide behind “anonymous source.” Yes, the stellar Admins here have this writer’s info as well.
    A true white hat who wishes to remain anon goes to a reputable source who verifies the veracity of the source.
    Benji is NOT reputable.

    That said, mistakes are sometimes made.
    But the intermediary who contacted M Caputo fits the pattern and narrative of the others who were attempting to push the Clinton email/Russia narrative.

    Were the “former gov offical” who contacted M Caputo’s intermediary legit, why did this “former gov official” not contact former DIA chief Lt Gen Michael Flynn, Rudy Guiliani, or one of the other higher-ups who had knowledge of such things?
    Per Dr Steve P, the military white hats were already working. Why not contact them?
    Why not contact an FBI field office who is known to be non-corrupt?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mark McQueen says:

      Agree. This can easily be put into the “chumming the waters” MO that has clearly been shown in the nature of previous attempts by the conspirators. Caputo didn’t take the bait.

      Liked by 1 person

  27. stringplayer55 says:

    The intermediary, Kirk Bell, seems very fishy. Another “plant” in the Trump campaign???

    Bell was at a Derby event sponsored by a staffer for Dem U.S. Senator Mazie Hirono. Somehow, at this Derby event sponsored by someone with strong ties to a sitting Dem, Bell and this contractor start talking about getting access to damning Hillary emails?

    I did a bit of sleuthing of Kirk Bell through his Linked In account. Bell identifies one person who is an influencer to him. His one influencer is Mike Allen, co-founder and executive editor at Axios. Axios is a left-wing media company. Strange, no, that the one person who influences him is from a left-wing media company?

    In addition, his Linked In activity is very sporadic. There is something every couple of months or so. But it is interesting to note that two weeks ago when news of an FBI plant first popped up, Bell posted a link to an article about that. Does he have some particular investment in such news?

    I smell a rat in Kirk Bell. Just like Joseph Mifsud, who supposedly was working for the Russians while schmoozing with Claire Smith, Chair of British Intelligence Cabinet Security, I suspect that Kirk Bell is a “double agent,” working on the Trump campaign (and for most of 2017 in the Trump administration as White House liaison for the Department of Transportation) while his loyalties are to anti-Trump agencies. (Hmm, I wonder how much Bell could pick up and redistribute in his position as WH liaison? Could Bell have been a source for many leaks throughout 2017?)

    Too much here does not add up!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sandra-VA says:

      His Twitter profile shows he no longer works with the Administration.

      “Deputy Vice President for Congressional and Public Affairs – Millennium Challenge Corporation – Former: White House Liaison – US Department of Transportation”

      Last tweet was a retweet on March 30th. Looks like a standard pro-Trump feed. From his twitter feed, it looks like he might have taken the new role in December 2017.

      This is his new job (although his name appears nowhere in the top level):

      https://www.mcc.gov/

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sandra-VA says:

        Sorry, meant to edit “no longer works for Administration”.. to say “no longer with DoT” – wasn’t aware that MCC was a .gov when I first started typing LOL!

        Liked by 1 person

      • stringplayer55 says:

        Bell left his position as WH liaison in November, 2017. His Linked In profile indicates that he is now Deputy VP for Congressional and Public Affairs with the Millennium Challenge Corporation. MCC was set up in response to a G. W. Bush push for developmental assistance to poor nations. It might be interesting to learn more about MCC operations.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Sandra-VA says:

          That is what I posted…

          Also, there is nothing suspicious about this guy. At all.

          Like

          • stringplayer55 says:

            I posted from his Linked In profile. You had posted from his Twitter account some information that I had already posted from his Linked In account. Do we really need to duel about information feeds and who got what first from where?

            I would note that you did not produce any information about the purpose of MCC and how/when it was established. I find the transition from WH liaison to working for MCC mildly interesting given:

            &tab&bullet that MCC is a program that has a strong redistribution of wealth component (suggesting a left-leaning program)
            &tab&bullet that MCC developed from a G. W. Bush initiative
            &tab&bullet that G. W. Bush has identified with the Uniparty against Trump

            Along with other information showing Bell’s associations with people who are certainly left wing, the transition to a group that is almost surely comprised of people with a left-leaning bent seems noteworthy – and totally missed in the information you posted.

