Donald Trump - Yes Puppet! Yes Puppet! - Part Two

In the first part, I outlined the takeover of the Trump campaign by a cadre of hedgefund billionaire Robert Mercer connected operatives including Stephen Bannon, Kellyanne Conway and David Bossie. This takeover coincided with a "reconfiguring of the DT persona."

Many of us have been wondering what is going on at the FBI in the last week, starting with the letter to Congress from FBI Director Comey regarding emails — of unknown significance — found on device shared by Clinton aide Huma Abedin and her estranged husband Anthony Weiner in the course of an investigation into allegations that Weiner had engaged in sexting with a 15 year-old girl.

The unprecedented timing of the letter has been the topic of much disussion. Though Comey has been silent in the media, an internal memo was leaked to Fox News that gives some insight from Comey. A number of media outlets are reporting that "sources" have claimed that Comey's actions were due to concerns about leaks from the FBI's NY office

Two law enforcement sources familiar with the FBI's New York Field Office, which initially discovered the emails, said a faction of investigators based in the office is known to be hostile to Hillary Clinton. A spokeswoman for the FBI's New York office said she had no knowledge about this.

Speculation about internal conflict between FBI agents and the DOJ has been rampant in the media and in the most recent and sensational development, Fox New's Bret Baier reported some very explosive claims made by unidentified sources. Along with much of the rest of Fox's lineup, the conservative echo chamber went nuts repeating these allegations of a "likely indictment" and a "far reaching investigation" with an "avalanche of evidence" and further claims of "99% certainty" that "at least 5 foreign governments" had hacked the email server. Social media went into meltdown and #HillaryIndictment immediately was trending at the top of Twitter.

Donald Trump has been hammering the claims ever since to chants of "lock her up." In fact, as I am typing this, Donald Trump is repeating many of the claims right now in a speech.

However, what Trump is ignoring as he reads his script from the teleprompters, is that other journalists, pundits, etc immediately pounced on Baier and Fox News, pointing out obvious problems with the claims — not least of which is that the FBI doesn't indict anyone. This led to a walking back of parts of the story by Baier on Twitter later that night and the following day on Fox:



Since then the piece has been further scrutinized. In the interest of saving time and typing, I'll illustrate one major point with an excerpt from a Real Clear Politics piece.

Bret Baier: FBI Sources Believe Clinton Foundation Case Moving Towards "Likely an Indictment

Fox News Channel's Bret Baier reports the latest news about the Clinton Foundation investigation from two sources inside the FBI.

Two sources within the FBI? Yikes. What's interesting about this article is that also contains the transcript of the original Baier segment as well as Baier discussing the same material with Brit Hume:

BRET BAIER: Breaking news tonight -- two separate sources with intimate knowledge of the FBI investigations into the Clinton emails and the Clinton Foundation tell Fox the following:

BRET BAIER: Here's the deal: We talked to two separate sources with intimate knowledge of the FBI investigations.

Notice what Bret Baier didn't say that those regurgitating his "reporting" often have — that the Baier sources were from within the FBI. If this were te case, it's almost certain that Baier himself would have said so and in his multiple statements, he chooses instead to identify the sources as people "with intimate knowledge" of the FBI investigations.

This is important.

Before I move on to who the likely sources are, I'd like to touch on something rather surprising that ties back into the first thread. Both the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times ran stories about this conflict between FBI agents of the New York FBI office and prosecutors.

Some have described the actions of the FBI agents as a mutiny by rogue agents. Others, including Baier's sources, have framed it as obstruction by prosecutors. What nobody seem to be disputing are that the dispute boils down to this: FBI agents from the NY office presented prosecutors with what they had and the prosecutors blew them off for lack of evidence. I'll start with an excerpt from the NYT:

Sorting Through the Clinton Email Case and What the F.B.I.’s Options Are

What does the Clinton Foundation have to do with the email inquiry?

Not much. The F.B.I. opened a preliminary investigation into the Clinton Foundation in 2015 after the publication of the book “Clinton Cash’’ by Peter Schweizer, a former fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution. The book asserted that some foreign entities gave money to former President Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation in return for State Department favors when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state. Mrs. Clinton has denied those claims.

