Sam Clovis Ponders If Intelligence Asset Stefan Halper Was Using Him To Get To George Papadopoulos…

Byron York has an interesting article today outlining his interview with former Trump campaign official Sam Clovis.  Within the article Clovis shares the unexpected contact he received, via email, from CIA Asset Stefan Halper.   As shared:

“I am a professor at Cambridge University lecturing on US politics and foreign policy. I am what is called a ‘scholar practitioner,’ having served in the White House and four presidential campaigns — two as policy director. Over the past month I have been in conversation with Carter Page who attended our conference in Cambridge on US elections. Carter mentioned in Cambridge, and when visiting here in Virginia, that you and I should meet. I have enjoyed your comments and appearances in the media; you hit the sweet spot focusing Trump’s appeal to working America. May I suggest that we set a time to meet when you are next in Washington. Meanwhile, all the best, Stefan Halper.”

The York article then goes through the hindsight possibilities Sam Clovis now considers amid recent revelations the FBI was using Halper as an ‘agent provocateur’.  Make sure you read it. However, journalist Byron York makes a critical assumptive mistake within his discussion with Mr. Clovis that misses a very important detail.

As York discuss the testimony delivered by Clovis to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), they cite further testimony by Carter Page. Unfortunately, both York and Clovis forget two critical points that must overlay any review of congressional inquiry.

According to the article:

[…] Clovis’s theory is that Halper was trying to link Papadopoulos and the 30,000-plus emails that Hillary Clinton unilaterally deleted from her private email system. Halper was hoping “that somebody would bite in the campaign…his goal was to drag George into this to say the Trump campaign tried to get access to those emails from Russia.”

If that is what Halper was trying to do — and again, that is simply Clovis’s theory — then it didn’t work. “Nobody was biting,” Clovis told me. “As far as I know, no one in the campaign lifted a finger to get to the 30,000 emails. I don’t think it was in their interest. Anytime anybody approached me about oppo, I deleted it. Oppo research against Hillary Clinton? We had plenty of material. It’s not like it’s not a target-rich environment.”

[…] Clovis told me that in all 19 hours of questioning, no one — not Mueller’s investigators, not investigators from the House or Senate, not anyone — ever mentioned Halper. (Clovis said that, among other documents, he gave all the investigators all emails making any reference to Carter Page, so he believes he turned the Halper email over.) At the time he was questioned, of course, Clovis did not know Halper was an FBI informant.

[…]  [Carter] Page mentioned on a number of occasions that he had traveled to Cambridge University, and the lawmakers, including Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff and Republican Rep. Mike Conaway, moved on to other topics.

For example, when Conaway questioned Page about who paid for his plane fare to give a speech in Moscow, Page said, “They bought me — they booked a ticket, just like Cambridge University booked a ticket for the — ”

“Okay,” said Conaway. “I don’t need Cambridge; I just need the Russians.”

At the time, it’s fair to say that no one in the room knew that Halper was an FBI informant. It was only later that the House committee’s work led to the discovery of Halper’s role. (link)

No, actually, it’s not fair to say: “no one in the room knew that Halper was an FBI informant“.  Exactly the opposite is true due to the prior congressional testimony of CIA Director John Brennan.

In his May 23rd, 2017 testimony, CIA Director John Brennan stated he informed HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff, between August 11 and September 6, 2016, of the concerns that initiated the “Electronic Communication” (EC) origination documents; that EC started the FBI counterintelligence operation on July 31st, of 2016.

This is important.  Remember, the entire discussion of the FBI informant surfaced because the intelligence community, via the FBI and DOJ, are refusing to turn over to Chairman Devin Nunes and Chairman Trey Gowdy the actual two-page EC document that validated and originated the July 31st, FBI investigation.

Current DOJ and FBI officials claim their reason for withholding the EC document was to protect the “source“.  The source was/is the “informant”.  We now know the ‘confidential informant’ was/is Stefan Halper.

That simple and logical fact means Stefan Halper is outlined, in some capacity, within the two-page EC, presented by CIA Director Brennan to the FBI.

