On the perceived bias within the Special Counsel team investigating the President. Trey Gowdy and Jim Jordan’s questioning period stood out to me as the most riveting and just downright captivating. This is not because both men are extremely intellectual, passionate and typically characterized as truth-seekers, but because the picture they painted when deconstructing the newest Peter Strzok revelations made me realize the fundamental truth about the entire investigation lies in the Trump-Russia dossier.
Let’s go back to March 2017 when President Trump began to tweet about former President Barrack Obama illegally wiretapping him. The media ridiculed him and widely denied these allegations. I even mentioned in a previous podcast that it was extremely strange that the media seemed to be offended by these claims and took it upon themselves to denounce them. It eventually came out that the claims were, in essence, true. It was shortly thereafter revealed that during the execution of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant, Pres. Trump’s conversations were being picked and retained up by the FBI.
So why does this matter? Well, because of the ‘F’ in FISA. This warrant is meant to target foreign subjects, NOT American. There is a fundamental difference between how the government acknowledges a citizen’s constitutional rights and a non-citizens rights. It should be noted that when a US citizen’s communication is picked up during the execution of a FISA warrant, it is inadmissible in court since they are inherently not the target of the surveillance.What I suspect occurred was that the Bureau utilized a FISA warrant as a way to subtly, and illegally, obtain confidential communication from an American citizen in order to build a case against him. A bold claim, but a theory nonetheless.
We are just getting warmed up– stay with me. The interesting part of this story comes to fruition when we consider the application to obtain a FISA warrant. For those of you who are not familiar with how warrants work, let me briefly explain. In order to obtain a warrant, law enforcement personnel must complete an application. This application contains the justification and rationale for why the warrant is being requested. Once the application is complete, it is brought before a judge who determines whether to grant it or not.
So what was in the application? What information was used in order to obtain a FISA warrant? The answer to these questions could either make or break the entire Trump-Russia investigation and when Rep. Jim Jordan asked Rosenstein, he was unable to answer. Obviously this doesn’t mean the answers given prove criminal behavior and circumvention of the Constitution, but it does raise the proverbial eyebrow.
Let’s go back to January 10, 2017 when BuzzFeed published the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, or as some know it, the Steele dossier. Within the dossier were a plethora of baseless, salacious, and unverified claims that were put together and paid for by the Clinton campaign. To give you an idea of how outrageous the claims were, I would suggest to you that you would find similar headlines in the National Enquirer. This was essentially opposition research– a common tactic used against political adversaries. The ethical and potential legal question arises when you realize that the Clinton Campaign hired a former British MI6 operative, Christopher Steele, to obtain this information– some may say that is collusion, but that’s a whole other story. After a myriad of bombshell revelations it is suggested, though not confirmed, that the FBI also paid for the research against Trump. Why would they do this? It is my theory– a theory that can only be confirmed with a few good men persistently seeking the truth– that they did so in order to utilize the dossier in their application for the FISA warrant.
This, folks, is something that should send a shiver down your spine. If this theory is correct, we could be looking at the incestuous and immoral fornication between a fundamentally apolitical federal law enforcement entity and a political party. This theory does not find it’s origin in a malicious place; instead, it originates from a place of healthy skepticism, concern, and a hunger for the transparent and whole truth.
The Truth Lies in the Dossier.