            Like

            • Sandra-VA says:

              I linked to the MCC website… which I looked at before I posted it. Clicking it reveals what they do….

              Anyway, this is getting silly.

              Have a good rest of the day, stringplayer55!

              Liked by 1 person

    • Sandra-VA says:

      In conclusion, this guy looks like a connected guy and a Republican. Given his job, he would interact with both sides of the aisle. I see no rat.

      Liked by 1 person

      • stringplayer55 says:

        A connected guy who lists as his one and only influencer the co-founder of Axios? The perfect plant in the Trump campaign (and administration) is a “connected” RepubliCon. That he states that he is influenced by the founder of Axios says much.

        That there were many leaks out of the White House during his time as WH liaison for the DOT and those leaks have slowed to a trickle since he left is also suggestive (though not confirming) that he may have been a source of some leaks.

        You appear to be naive on what it means to be a good plant and how plants operate.

        Like

        • Sandra-VA says:

          You do know that LOTS of people left during the same time frame, right?

          I am not naive in the slightest, but you are maligning someone based on extremely flimsy evidence. I did a bit of research and came to a different conclusion than you did. I could be wrong, you could be wrong…

          Every time someone is “mentioned” there is always a rush to decry the person “mentioned” and often it is wrong.

          I haven’t seen any “facts” to agree with your suspicions… that is all.

          Like

          • stringplayer55 says:

            You do realize that I did not assert that Kirk Bell was a source of leaks. I merely mentioned that he had opportunity, that he was employed in the White House at a a time when there were a lot of leaks, and that according to the Daily Wire article and his Linked In page, Bell associates/identifies with people strongly left of center. The latter point about association/identification suggests motive. Hmm, motive and opportunity. Together, those raise some troubling questions, do they not?

            I also raised questions about the fishiness of the discussion of Hillary’s incriminating emails at a function hosted by an individual with direct ties to a sitting Dem. I have not claimed that there is confirmation that Bell was a plant. But there are certainly some strong reasons to question whether he might be a plant. And to use the argument that Bell “looks like a connected guy and a Republican” as defense against the suggestion that he might be a plant flies in the face of what we know about Stefan Halper. Halper is a Republican, a very connected guy. And even left-wing media are indicating that Halper was a plant to surveil the Trump campaign.

            Finally, I take umbrage at your statement that I am “maligning” Bell’s character. I have done no such thing. I have pointed to information that bears scrutiny and stated that, given what we know of how the FBI and DOJ were surveilling the Trump campaign, given that there have been recent reports of the FBI and DOJ using plants in the Trump campaign to carry out their surveillance, and given what we know about Bell, it would be naive to just assume that what is reported in the Daily Wire article is not part of a disinformation campaign. Successful disinformation campaigns always feature some truth along with some wrong information. The true statements are slipped in there to give credence to the entirety of the messaging even as the major point (which is false) goes unchallenged.

            You can’t be so naive as to think that in the current climate, we shouldn’t question everything that proceeds from “connected” people. Can you???

            Like

        • Sandra-VA says:

          Mike Allen is a problem… and he has been getting stories out of the WH. But Bell was at DoT… how much gossip could he have heard around there? Also, he is still part of the administration…

          Like

          • stringplayer55 says:

            Bell was White House Liaison for the DOT. That means that he is working inside the White House – or at least working directly with persons inside the White House. So, he would have plenty of opportunity to have heard gossip.

            What do you find interesting about the fact that he is still employed by the government? (I would note that you claim “administration”. There are many positions in the government which are not really part of the administration if we think of the administration as restricted to persons with direct access to the White House. And there is nothing to indicate that in his new position, Kirk Bell has direct access to the White House.)

            Like

  28. dawg says:

    I just watched Caputos latest interview on Tucker and he didnt retract a thing. He sounds totally credible to me.

    Liked by 4 people

  29. Beverly says:

    IF it was a misunderstanding, I believe it was an honest mistake by Caputo. After all, when you’re being drowned in the sewage poured out by the Left, it’s hard to sort out what’s going on.

    BUT time will tell (we can hope).

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Tumbleweedsdale says:

    Settle down now Mike. Redacted and taken care of immediately so settle down Mike!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s