When you accept the July 2016 “EC” contains information from/surrounding Stefan Halper, that is the appropriate context when applying hindsight to the May, 2017, testimony of John Brennan.   Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan’s testimony:

Brennan: [13:35]  “Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight process we kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them.

“Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”…

OK, let’s break this down, to understand the importance.

FBI Director James Comey stated he never briefed congressional oversight on the FBI Counterintelligence operation due to the “sensitivity of the matter“. (link) That takes James Comey out of this 2016 briefing aspect entirely.

Per his own testimony, the only congressional oversight briefing was from CIA Director John Brennan between August 11, and Sept 6, 2016.  [*Note* the email from Stefan Halper to Sam Clovis was August 29, 2016.]

Per his own testimony, John Brennan is briefing the Gang of Eight on the origination details of “an active FBI counterintelligence operation“.  That FBI counterintelligence operation officially began on July 31st, 2016.

CIA Director John Brennan is briefing the ‘Gang of Eight’, on his two-page EC.  That two-page EC contains source material from Stefan Halper.  So, CIA Director John Brennan is briefing Adam Schiff on source Stefan Halper, and the subsequent initiation of the FBI counterintelligence operation.

HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff is fully aware of the importance of Stefan Halper when Sam Clovis and Carter Page are giving testimony in 2017. HPSCI Ranking Member Adam Schiff is the ONLY person in the room aware of the role of a CIA “confidential informant” in the origination EC; and HPSCI Ranking Member Adam Schiff is aware one FBI asset behind the counterintelligence operation is Stefan Halper.

Remember, in 2016 CIA Director John Brennan briefed both HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes and HPSCI Ranking Member Adam Schiff.  However, in 2017, at the times of these interviews, Devin Nunes was removed from the proceedings during the ridiculous “ethics investigation”.

Now, with hindsight, we can clearly see the political motive and purpose behind the rage against Chairman Devin Nunes; spurred on by Democrats -particularly Adam Schiff-  that led to the ethics investigation.

By pushing Chairman Nunes away from the 2017 congressional testimony and inquiry during the attempted deployment of the “insurance policy” phase, the democrats removed the ability of Nunes to reconcile any differences between the prior information provided by CIA Director Brennan, and the current testimony from witnesses approached by control agents of CIA Director Brennan.

See how that works?

If Byron York and Sam Clovis reviewed their conversation again, this time from the perspective that Adam Schiff knew everything behind the historic scenes as described by John Brennan, they might have an entirely different perspective on the approach of the Democrats, and particularly Adam Schiff during that 2017 committee testimony.

Lastly, and importantly, consider this possibility:  What if the reason the DOJ and FBI don’t want to turn over the actual originating “EC” document to Nunes and Gowdy has nothing to do with the ‘informant‘?   What if the reason to keep the document away from Devin Nunes, is because the content specifically -or partially- contradicts the actual 2016 briefing that CIA Director John Brennan gave Gang-of-Eight member Devin Nunes?

Devin Nunes April 22nd:

“There Were No Official Intelligence Channels Used To Start Trump Investigation”… (link)


Occam’s razor?

This entry was posted in AG Jeff Sessions, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, 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, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, NSA, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

565 Responses to Sam Clovis Ponders If Intelligence Asset Stefan Halper Was Using Him To Get To George Papadopoulos…

  1. Judiciary says:

    Another thought, frankly, how is Halper to pay for luxury living in both Cambridge and Virginia, if he can’t feed the US-UK-AU governments (and assorted “research” firms) with all sorts of exciting James Bond tales of intrique? People laughed at Halper’s pearl clutching description of Flynn sitting next to a Russian-born women at some conference. Yet, Mueller et al treat it as proof positive.

    Liked by 8 people

  2. Sandra-VA says:

    Why did Trey Gowdy let the Ethics Committee investigation into the C.R.E.W ridiculous claims take 6mths (or was it 8) to clear Nunes? Is this part of the reason that Gowdy is leaving? Was he threatened into ensuring Nunes was sidelined?

    I was pretty shocked when I learned that Gowdy was head of the Ethics Committee when he resigned from that committee!

    Now we know the impact of sidelining Nunes… he would have KNOWN immediately that there was a problem had he been able to do his job.

