Buffalo_Gal Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 Why Britain Doesn’t Want Trump to Declassify Obamagate Docs They will show it was on the ground floor of John Brennan’s spy operation. “FISA declassification will assure all the actors who tried to harm America are finally exposed,” George Papadopoulos wrote on Twitter last week. “Alexander Downer, the Australian government, UK, and GCHQ (British intelligence). If FISA is not declassified, these foreign governments will try to interfere again in 2020 to hurt Trump and the movement.” Meanwhile, the British spies who tripped up Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and others are demanding that Trump stop the release of any Obamagate docs. “UK spy chiefs in fight to stop Trump exposing their sources,” ran the headline on a Sydney Morning Herald story last week. “MI6 chiefs are secretly battling Donald Trump to stop him publishing classified information linked to the Russian election meddling investigation,” according to the story. “The UK is warning he will undermine intelligence gathering if he releases pages of an FBI application to wiretap one of his former campaign advisers.” 1
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 14 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Why Britain Doesn’t Want Trump to Declassify Obamagate Docs They will show it was on the ground floor of John Brennan’s spy operation. “FISA declassification will assure all the actors who tried to harm America are finally exposed,” George Papadopoulos wrote on Twitter last week. “Alexander Downer, the Australian government, UK, and GCHQ (British intelligence). If FISA is not declassified, these foreign governments will try to interfere again in 2020 to hurt Trump and the movement.” Meanwhile, the British spies who tripped up Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and others are demanding that Trump stop the release of any Obamagate docs. “UK spy chiefs in fight to stop Trump exposing their sources,” ran the headline on a Sydney Morning Herald story last week. “MI6 chiefs are secretly battling Donald Trump to stop him publishing classified information linked to the Russian election meddling investigation,” according to the story. “The UK is warning he will undermine intelligence gathering if he releases pages of an FBI application to wiretap one of his former campaign advisers.” Foreign interference in our elections is terrible! ... Except for when the Brits do it for the DNC, then it's not foreign interference, it's just one ally helping the other. ? 1
Tiberius Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 1 hour ago, peace out said: oh my Collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks, oh my! Quote The Guardian cited an internal document written by Ecuador’s Senain intelligence agency, which lists Manafort and “Russians” as guests of Assange. https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-manafort-met-assange-wikileaks-trump-election-20181127-story.html
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 Wikileaks denies it. Manafort denies it. There's no evidence made public to prove it happened... But the British IC mouthpiece (Guardian) runs it anyway... because they're terrified of their role in the coup being exposed and are still hoping people associate WikiLeaks with Russian intelligence (even though there's even less evidence of that connection than there is of Manafort/Assange meeting). People are nervous. Nervous people make mistakes. 2
Tiberius Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 The criminals are denying it! Ok! Heck, I bet even Putin would be denying it, if he gave a sheeet, lol
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 I'm firmly on record as being of the opinion Manafort is a bad guy. I'm firmly on record as being of the opinion Assange has blood on his hands. But just because Manafort is bad, and Assange isn't a saint, doesn't make them suddenly Russian agents. The entire history of WL's publishing record proves quite the opposite when you look at how hard they've made life on Putin at home and abroad. This is a desperate attempt by a heavily compromised newspaper to carry the water for their dirty intelligence apparatus (MI6 and GCHQ) who were in fact interferring in our elections much more so than the Russians could have dreamed. Yet I don't hear you complaining about British interference.
Warren Zevon Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm firmly on record as being of the opinion Manafort is a bad guy. I'm firmly on record as being of the opinion Assange has blood on his hands. Do you still think Manafort is a Plant?
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 1 minute ago, peace out said: Do you still think Manafort is a Plant? 100% Assange's lawyer tweets response:
Warren Zevon Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 28 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Manafort denies it. Where?
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 1 minute ago, peace out said: Where? His attorneys' statement has been on a few of the cablers this morning denying it. There will be links soon I imagine. ***************************** Greenwald raises some interesting points: Thread on the whole unsealing motion today, from Buzzfeed so, grain of salt: Same guy was on Fox saying there's no evidence a meeting happened about 30 min ago. (Fox=grain of salt as well)
Nanker Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 2 hours ago, ALF said: Whitey Bulger says hello ? Whitey Bulger was a piece of shite that corrupt FBI agents used and protected for decades. He got less than he deserved - far less than he deserved. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 8 minutes ago, Nanker said: Whitey Bulger was a piece of shite that corrupt FBI agents used and protected for decades. He got less than he deserved - far less than he deserved. And who ran him as a CI? Mueller.
Nanker Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 BINGO. You mean the most honest and integrity- filled person in the Bureau? 2
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 (edited) Per the Guardian article, there are no logs of Manafort entering the Embassy either. So we are to believe that this meeting has been known to Mueller for months... and he didn't include it in his charging of Manafort out of the kindness of his heart? Or is it more plausible that there was no meeting, Manafort had no idea about this meeting, and the Guardian ran a bad story? More on the Guardian's attempts to spread (dis)information specific to Trump/Russia: (Carrying the water for MI6 and GCHQ) Edited November 27, 2018 by Deranged Rhino 1
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 Aaaand now the Guardian is editing their story without an official retraction. This is how disinformation works: float a false story knowing people believe the first thing they hear/read, then edit it/contradict it completely without the fanfare and three weeks from now it's a "fact" Manafort/Assange met in March of 2016 but no one knows where that fact came from.... 2 1
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 More: Remember the connections here. Warner was in (highly dubious) contact with Waldman (Assange's former attorney and Deripaska's attorney) in September of '17 trying to arrange a meeting. Warner is seriously compromised on this matter, yet this is the first he's heard of the meeting. Manu is one of the reporters named in the Wolfe indictment for receiving leaked documents from Warner's committee (the dirtiest/swampiest committee on the Hill). This is a rats' nest of conspirators trying to figure out if the story is real or not... make of that what you will, but it sure is a bad look for the Guardian so far. Let's also run out the "why now" theories... IF the meeting happened in March of '16, just before Manafort became Trump's campaign manager and just after he left his partnership with the Podesta Group and JUST BEFORE the Podesta emails were leaked... the attempt here could be to make it appear Manafort was the one who provided Podesta's emails to Assange. He had motive/opportunity to take them and release them... of course this would destroy the Russian collusion narrative, but it would protect the DNC/DCCC/Clinton camp from any more questions about Seth Rich and other ways as to how Wikileaks got possession of the emails. IMO This whole fiasco with this story is a desperation move by very nervous intelligence operatives in Britain. 1 1
Deranged Rhino Posted November 27, 2018 Posted November 27, 2018 (edited) Manafort denial: https://mobile.twitter.com/zoetillman/status/1067513784821055490?s=21 Edited November 27, 2018 by Deranged Rhino
Recommended Posts