Did The Biden-Harris Campaign Collude With Iran?
Sept 22, 2024 17:10:29 GMT -5
Post by J.J.Gibbs on Sept 22, 2024 17:10:29 GMT -5
Did The Biden-Harris Campaign Collude With Iran?
Sunday, Sep 22, 2024 - 04:20 PM
Authored by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke via Truth Over News,
In a joint statement issued on September 18, 2024, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) revealed that Iranian hackers had stolen materials from the Trump campaign and passed some of them on to the Biden-Harris campaign:
“Iranian malicious cyber actors in late June and early July sent unsolicited emails to individuals then associated with President Biden’s campaign that contained an excerpt taken from stolen, non-public material from former President Trump’s campaign as text in the emails.”
This, of course, sounds eerily similar to the story we heard eight years ago, specifically from Hillary Clinton’s campaign director, Robbie Mook, who appeared on CNN on July 24, 2016, to assert:
“What's disturbing to us is that we -- experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these e-mails. And other experts are now saying that the Russians are releasing these e-mails for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump.”
However, there is a significant difference. In one instance, the revelation originates from the ODNI, the FBI, and the CISA. In the other instance, the revelation was fabricated by the Clinton campaign as a dirty trick to tarnish Donald Trump's reputation by portraying him as a Russian agent.
But let us set that aside for a moment. Instead, let us assume that the FBI was unaware that the Russia collusion narrative was a scheme orchestrated by Hillary Clinton and that there was credible information justifying an investigation into Trump and his campaign. What was that credible information?
(For the avoidance of doubt, it should be noted that the FBI had known since at least July 28, 2016, that Hillary Clinton had approved a plan to fabricate a scandal by linking Trump to Putin. (see Figure 1)
Figure 1
The supposedly actionable information that the FBI allegedly relied on to initiate its extensive “enterprise” investigation into Trump, a number of his advisors, and the campaign itself, was a single tip from an Australian diplomat. Contrary to some widely shared narratives, the FBI did not officially depend on the infamous Steele dossier or any other source when opening its Crossfire Hurricane investigation. It was the Australian tip, and it alone.
So, what did the tip entail? Fortunately, the tip was reproduced several years ago, allowing us to examine it for ourselves (see Figure 2). In essence, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer claimed that a Trump advisor, George Papadopoulos, had made a suggestion of a suggestion that Russia might assist Trump by releasing information about Hillary Clinton. Notably, Judge Andrew Napolitano made a very similar claim on Fox News the day before Papadopoulos allegedly informed Downer about it. Even more significantly, Downer’s tip made clear that the information the Russians might release could have originated from publicly available sources. In other words, the tip was not about stolen emails, as the media often falsely asserts, but rather about generic information that may have been accessible to the public regardless.
Figure 2
Let us compile the purportedly incriminating information from the Downer tip and compare it to the data released by the ODNI, the FBI, and CISA regarding Iran and the Biden-Harris campaign.
Trump-Russia:
• Suggestion of a suggestion
• Information may have originated from the public domain
• No evidence that any information was provided to anyone
Biden-Iran:
• Not a suggestion but a fact
• Information was stolen and not public
• Information was provided to the Biden-Harris campaign
The two situations could not be more different. However, in Trump's case, he was subjected to years of fraudulent investigations, while in Biden's and Harris's case, the entire situation has already been swept under the rug, despite the underlying facts being significantly more incriminating.
The key issue here is not whether the Biden-Harris campaign colluded with Iran; we do not have definitive evidence to support that claim. The point is that there never will be an investigation of whether the Biden-Harris campaign colluded with Iran. Instead, the announcement by the ODNI, the FBI, and CISA was directed against Iran. They let the cat out of the bag by asserting, apparently without evidence, and certainly without investigating, that the Biden-Harris campaign’s receipt of the stolen materials was “unsolicited.”
What we are left with is the significant disparity in how federal law enforcement has treated the two situations, which reveals much—if not everything—about the Russia collusion narrative. If the Russia collusion investigation had ever been serious or anything more than a concerted campaign of legal warfare by federal agencies against an unfavored presidential candidate, and later president, there would now be a comprehensive investigation into the Harris campaign. It is the absence of such an investigation that unequivocally proves that the Trump-Russia collusion inquiry was nothing short of treason.
