As expected, there has been the formation of a partisan divide in Washington, D.C. after reports published this week revealed that two-time failed Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee paid for the infamous “Trump dossier,” which alleged big-time collusion between the president’s campaign team and the Russian government.
For a year now Americans have heard the lie that Trump “colluded” with Moscow to “steal the election” from Clinton, and the dossier — none of which has been substantiated — is proof that the current occupant of the Oval Office cheated with a foreign government to deny Clinton her rightful place as leader of the free world.
The Democratic Left is pooh-poohing the fact that Clinton and the DNC paid for the dossier because, heck, it was just “opposition research” created by an oppo research firm, Fusion GPS. And you know, political campaigns do this sort of thing all the time.
Only, this particular piece of ‘opposition research’ was in reality much more than that, making its financing, creation and resultant use during the last election cycle and beyond a very big deal.
First, some political housekeeping. It should be acknowledged widely that once again President Donald J. Trump and not his detractors was right when he claimed early on that the dossier was A) a fabrication; and B) a Clinton campaign/DNC dirty trick, giving him yet another victory over Deep State forces seeking to topple him at the earliest convenience.
Still, neither the president nor any American concerned about the future of our republic should waste any time taking a victory lap. This bogus document was not only used as the basis of launching political attacks against the president. It was also used as the basis of national security investigations against the president and his campaign team, some of whose lives have now been permanently ruined, like distant campaign official Carter Page and Trump’s first national security advisor, retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
What’s more, the dossier and its use by the FBI and the CIA, who relied on it to launch their probes, opens up many uncomfortable but necessary questions related to the politicization of U.S. intelligence and security entities under President Obama. (Related: Congress looking into whether Obama DoJ used bogus ‘Trump dossier’ to obtain secret surveillance warrants.)
Some analysts say there aren’t any questions about why a firm like Fusion would hire someone like ex-British spy Christopher Steele, the dossier’s author; the point of such firms is to perform opposition research and feed it to friendly media outlets. Accuracy isn’t first and foremost on the list of requirements; information has to just seem credible enough to be repeated by credulous people. However, when it comes to the accuracy of information used by the nation’s federal law enforcement and intelligence apparatuses as justification for a FISA warrant, shouldn’t it be paramount — especially when we’re talking about opposition research pertaining to the president-elect of the U.S.?
Apparently not or, at least, not as far as Obama and Democrats were concerned, whose “win at any cost” strategy has just cost the FBI and the CIA what was left of their credibility. And that is dangerous because we rely on the men and women of these organizations to be fair, to be accurate, and to be right when it comes to the prosecution of their duties.
And again, let’s never forget that the dossier is bogus. It was circulated widely, though below the radar, among journalists all last summer as the campaign heated up, but because nobody could verify any of its contents, nobody ran with it. That all changed when Buzzfeed decided in January to publish it in full. And even though the site ran it with the caveat that none of it was substantiated, rest assured the decision to publish was made in order to put certain details into the minds of Trump opponents in government (and out) that hey, parts of it sound true and sound like Trump so…they could be true.
Our intelligence and law enforcement agencies are not supposed to operate off of “would be, could be” information. Solid facts and solid leads are the order of the day.
Or they used to be.
J.D. Heyes is editor of The National Sentinel and a senior writer for Natural News and News Target.
Sources include:Submit a correction >>