During the investigation into the foundation, F.B.I. agents in New York wanted to take more overt steps, like conducting interviews and obtaining subpoenas. Agents had also developed two informants who they hoped could lead to additional information about the foundation’s dealings.

But senior F.B.I. and Justice Department officials were wary of agents making any waves that could affect the election. Although the bar for opening a preliminary investigation is low — it can done on the basis of a public allegation — senior Justice and F.B.I. officials said there was not enough evidence to move the investigation forward. F.B.I. agents working on the case countered that they could not learn if a law was broken if they were not able to exhaust all investigative steps. Senior officials stood firm.

Now from the WSJ:

Secret Recordings Fueled FBI Feud in Clinton Probe

Much of the skepticism toward the case came from how it started—with the publication of a book suggesting possible financial misconduct and self-dealing surrounding the Clinton charity. The author of that book, Peter Schweizer—a former speechwriting consultant for President George W. Bush—was interviewed multiple times by FBI agents, people familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Schweizer said in an interview that the book was never meant to be a legal document, but set out to describe “patterns of financial transactions that circled around decisions Hillary Clinton was making as secretary of state.”

Breitbart was touting the fact that book was "required reading for FBI agents" investigating the Clinton's back in March.

This book was of course written by Peter Schweizer, editor-at-large for Breitbart News with data mining done by another Robert Mercer funded Bannon venture, the GAI.

Robert Mercer was also the source of funding for the movie adaption of the book, Clinton Cash.

What appears to have happened here in my opinion and those of others commenting on the situation is that FBI agents from the NY office — who are not a part of the Clinton server investigation — used the book as a basis for starting an informal inquiry. Using recorded conversation from an unknown (unreported at any rate) individual along with the book, these agents made a case for opening a fullscale investigation but the DOJ prosecutors and FBI higher ups were less than impressed and rebuked the the agents, telling them that they didn't have anything reaching a level that would justify pursuing subpoenas, conducting interviews, etc particularly in such close proximity to the elections.

It's worth noting here that there are cursory inquiries ongoing into the actions of individuals surrounding Trump and that Comey and the FBI as an agency have taken the exact same stance of muting those investigations until after the election.

So what was different here? Did agents from the New York FBI office go rogue and start leaking information to Fox News? A story from veteran investigative reporter Wayne Barrett, published in The Daily Beast suggests something different just as Bret Baier's own words.

Before I wrap up with that, I want to lead with an image. Along with Kellyanne Conway's company and the Robert Mercer funded Cambridge Analytica, the Robert Mercer funded PAC, Keep the Promise I / Make America Number 1, also made substantial payments to two law firms:

Meet Donald Trump’s Top FBI Fanboy

Two days before FBI director James Comey rocked the world last week, Rudy Giuliani was on Fox, where he volunteered, un-prodded by any question: “I think he’s [Donald Trump] got a surprise or two that you’re going to hear about in the next few days. I mean, I’m talking about some pretty big surprises.”

Pressed for specifics, he said: “We’ve got a couple of things up our sleeve that should turn this thing around.”

The man who now leads “lock-her-up” chants at Trump rallies spent decades of his life as a federal prosecutor and then mayor working closely with the FBI, and especially its New York office. One of Giuliani’s security firms employed a former head of the New York FBI office, and other alumni of it. It was agents of that office, probing Anthony Weiner’s alleged sexting of a minor, who pressed Comey to authorize the review of possible Hillary Clinton-related emails on a Weiner device that led to the explosive letter the director wrote Congress.

“The other rumor that I get is that there’s a kind of revolution going on inside the FBI about the original conclusion [not to charge Clinton] being completely unjustified and almost a slap in the face to the FBI’s integrity,” said Giuliani. “I know that from former agents. I know that even from a few active agents.”

Along with Giuliani’s other connections to New York FBI agents, his former law firm, then called Bracewell Giuliani, has long been general counsel to the FBI Agents Association (FBIAA), which represents 13,000 former and current agents. The group, born in the New York FBI office in the early ’80s, was headed until Monday by Rey Tariche, an agent who just retired from the New York FBI office.