    Great reporting, Sundance! It’s those little snippets of information that you ferret out that makes the puzzle more complete!

    Liked by 18 people

    • Turranos says:

      Yes, thank you Sundance, you’re amazing, as always. Sandra, I think you nailed it when it comes to Trey Gowdy. I think you are spot on.

      Liked by 5 people

    • 4sure says:

      And NOW that Nunes does know, has anything changed?

      Liked by 3 people

      • Sandra-VA says:

        It depends on if he does know… well, after reading here he will definitely know 🙂

        I think Nunes has done an EPIC job of exposing the truth so far.

        Liked by 6 people

    • Lunagirl says:

      Trey Gowdy’s behavior on many issues is probably the primary reason I have come to believe people in Washington are not merely being bribed, but are being blackmailed or just plain threatened with bodily harm to themselves or their family. His conduct is just too schizophrenic not to believe external pressure is being applied. Yesterday he apparently commented on the Obama administration spying on the Trump campaign as proper and “appropriate” under the circumstances.


  3. billrla says:

    We are now into the Summer Silly Season of non-stop meaningless blather, meant to show action where there is none, and to avoid actually doing anything to put a stop to the creeping coup. It’s off to Martha’s Vineyard and the Hamptons. See you in September, looking tanned, fit, and ready to focus on campaigning for the November elections, while paying lip service to the creeping coup.

    Liked by 8 people

  4. jack says:

    We all realize Trump was spied on. I think what would divide the Leftist-Dems would be if we could investigate if Obama put spies on Bernie Sanders campaign too, and did FISA or surveillance for Phoney Russia story on Bernie for “insurance policy” if he got ahead of Clinton.

    Also , many of us wonder if Obama/Clinton’s FBI/DOJ/CIA had found illegal activity in Bernie’s campaign or his advisor’s and that is why Bernie dropped out at convention in really silent way, and had money afterwards to buy more houses. His wife seemed to be doing questionable stuff at her job, it was in the news back then.

    Liked by 2 people

    • 4sure says:

      I don’t think anything is going to divide the leftist dems. They will never be divided in their hatred of us. Bernie is a Marxist commie selling himself as a socialist. The dems are commies, so they are not going to be divided. When have you ever seen them divided?

      Liked by 4 people

      • AH_C says:

        I think there is a significant percentage that strongly feel Bernie was robbed. Let’s call it 20%. That is a significant chunk of the Dems’ 48% (including the X number of fraud) in a 46/48/6% (R/D/3rd) electorate.

        If half, 10% of the Bernie Bots bail on the Dems and throw in with Jill Stein or other 3rd parties (actually, some of Bernie Bots would rather have Trump than Hillary), you can see where that blue wave went, sucked out the drain by the muh Russia riptide in something like a 36/86/16% split – it’s almost like 1992 all over again, except it’s the dems on the outside looking in, instead of Pappy Bush.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Leslie says:

        The Bolshevik Party split from the Menshivek Party in Russia in 1903.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Phil says:

      I really am warming up to the idea of calling the Obama reign -the preTrump administration- sort of like B.C. and A.D. (no religious meanings implied). Just a wish to forget about him.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Interested Bystander says:

    I think the “source” in question with respect to Papadopoulos is more than just Halper. I think it is GCHQ as an entity. I think the Papadopoulos sting was a British run operation from start to finish, and I think the “highly sensitive” information that the head of the GCHQ passed on to Brennan in the summer was the Mifsud and Downer agents provocateur approaches to young George (and likely other bad stuff). Passing this information to the US is a naughty, since the Five Eyes boys keep saying they don’t conduct domestic surveillance for each other, and that is why they don’t want the EC released. Halper was supposed to get Papadopoulos to incriminate himself regarding the “emails of Clinton” so they could take him to the FISC, but when that failed the FBI went with the double bank shot of “we know the ‘Russians’ approached Papadopoulos, and we have a report that Russians offered Page billions of dollars worth of stock as a bribe(Steele report on 10/18/16), so we need to surveil Page.” Alarmingly, they were approved, and the rug under which they hoped to sweep all the dirt was installed on the 7th floor of the FBI…