The perpetrators of this treason remain not only unpunished but also continue to disseminate their falsehoods every single night. This includes, first and foremost, Hillary Clinton, who once again propagandized her Russia collusion lies on MSNBC just two nights ago.
link
Sunday, Sep 22, 2024 - 04:20 PM
Authored by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke via Truth Over News,
In a joint statement issued on September 18, 2024, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) revealed that Iranian hackers had stolen materials from the Trump campaign and passed some of them on to the Biden-Harris campaign:
“Iranian malicious cyber actors in late June and early July sent unsolicited emails to individuals then associated with President Biden’s campaign that contained an excerpt taken from stolen, non-public material from former President Trump’s campaign as text in the emails.”
This, of course, sounds eerily similar to the story we heard eight years ago, specifically from Hillary Clinton’s campaign director, Robbie Mook, who appeared on CNN on July 24, 2016, to assert:
“What's disturbing to us is that we -- experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these e-mails. And other experts are now saying that the Russians are releasing these e-mails for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump.”
However, there is a significant difference. In one instance, the revelation originates from the ODNI, the FBI, and the CISA. In the other instance, the revelation was fabricated by the Clinton campaign as a dirty trick to tarnish Donald Trump's reputation by portraying him as a Russian agent.
But let us set that aside for a moment. Instead, let us assume that the FBI was unaware that the Russia collusion narrative was a scheme orchestrated by Hillary Clinton and that there was credible information justifying an investigation into Trump and his campaign. What was that credible information?
(For the avoidance of doubt, it should be noted that the FBI had known since at least July 28, 2016, that Hillary Clinton had approved a plan to fabricate a scandal by linking Trump to Putin. (see Figure 1)
Figure 1
The supposedly actionable information that the FBI allegedly relied on to initiate its extensive “enterprise” investigation into Trump, a number of his advisors, and the campaign itself, was a single tip from an Australian diplomat. Contrary to some widely shared narratives, the FBI did not officially depend on the infamous Steele dossier or any other source when opening its Crossfire Hurricane investigation. It was the Australian tip, and it alone.
So, what did the tip entail? Fortunately, the tip was reproduced several years ago, allowing us to examine it for ourselves (see Figure 2). In essence, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer claimed that a Trump advisor, George Papadopoulos, had made a suggestion of a suggestion that Russia might assist Trump by releasing information about Hillary Clinton. Notably, Judge Andrew Napolitano made a very similar claim on Fox News the day before Papadopoulos allegedly informed Downer about it. Even more significantly, Downer’s tip made clear that the information the Russians might release could have originated from publicly available sources. In other words, the tip was not about stolen emails, as the media often falsely asserts, but rather about generic information that may have been accessible to the public regardless.
Figure 2
Let us compile the purportedly incriminating information from the Downer tip and compare it to the data released by the ODNI, the FBI, and CISA regarding Iran and the Biden-Harris campaign.
Trump-Russia:
• Suggestion of a suggestion
• Information may have originated from the public domain
• No evidence that any information was provided to anyone
Biden-Iran:
• Not a suggestion but a fact
• Information was stolen and not public
• Information was provided to the Biden-Harris campaign
The two situations could not be more different. However, in Trump's case, he was subjected to years of fraudulent investigations, while in Biden's and Harris's case, the entire situation has already been swept under the rug, despite the underlying facts being significantly more incriminating.
The key issue here is not whether the Biden-Harris campaign colluded with Iran; we do not have definitive evidence to support that claim. The point is that there never will be an investigation of whether the Biden-Harris campaign colluded with Iran. Instead, the announcement by the ODNI, the FBI, and CISA was directed against Iran. They let the cat out of the bag by asserting, apparently without evidence, and certainly without investigating, that the Biden-Harris campaign’s receipt of the stolen materials was “unsolicited.”
What we are left with is the significant disparity in how federal law enforcement has treated the two situations, which reveals much—if not everything—about the Russia collusion narrative. If the Russia collusion investigation had ever been serious or anything more than a concerted campaign of legal warfare by federal agencies against an unfavored presidential candidate, and later president, there would now be a comprehensive investigation into the Harris campaign. It is the absence of such an investigation that unequivocally proves that the Trump-Russia collusion inquiry was nothing short of treason.
The perpetrators of this treason remain not only unpunished but also continue to disseminate their falsehoods every single night. This includes, first and foremost, Hillary Clinton, who once again propagandized her Russia collusion lies on MSNBC just two nights ago.
link