When the FBIAA threw its first G-Man Honors Gala in 2014 in Washington, Giuliani was the keynote speaker and was given a distinguished service award named after him. Giuliani left Bracewell this January and joined Greenberg Traurig, the only other law firm listed as a sponsor of the FBIAA gala. He spoke again at the 2015 gala. The Bracewell firm also acts as the association’s Washington lobbyist and the FBIAA endorsed Republican Congressman Mike Rodgers, rather than Comey, for the FBI post in 2013. Giuliani did not return a Daily Beast message left with his assistant.

The first most likley of Bret Baier's sources is Rudy Guiliani himself, who in addition to being a Trump surrogate, is financially benefitting from his association via payments to his firm by none other than Robert Mercer. Understand what I'm saying here folks.

Robert Mercer, who funds Breitbart News, who pays the salary of Steve Bannon, Donald Trump's campaign CEO, who has paid Kellyanne Conway's firm nearly a million dollars this election from a PAC that was later led by David Bossie, who later became Trump's deputy campaign manager and the principal investor in Cambridge Analytica (principal in getting the Brexit referendum passed) which is being used for crazy psyops micro-targeting by the Trump campaign and also funds the GAI (which is essentially a data mining outfit) and also pays Breitbart editor-at-large Peter Schweizer's (author of Clinton Cash) salary and also paid for the movie adaption of Clinton Cash...

Also has on his payroll, a Trump surrogate, Rudy Giuliani, who has all along been the source of information/disinformation about activities within the FBI's NY office and is likely one of two "sources with intimate knowledge" cited by Bret Baier for partially walked-back sensational claims that are at this moment being repeated as gospel by Donald Trump who has in recent months become little more than a mouthpiece for an agenda funded in very large part by Robert Mercer who we can assume is also behind/partnered with Bannon in his efforts to expand his brand of white/European nationalism to Europe (that's another thread).

"It's gonna be Brexit times ten folks!" said the Puppet.

The other likely source for Baier's "reporting" of outlandish "leaks" from the FBI is the real subject of Barret's piece, James Kallstrom, former Assistant Director of the FBI in New York and longtime pal of Guilania.

Last October, after President Obama told 60 Minutes that the Clinton emails weren’t a national security issue, Megyn Kelly interviewed Kallstrom on Fox. “You know a lot of the agents involved in this investigation,” she said. “How angry must they be tonight?” “I know some of the agents,” said Kallstrom. “I know some of the supervisors and I know the senior staff. And they’re P.O.’d, I mean no question. This is like someone driving another nail in the coffin of the criminal justice system.”

When Comey cleared Clinton this July, Kallstrom was on Fox again, declaring: “I’ve talked to about 15 different agents today—both on the job and off the job—who are basically worried about the reputation of the agency they love.” The number grew dramatically by Labor Day weekend when Comey released Clinton’s FBI interview and other documents, and Kallstrom told Kelly he was talking to “50 different people in and out of the agency, retired agents,” all of whom he said were “basically disgusted” by Comey’s latest release.

By Sept. 28, Kallstrom said he’d been contacted by hundreds of people, including “a lot of retired agents and a few on the job,” declaring the agents “involved in this thing feel like they’ve been stabbed in the back.” So, he said, “I think we’re going to see a lot more of the facts come out in the course of the next few months. That’s my prediction.”

Kallstrom, whose exchanges with active agents about particular cases are as contrary to FBI policy as Giuliani’s, formally and passionately endorsed Trump this week on Stuart Varney’s Fox Business show, adding that Clinton is a “pathological liar.”

Kallstrom was interviewed by The Daily Beast and he initially tried to claim that the "hundreds of agents" that he was constantly referencing were all retired. Then he relented and admitted that he was in contact with active agents. Then he changed he tried to reframe his connections again before getting caught up in his own conflicting statements:

Kallstrom adamantly denied he’d ever said he was in contact with agents “involved” in the Clinton case, insisting that he didn’t even know “the agents’ names.” He asked if this story was “a hit piece,” and contended that it was “offensive” to even suggest that he’d communicated with those agents.