    Liked by 6 people

    • DanO64 says:



    • Richard Whitney says:

      @Interested Bystander…I agree with you. I was struck by the photos from the meeting of DJT and Teresa May when Trump traveled Europe. DJT looked like his normal engaged, energetic self, and Teresa May looked like she had been spanked for something wrong she did. At the time, I wasn’t aware of what that could be, but since then the evidence has piled up. You could imagine that he had read her the riot act, that it was her agency that participated in the conspiracy (and perhaps he told her that he knew she knew). Then he told her to sit down and shut up for the photo op.
      Take a look at those photos and decide for yourself

      Liked by 2 people

    • Good Job! says:

      I believe “Operation Halper” in September was somebody’s recognition that Papad.’s earlier comments about Hillary’s emails, or “dirt,” that the Russians already had, was a bad premise for thinking Russia tipped off Papad. that they planned to later hack the DNC and needed Trump’s help to contact Wikileaks.

      Some Judge, some one in the FBI, some one must have said in July or August, “Isn’t Papad’s probably talking about Hillary’s missing emails from her own server?”

      That’s why Halper got angry. His specific job on Papad. was to get Papad. to say he knew something about the DNC hack.

      All the Fusion GPS commentary posing as news articles in the New York Times prominently confuse the Hillary’s email issue with the Podesta hack and DNC leak. That’s a sure sign that’s the thinking of the FBI and Mueller’s phony investigation.

      Liked by 1 person

        • Interested Bystander says:

          Yes that article, and others by the same author are some of the key evidence of what I speculate above. Note the links in his articles, many (if not all) of which are to the BBC, the Guardian, the Washington Post, etc. — all “officially approved news organizations.” The British ones in particular have good sources on the Papadopoulos sting operation, reaffirming the British IC connection.

          BTW, all of my speculation can be traced to such sources. For instance, the NY Times story that broke the Papadopoulos story says the following:

          “It is unclear whether Mr. Downer was fishing for that information [from Papadopoulos] that night in May 2016.”

          Say WHAT? The sources for the Times report are “four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role,” but none of them know whether Downer was fishing for information that night? Or is it that they knew he was fishing for information, just not that he “was fishing for that information”?

          Here’s another one from CNN from November 2017:

          “Page told the committee he was invited to speak in Russia after joining the campaign — a similar pattern to foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, who was approached by a professor connected to the Russian government after the professor learned he was advising the campaign.”

          CNN didn’t just happen to “notice the pattern” between Page and Papadopoulos. This was the FBI feeding the (paper thin) theory of their case to CNN to circulate to the public.

          I could go on, but I don’t want bore anyone with more press leaks. It takes time and effort, but at least 75% of the outline of the story has been revealed through the press, and each time they plug one hole in the dyke, a bigger one springs open…

          Liked by 1 person

        • Good Job! says:

          Here’s something from a new article there:

          Beneath all of their flailing attacks on Congressman Devin Nunes lay the fear that his oversight would kick loose scandalous nuggets buried within their probe: a FISA warrant cribbed from Hillary’s campaign smears, national security letters based on insanely thin justifications, an embarrassing reliance on sketchy foreign intelligence (which consisted largely of Russian disinformation and re-circulated nonsense from Hillary’s hired gun, Christopher Steele), and an infiltration plot involving a swampy old CIA asset.

          How many of these “National Security Letters” were based on the idea Papad., or any one else, had an opinion who might have Hillary’s deleted emails, and this opinion warranted accusations of personal connections to the DNC hack?

          BTW, I’m still hoping for Nellie Ohr to be the real author of the dossier!

          Liked by 2 people

        • Good Job! says:

          Here’s something from a January 2017 BBC article I found:

          Claims about a Russian blackmail tape were made in one of a series of reports written by a former British intelligence agent, understood to be Christopher Steele.

          As a member of MI6, he had been posted to the UK’s embassy in Moscow and now runs a consultancy giving advice on doing business in Russia. He spoke to a number of his old contacts in the FSB, the successor to the KGB, paying some of them for information.

