These are legitimate questions given the contents of an internal FBI document revealed last week by Yahoo News.
According to an analysis of the report by The Gateway Pundit, it appears as though elements within the bureau have not only made some inherently questionable speculative allegations, but the sources cited as the basis for at least some of them are not only suspicious but outright comical.
The crux of the FBI report, which originated in the Phoenix office, according to Yahoo News, warns that “conspiracy theorists” who discuss the “Deep State” are a new, emerging domestic terrorist threat.
Furthermore, one of the conspiracies identified as problematic in the report is the belief that a deep state plot existed — or continues to exist — to oust POTUS Donald Trump from office.
Now, based on at least two years’ worth of reporting, mostly by the independent media but not exclusively so, rational Americans understand and know that a) “Spygate” is a real thing; b) it was launched by the Obama administration; and c) the objective, clearly, was to drive POTUS Trump out of office.
But beyond that, sources for the report’s conclusions included the far-Left ‘fact-checking’ site Snopes and Wikipedia, the latter of which is banned as a student reference source by most colleges and universities because it is biased, non-objective, and often incorrect.
Notes Twitter user Rosie memos: “Wow. The @FBI has yet to say a word about ANTIFA but the Arizona office is tiptoeing around calling conspiracy theorists, domestic terrorists. They cite Qanon, Sandy Hook, Pizzagate and Islamberg.”
“Shockingly their citations are WIKIPEDIA and SNOPES? Are you kidding @FBI @TheJusticeDept are these really your sources? Is there no one in the intelligence community that understands wiki can be edited by anyone and Snopes is owned by a sexual predator couple?”
As you can see in the tweets, the sources are plainly listed: Snopes. Wikipedia.
This, from Connors State College, regarding the unreliability of Wikipedia as an academic source: “Wikipedia is increasingly used by people in the academic community, from first-year students to professors, as the easiest source of information about anything and everything. However, citation of Wikipedia in research papers may not be considered acceptable, because Wikipedia is not a creditable source.”
You know who else says that Wikipedia isn’t a reliable source? Wikipedia, as noted at this link.
Snopes is equally unreliable and often false — motivated by political bias rather than facts, as Natural News has reported.
But hey, to the FBI, these are now bona fide reliable sources. (Related: Are Unrecorded FBI Interviews a G-Man’s License to Lie?)
No wonder fewer and fewer Americans trust this agency.
There’s more, however, and it’s something that Director Christopher Wray should have to answer for.
As The Gateway Pundit revealed, the bureau wants to develop or purchase an off-the-shelf “social media early alerting tool” so that agents can monitor social media in real time, just like what happens in China, Cuba, Venezuela and, increasingly, Russia.
“With increased use of social media platforms by subjects of current FBI investigations and individuals that pose a threat to the United States, it is critical to obtain a service which will allow the FBI to identify relevant information from Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and other Social media platforms in a timely fashion,” the FBI said in a recent proposal that’s been updated.
“Consequently, the FBI needs near real-time access to a full range of social media exchanges in order to obtain the most current information available in furtherance of its law enforcement and intelligence missions,” it says.
Anyone who isn’t backing POTUS Trump’s efforts to ‘drain the swamp’ after all that has happened to him is part of the problem.