When I emailed him two quotes where he made that claim, he responded: “I know agents in the building who used to work for me. I don’t know any agents in the Washington field office involved directly in the investigation.” Later, though he acknowledged that “the bulk” of the agents on the Weiner case are “in the New York office,” even as he insisted that the “locals” he told Pirro would’ve leaked the renewed probe had not Comey revealed it were not necessarily agents.

Kallstrom was also adamant that he was "apolitical" which is hilarious but even if that was the case (and it's not) it turns out that Kallstrom himself has deep ties to Trump:

didn’t mention that a charity he’d founded decades ago and that’s now called the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, was the single biggest beneficiary of Trump’s promise to raise millions for veterans when he boycotted the Iowa primary debate. A foundation official said that Trump’s million-dollar donation this May, atop $100,000 that he’d given in March, were the biggest individual grants it had ever received. The Trump Foundation had contributed another $230,000 in prior years and Trump won the organization’s top honor at its annual Waldorf Astoria gala in 2015.

Kallstrom said he’d have breakfast at the Plaza with his wife and visit with Trump and his kids, who he got to know at an early age. When Trump owned casinos in Atlantic City, he allowed Kallstrom’s organization to hold fundraisers “pro bono” there.

I've excerpted heavily from the Barrett piece because it contains a trove of information and all of it seems equally relevant but of course, I could only reasonable (and under T&C) excerpt a fraction. I highly recommend reading the piece. I will end this with one more excerpt:

It’s clear enough, though, why when Comey sent a note to FBI staff on Friday explaining his decision to inform Congress about the renewed Clinton probe, the scoop about that internal memo went to Fox News. Why Kallstrom gets booked to talked about the Clintons a “crime family.” Why Clinton Cash author Peter Schweitzer, caught in a web of Breitbart and Trump conflicts, would announce on Fox that he was asked in August to sit down with New York office FBI agents investigating the Clinton Foundation (with The New York Times reporting this week that the agents were relying largely on his discredited work when they pitched a fullscale probe).

Fox is the pipeline for the fifth column inside the bureau, a battalion that says it’s doing God’s work, chasing justice against those who are obstructing it, while, in fact, it’s doing GOP work, even on the eve of a presidential election.

I would inject here that they're not really doing the GOP's work so much as the work of Robert Mercer and his cohorts.

Do less...

Sincerely,
Everyone

a reply to: theantediluvian

I'm glad so many people want to keep corruption in our country.

Hillary for prison 2016, we need our wounds to heal.

The more words you need.....

a reply to: EartOccupant

Funny thing though, if there's no YouTube video to post, you have to use WORDS to convey information. When the subject is complex as you know, conspiraciesby their nature often are, it can take more than 3 lines of text.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Speaking Of Puppets..........The Evil Puppet seen here is Also being Manipulated by Another Evil Puppet.........

originally posted by: Christosterone
Do less...

Sincerely,
Everyone

Anything related to the OP or just your typical irrelevant nonsense?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

What's funny about that is that you're repeating a catchphrase promoted and popularized by Trump's own henchmen, Roger Stone Jr, who has been behind DECADES of corrupting American politics. But you know that, right?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Not a Stone fan but I won't turn my head to Hillary's blatant corruption who would actually be sitting at the desk deciding our fate.

By the way, I don't care which party anyone is a part of, if they break the law they need to pay, rules are rules.

So what are you saying? Trump is corrupt because Rudy is the source leaking to fox news about the FBI? Robert mercer pays money to people in the trump campaign so now Trumps a Robert Mercer plant?

When you boil it all down why does any of this matter? I dont care who the source is I care what they are telling us. Rudy would be in a posistion to have inside info from the FBI and why is there anything wrong with that if we are getting info we otherwise wouldn't about investigations into clinton?

Unless I'm missing your point altogether...if so please clarify.

a reply to: theantediluvian

So, I read part 1 as well as this. What is the point? People are connected? What illegal is happening that involves Trump? How is this a conspiracy? Wealthy donor and supporters change who they support when their guy gives up.