          They told him that Mr Trump had been filmed with a group of prostitutes in the presidential suite of Moscow’s Ritz-Carlton hotel. I know this because the Washington political research company that commissioned his report showed it to me during the final week of the election campaign.

          The BBC decided not to use it then, for the very good reason that without seeing the tape – if it exists – we could not know if the claims were true. The detail of the allegations were certainly lurid. The entire series of reports has now been posted by BuzzFeed.

          So Confusion GPS was pushing the “pee memo” to the British media in the week before the election.


    • hanna693 says:

      The president needs to check out people better, and ignore people that flatter him. He needs to fire Bolton, Rosenstein and Bolton. Why are Clovis and Halbert so obese?


    • farrier105 says:

      GCHQ was sicced on Trump early on, back in 2015. They were allowed to set up at Fort Meade for the work, too, while Rogers was in charge.


  6. Paul Tibbets says:

    “I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

    I find the above statement by Brennan to be highly suspect. It is clearly a statement to offer himself cover. Notice what he said, he did not brief the gang of eight collectively, he briefed them separately. He state he gave them ALL the same info. we have, how much shall we bet that Schiff got an entirely different briefing than Nunes?

    Liked by 7 people

    • AH_C says:

      That’s a salient point I picked up on the minute he first said it. When you have a known liar parsing a statement like that, you know the opposite is true.

      Sorta like Clinton’s “I did not have “Sex” with that woman!” “What? Oh, I thought you meant intercourse, because everyone knows oral sex isn’t really sex.”

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Alligator Gar says:

    Just to bump the idea for further dissection…..
    Do Brennan’s Analytica,
    Cambridge University and its ties to spies R us,
    and the sketchy oppo firm Cambridge Analytic that kept raising its ugly head during the 2016 presidential run have any connections…
    other than darn funny name connections that seem, well, way too coincidental?

    Liked by 1 person

    • mr.piddles says:

      That leaves one outlier. Brennan University. Don’t think he hasn’t considered it.


    • Sandra-VA says:

      You know what else is funny about Cambridge Analytica? The Trump Campaign never used their data machine because it was “less than useless” – they used the RNC data because it was far superior. Per Brad Parscale.

      Now we have this huge take down of Cambridge Analytica and a whistleblower (who left the company in 2014) suddenly exposing all this nasty dirt about the outfit… that the Trump Campaign didn’t use but is being tarnished with. Oh, and for some reason, the D’s are now looking into CA to see if there are “russian connections”. Strange that.

      Oh, and guess what? The Trump Campaign used social media to spread their message far and wide (with great success)…. and now? You have to jump through hoops to use Social Media for a political campaign (especially if you are an R). Why? Because CA (that wasn’t used by the Trump Campaign) supposedly bought data from another entity who obtained it legally via Facebook in 2012. The message being sent to the users of Social Media is that this data was “hacked”.

      When you sit back and look at everything, the motivations are crystal clear.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Alligator Gar says:

        Yes. Now, how to tie it to GCHQ, that slob Halper and his happy band of misfits at Cambridge…..the DNC…..I’ve got some digging to do!


        • farrier105 says:

          You might be able to tie the DNC, GCHQ, and Halper through the FBI. With contractor CROWDSTRIKE having unlimited access to the DNC internal network, and with former FBI executive Shawn Henry managing that access for CROWDSTRIKE, the FBI is ONE thing they all have in common as GCHQ works with FBI CI from time-to-time, especially in the borders.


        • Mickturn says:

          Alligator, cut to the chase, dig Prison graves!


      • LULU says:

        Sandra, Cruz used Cambridge Analytica. His supporter Robert Mercer bought into CA and it was to be a major tool in the Cruz campaign. Psychological profiling. When Cruz killed the Mercer support, Mercer swung to Trump. I don’t believe CA was ever used by the Trump campaign. Just not their style.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Interesting article in Breitbart re: meeting at Trump Tower with Da Russians.

    Seems like there was a Friend Of Hillary in attendance.

    Follow the Yellow Brick Road.


    • mr.piddles says:

      “He also said he had drinks that same night with another “friend” but could not remember who that friend was.”

