Discover more from Craig’s Newsletter
The Grand Clinton Conspiracy Theory
What Does the Durham Report Tell Us About the FBI?
If you read The New York Times, you will be led to believe that the Durham report revealed nothing new or significant, and the hardcore anti-Trumpers will continue to live in their own delusional world of Trump-Russia collusion while claiming that the Republican Party lives in “its own universe.” While the Left is busy misleading gullible Americans into thinking that it was no big deal for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to collaborate with the Hillary Clinton campaign and attempt to rig the election, the rest of us in the real world have concerns about the weaponization of the FBI and the war against Donald Trump and his followers.
For years, the sophisticated, educated, and conspiracy theory-averse anti-Trumpers believed that there was validity to the Trump-Russia collusion theory while suggesting that conspiracy theory thinking was a “threat to our democracy.” It turns out that only right-wing conspiracy theories are dangerous. Of course, the Left will censor information and prevent the free exchange of ideas, which runs contrary to the concept of democracy and allowing the people to be introduced to information that helps guide their decisions. Progressives were having a fit because CNN dared to allow Donald Trump to speak on the network and have a townhall. Oh, no! Allowing your political rival to speak is so dangerous. How could CNN permit such a thing? It was interesting that conservatives were considered conspiracy theorists for doubting the Mueller report and investigation, but all along the Clinton campaign was the one creating the conspiracy theory that was adopted by the Left (this was some hardcore psychological operations).
Thanks for reading Craig’s Newsletter! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Probably the most important finding from Special Counsel John Durham’s report was that the FBI had absolutely no basis for opening up the investigation in the first place. There was zero evidence, and when evidence that arose contradicting the narrative of the case, the Bureau ignored it and still assumed collusion (not even speaking to Russia experts who would have certainly said that collusion was unlikely). The “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation was launched based on an Australian diplomat tipping the FBI off to Trump campaign member George Papadopoulos’ claim that Russia had damning information on Hillary Clinton’s emails (he very strongly denied any relationship between Trump’s campaign and Russia), and since Trump allegedly invited Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails (he was not even president yet, so he had no authority to allow this, and it was clearly made in jest during a debate), it was automatically assumed that Trump was working with the Kremlin.
The FBI did not follow its own procedures and initiated the investigation centered on information that was “unverified or uncorroborated” and “hearsay.” It used the Democratic-funded Steele dossier (created by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele) as evidence, but in reality, it was just false allegations made by the Clinton campaign. The FBI did not even try to verify if the allegations were valid, and it continued using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court (FISC) “warrants” to spy on Trump campaign members, such as Carter Page. Those false allegations were presented to the FISC, but because secret FISA warrants are rarely, if ever, refused, the Bureau was able to unconstitutionally surveil Trump’s campaign, without probable cause, many times over (almost every time that the FBI investigates through this method, it is a blank check to violate the Fourth Amendment, which requires public judicial review of the details of a warrant and probable cause).
The FBI overlooked Hillary Clinton’s email scandal and “pay-to-play” scheme (foreign officials got consideration for policies in exchange for donating to the Clinton Foundation). The Clinton Foundation’s investigation was taken far less seriously than the one against the Trump campaign, and it is clear that the FBI was politically biased (and still is). It was also revealed that Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok, who opened the investigation, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s assistant, Lisa Page, were very adamant about Hillary Clinton becoming president and Donald Trump losing the election. The FBI even briefed Clinton on how to prevent foreign influence against the campaign, and it did not show Trump the same courtesy.
Wanting the public to be distracted from her email scandal, which involved her holding and viewing classified documents on a private server when she as the secretary of state, Clinton conspired with members of her campaign to intentionally concoct the false narrative that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia, and this information was passed on to the FBI (recall the Steele dossier). Did the FBI knowingly assist Clinton in this conspiracy? The evidence should speak for itself, but at the very least, you could argue that the Bureau was an unwitting partner.