You clearly put a lot of time into this, but I don't see where any of that effort paid off. Essentially it's all a vast right-wing conspiracy, or is it a vast alt-right conspiracy?

a reply to: FauxMulder

You're assuming that there's anything accurate about what Guliani and Kallstrom are "leaking" to the media. The NY FBI office seems to be on a political witchhunt based on a book that is full of inaccuracies which is essentially political propaganda paid for by a man who is behind Breitbart and the latest iteration of Trump.

As for the actual statements made:

Some of the statements have been debunked and others it doesn't seem like anyone from the NY office — let alone a Trump surrogate retelling hearsay the week of the election — would even be positioned to comment on such as the outrageous "99% sure the server was hacked by at least 5 governments."

So first and foremost, the information is likely disinformation. The source is horribly biased hearsay at best. Not only wouldn't that hold up in any court anywhere, nobody would even try to present it. Yet it's being foisted on the American people the week of an election in an attempt to influence the outcome of the election? Presented as fact? Repeated over and over by the media and the least informed candidate in modern history?

Secondly, the campaign has been co-opted by an international agenda backed by a shady billionaire. Think that through. One billionaire funding all these things, attempting to get a candidate elected whose top campaign officials are all on his payroll?

If his name was Soros, this site would be in meltdown mode right now.

That's without even discussing what's going on with Cambridge Analytica.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Ok but you're also assuming it is disinfo which it could be but if there wasn't anything serious going on why would Comey reopen the inestigation?

And funny you should mention Soros, I was going to say you put a lot of effort into this thread (excellent job), but I was going to say if you put half as much looking into Soros you would find a lot more to be upset about. I don't see Roberts Mercer tentacles everywhere like Soros.

a reply to: FauxMulder

Or a thread about companies putting millions into Bill's pocket (essentially Hillary's too) while she was secretary of state.

a reply to: theantediluvian

you aren't a paid troll, and you seem intelligent enough, so it kind of begs the question, do you comprehend the illegalities that have come to light with regards to the DNC and Hillary Clinton?

I honestly do get that you hate Trump. Lots of folks do. Hell, a good portion of those who support him don't think he's a really nice guy, but he's not the one under investigation. In fact, all the nutty things he said in the past that made people like you jump on him are kind of playing out right now. Not all, but some.

so if you can break away from the mindset you are ingrained in, I'd love to hear your thought on all this. If you just want to pout and slam Trump, please excuse my interruption.

a reply to: FauxMulder

Ok but you're also assuming it is disinfo which it could be but if there wasn't anything serious going on why would Comey reopen the inestigation?

That question reflects the level of manipulation that is at work. There wasn't an investigation that was "re-opened" at all. What has happened is that during the course of an unrelated investigation, a device was found to possibly contain emails that could be significant to the Clinton email investigation.

They will go through the emails and make a determination (as they should) but even at the time that Comey wrote the letter, he himself had no idea what if anything was among the 650k emails on the laptop and if any of it would be at all significant.

By generating false media coverage like was done with Baier, they're able to conjure up the illusion of an impending scandal. Hell, they didn't even need that. All they needed was a letter from Comey saying that was completely neutral as to whether there was anything of significance in the emails and that was enough to be off to the races and cause a multi-point swing.

And funny you should mention Soros, I was going to say you put a lot of effort into this thread (excellent job), but I was going to say if you put half as much looking into Soros you would find a lot more to be upset about. I don't see Roberts Mercer tentacles everywhere like Soros.

Soros has his tendrils everywhere via his grants and orgs, yes. Soros is but one of a number of oligarchs who use their money to influence politics to a disturbing extent. The Koch Bros of course come to mind. What I find most interesting is how the CT set is sleeping on Mercer.

EDIT to add:

I'm really interested in what's going on with Cambridge Analytica. I'll have to look into that further. Trump is also backed (to a lesser extent) by Peter Thiel, co-founder of Planatir. Also, I didn't fit it into the thread but one of the few other donors to the Make America Number 1 PAC that have come on since it became pro-Trump is Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Maybe the investigation has to do with Bill and Hillary combined worth at close to 200 million dollars. Odd for a couple being in politics for 30+ years.

Bush Sr. is only worth around 30 million and he was in oil for God's sake.

Most presidents are worth well under 100 million. Because most presidents don't sell their influence.