      Well, I believe him.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sandra-VA says:

      Also, the interpreter was a regular interpreter for the State Dept, UN and….. wait for it…. the FBI.

      Liked by 2 people

      • mr.piddles says:

        Glen Simpson: “Guys, can we just send in the Shady Russian Lawyer, the FBI Interpreter, and the Friend of Hillary? The kids are out of school in like 2 weeks, and I have the timeshare on the Vineyard booked that month.”

        Liked by 1 person

    • Zimbalistjunior says:

      Rinat was also at the conference in Canada post election where McCain and sir woods people exchanged at the very least some pleasantries.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. deplorable says:

    Clovis told me that in all 19 hours of questioning, no one — not Mueller’s investigators, not investigators from the House or Senate, not anyone — ever mentioned Halper.

    Now that’s odd. Mueller cast a wide net and yet never mentioned Halper during his interrogation of Clovis. It would be interesting to ask others that were interrogated by Mueller whether he ever mentioned Halper and if not, then how likely is it that Mueller already knew about Halper?

    Or am I way off base here and are we to assume that Mueller saw the unredacted EC and knew about Halper from the beginning?

    Liked by 3 people

  10. holdmybeer says:

    A spy or informant may not be a bad thing, at least as Clapper tells it, if (ahem) conducted for national security purposes. At least that is the spin that helps him tell this crock with a straight face in the MSM. Reality is that this was a criminal enterprise–the planting of false evidence on an unsuspecting dope (sorry Pappa) to try to frame Trump. No spy, no informant, because there was no incriminating information to gather and the bad guys knew it. So they decided to plant some false evidence themselves….

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Zimbalistjunior says:

    Off thread a bit, but sometime before june 4 or so the IG report on HRC investigation part will come out. It will be devastating.

    It will be extremely entertaining too to watch the MSM flip out for an hour or two before receiving their marching orders and talking Points from Ben Rhodes and the others in the war room. And then boom the bs, lies , obfuscations and rationalizations begin.

    It’ll be glorious.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I can pretty much follow the domestic FBI/DOJ and CIA corruption and spying. The Russian, British, Australian connections and contributions to them is confusing. It appears there’s even wide variations in opinions from some of the Branch Hangers.

    Wouldn’t it be a lot easier to have PDJT send Bibi a stamped self-addressed envelope and ask him for copies of unredacted reports he has from Mossad on the topic? They probably even have HRC’s e-mails……..heh-heh-heh.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Tim Tarr says:

      No need POTUS has had most/all of this on a thumb drive(s) provided in Nov. ’16. I suspect some info was provided as early as ’15.

      O’Schome/ The Hag were way out of their league when they tried to screw with Bibi. Revenge is a dish best served cold and in large portions.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Mickturn says:

      Remember this, Globalists from whatever country are still NEVER Trumpers and were out to get him. The Deep State is MultiNational!


  13. Arby says:

    It seems clear to me that this entire CIA/DOJ/FBI “insurance policy” is a classic sting operation. Problem #1 is that nobody on the Trump team (or at least nobody of substance) took the bait and #2 (the biggest problem to them) is that, unbelievably, Hillary lost. As a result their actions are slowly, kicking and screaming coming to the surface because Trump and Nunes play hardball unlike the old guard Rhinos who when they win elections allow Dems to get the way as though they won.


  14. Golfbro11 says:

    I am starting to think that Spygate has more or less already been proven behind the scenes (maybe long ago). Maybe Sessions is responsible, maybe Huber and Horowitz, hell maybe even Mueller. And what we are witnessing now is the slow release of information to help the public come to the conclusion (not the whole public, about 20-30 percent of people believe Obama is the Savior) that Obama and his co conspirators were up to no good. Once a solid majority of people begin to believe this, the indictments will be unsealed. I think we are getting ever closer to when this will happen. And I think this will be the BIG UGLY because the left will have a violent meltdown in the streets.


    • DanO64 says:

      President Trump knew about the dossier BEFORE the election.