What happened to Clinton as a result of her lies, manipulations, and attempt to sway the election in her favor? She had to pay $8,000 in fines for “misreporting” campaign funds, with the Democratic Party having to pay out $105,000. Wow, big deal! She got to cheat in the election (she also cheated against Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary), and those were the only consequences. She did not even have to face charges for her email scandal (but Donald Trump may have to face charges for a similar situation). She is either lucky and is able to somehow evade what Trump was not able to avoid (for political reasons), or she is in bed with some powerful people within the ruling class and gets special treatment (but nobody is above the law, right?). Clearly, the “deep state,” and particularly the FBI and Department of Justice (DoJ), wanted Clinton to win, and the evidence points to the Bureau attempting to rig both the 2016 and 2020 elections against Trump.
From the Twitter Files, we learned that the FBI worked very hard to censor information and manipulate the public’s view of Trump in an effort to influence the 2020 election toward Joe Biden, and this is similar to what the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) does in foreign elections. Not only did the Bureau falsely flag the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation while it had an active investigation open on the topic (another government lie), but it also met weekly and monthly with social media companies to gain compliance in censoring information and eliminating unfavorable posts (progressives conveniently skip over the government’s role in this and refer to it as adhering to a private company’s “terms of service”). Twitter was finally pressured by the federal government to remove Trump’s Twitter account altogether (so much for democracy and allowing all political candidates and parties to freely exchange ideas, and if the Left views Trump’s tweets as more threatening than an Iranian leader calling for the extermination of Israel, there is clearly a problem with liberal logic).
The Durham report and earlier statements show that the assertion of Trump-Russia collusion was ridiculous and baseless, but this was all chopped up to “confirmation bias” on the part of the FBI. Was that really the case, though? Democrats will let this one slide because it was a maneuver against their political enemy, and they will argue that it was just a simple mistake. “Corrective measures” were taken, but should this make us feel better? Has the FBI not been responsible for atrocities from president to president? What about the FBI’s slaughter at Waco? What about the entrapment in the Michigan governor kidnapping plot? What about the bulletins labelling people with pro-Trump, pro-gun, and pro-liberty views as domestic terrorists? What about involvement in January 6th, 2021 and the militarized raids? Does it really matter who is in charge of the FBI or what procedures are implemented? If the Bureau has continuously committed heinous acts, with no reason to believe that this will change, is it not time to abolish the FBI, or at least hold it accountable? This is not simply “whataboutism” (as progressives often like to charge any time that they do not want to address their hypocrisies and the deeper connections on issues). These are normal procedures, and this is what the FBI has become. The Bureau is nothing short of a tool of the Democratic Party machine and a secret police force that is waging war against the people.
If you need more evidence of this, look at the whistleblowers who lost their pay, security clearances, and homes because they spoke out about the “politicized rot” in the FBI. Items listed by the whistleblowers included: the FBI’s targeting of conservatives attending school board meetings and Catholic mass, prioritizing of January 6th prosecutions over pursuing child predators, manipulating of data to fit Biden's narrative that Trump supporters are domestic terrorists, and pushing out of Republicans within the Bureau. Apparently, you cannot speak out against the FBI without facing retaliation. If the Bureau is firing, targeting, monitoring, entrapping, and framing people for exposing government tyranny, what does that say about the “land of the free?”
As the debate around Section 702 of FISA heats up, what can we expect? Well, some Republicans have emphasized that they will only reauthorize this section if significant changes are made to the FBI and its handling of investigations. Although allowing for the FBI to surveil individuals (without a warrant) within the United States because they happened to get caught up in an investigation involving a foreign person is clearly unconstitutional, in the end, Section 702 will likely pass unhindered, just like every other time. But hey, at least people are talking about it. If the FBI is allowed to continue acting as a partisan secret police for the Democratic Party, serving the interests of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, we need to seriously consider abolishing it. Although there is little appetite to eliminate what most Americans view as an important and trustworthy institution (television shows like Bones glorify the work of the FBI), the Bureau is actually a threat to the American people. As progressive commentators conveniently ignore the Durham report and continue to mislead their audiences and falsely believe that Trump colluded with Russia, we must determine if we want to hold the FBI accountable. If we collectively disregard the bombshell findings involving the 2016 (and onward) fraud, it will be to our detriment.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
Thanks for reading Craig’s Newsletter! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.