      Liked by 1 person

    • mimbler says:

      My perception of the effect of slowly releasing information is that it allows the media to claim it is “old news” when the hammer drops. And quite frankly, outside of the highly engaged, like we have here at the treehouse, no one is paying any real attention to the dribbles as the come out. Too abstract, disconnected, poorly reported, and quite frankly devoid of any filed charges which would make people take the news seriously.

      And the left, quite frankly, doesn’t care how criminal Obama was if he was persecuting conservatives. Look at Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, the Clinton white wash. Those have all been set out to the public, and few lefties could tell you what they are about and even fewer care.

      Just my opinion; I know that many on the site believe in the theory of slow info release to prepare the people. Time will tell,


    • farrier105 says:

      Are you saying that the indictments, which are presently sealed, PRECEDED an investigation? How does that work? Just when did all of these investigations take place? In 2017? 2016? We keep being told to be PATIENT and just WAIT for something to happen, but there are ALREADY indictments waiting to be unsealed? If so much waiting has to be done, during what time period were these indictments handed down and sealed? We are having WHAT kind of investigation NOW? What is Mueller doing? Is this all THEATER? Is this how we should conduct the business of justice? Where’s the evidence of all of this investigative and judicial activity in the past that resulted in these “indictments?”


  15. DanO64 says:

    So ABC canceled Roseanne just now. Figures.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. icthematrix says:

    The much earlier comments posted regarding this thread are devastating, and I believe dead on target:

    Halper has not been seen for many months. Same for the Ukrainian. Either in deep cover or dead. Hopefully real friendlies have them in safe keeping, ready for testimony and WPP.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. V says:

    Following on from discussion here:

    Papadopoulos should be invited to appear on Hannity and these are some of the questions he should be asked:

    Who sent you to the Ben Carson campaign?
    Who invited you to join the London Center of International Law Practice (LCILP)?
    When did you go to London to work at LCILP?
    Who were your contacts there?
    When did you first have contact with Mifsud by letter, phone, digital or in person?
    Who signed your paychecks at LCILP?
    Who gave you the idea to join the Trump campaign?
    Why were you in Rome when you met Mifsud there?
    When were you in Rome?
    What exact dates did you work at LCILP – start date – end date?
    Why did you change your testimony to Mueller from: “stated multiple times that he learned that information prior to joining the Campaign” to after?

    (There is now evidence that he was on Mifsud’s LCILP staff at least as early as 23 Feb 2016 – SEE DATE IN png: “…2016-02-23-at-17.16.24.png” at LCILP site) and he met with Clovis on 6 March 2016 and joined the Trump campaign.)

    CURRENTLY STILL AT LCILP SITE even though his staff page has been scrubbed:

    MUELLER’S COVERUP – 1st paragraph, pg 2 – insisting Papadop’s first contact with Mifsud was only after he joined the Trump campaign:

    Description of Mifsud’s outfit LCILP – fake, artificial front:

    Mifsud’s Intel connections:

    Does Mifsud know Halper?


  18. V says:


    Mifsud is no small fry. See in whose company he appeared at this Dept of State partnership meeting – with a total leftist/NWO agenda:

    Global Ties meeting Feb 8-11, 2017 in DC at which Mifsud was a speaker.
    See Page 8

    Other speakers:

    Amb. Gérard Araud
    Ambassador of France to the United States

    Dr. Esther Brimmer
    Executive Director and CEO, NAFSA:
    Association of International Educators

    Jorge Castro
    President, AFS-USA

    Jennifer Clinton, Ph.D.
    President, Global Ties U.S.

    Dr. Allan Goodman
    President, Institute of International Education

    Representative Jim Himes (CT-4)

    Dr. Ian Lesser
    Vice President for Foreign Policy, German
    Marshall Fund of the United States

    Joseph Mifsud
    Director, London Academy of
    Diplomacy, University of Stirling

    Amb. David O’Sullivan
    Head of the European Union
    Delegation to the United States

    Representative Steve Pearce (NM-2)

    Amb. Réka Szemerkényi
    Ambassador of Hungary to the United States

    Conrad Tribble
    Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Western
    Europe and the European Union *Invited

    Representative John Yarmuth (KY-3)

    Ilir Zherka
    Executive Director, Alliance for
    International Exchange


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s