Sundance on Barr Mueller Letter: No Russian Interference; Illegal Campaign Surveillance

Sundance at Conservative Treehouse has a provocative observation about the Barr Mueller Report Letter, the strongest part of which is this statement:

Those who are skilled in reviewing professionally obtuse legalese verbiage from the government will immediately pick up something. They are not saying the “DNC” was hacked...

He makes the case often cited here that there is no evidence of a hack, just the word of a questionable private Ukrainian source and that references to Russian efforts are disconnected from anything tangible. In addition, after spending months or years scrutinizing the spygate record of testimony and documents made public, Sundance makes a very good case that illegal surveillance of the Trump campaign started in 2015 and that Russiagate is an attempt to cover it up. Enjoy.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/03/25/a-review-of-the-barr-pri...

A Review of the Barr “Principal Conclusion” Notification, Overlaying Three Years of Background Research…
Posted on March 25, 2019 by sundance

… When Mueller’s team began… they had the legal authority to conduct active electronic surveillance on any individual who was within two hops of Carter Page. [So anyone who was in direct contact with Carter Page, and anyone that person was in contact with, and anyone that second person was in contact with.] All of those officials were under surveillance. A typical two-hop Title-1 warrant ends up hitting a network between 900 to 2,500 people.

… The same investigators who initiated the Trump operation in late 2015, through spygate, and into Crossfire Hurricane (July 2016), were the same investigators in May 2017 when Mueller became their boss. That’s three years of active electronic surveillance, intercepts and extraction. Think about it.

… The key point on the Russian collusion/conspiracy aspect is not actually within Barr’s letter, but is really the unwritten 800lb gorilla in the corner of the letter. There was NO actual Russian election interference to speak of. The entire premise was/is absurd.

A Macedonian content farm producing shit memes on social media isn’t exactly a vast Russian election conspiracy. So it is absurd that the predicate for the Special Counsel was to see if Trump was coordinating with irrelevant shit-posting meme providers etc.

The lack of evidence, for a premise that doesn’t exist, leads Robert Mueller to quote in his report: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities”.

How could the Special Counsel find that Russian “actors” hacked into computers without being able to do a forensic audit of the servers from the DNC?

... Notice how this is oddly worded:

”hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democrat party organizations.”

That paragraph could be describing anyone. Those who are skilled in reviewing professionally obtuse legalese verbiage from the government will immediately pick up something. They are not saying the “DNC” was hacked, and we know Podesta was NOT hacked (he was a victim of a phishing password change).

... The next segment is just as priceless when overlayed against what technically is not stated in the first:

”the special counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign”.

Everyone here is projecting Hillary Clinton emails into this statement, but the Clinton emails were never hacked, stolen or released. [There were 30,000 missing Clinton emails that supposedly never surfaced until the Weiner Laptop was discovered.] But the second segment says “these efforts“, and it’s not exactly clear what “these efforts” mean, because nothing in this paragraph makes any sense. What are “these efforts“?

Read it again and see if you can make sense of it.

The key takeaway from this entire “Russian Interference” part, is that there wasn’t actually any Russian interference, so the predicate for Trump to be investigated for colluding or conspiring to do something that technically wasn’t being done is just silly.

And that’s the frustrating part of this entire three years. The Russian Interference narrative was constructed ex post-facto to cover for a political surveillance operation that was targeting candidate Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election. The Carter Page FISA warrant (an insurance policy) was needed as cover for the investigative data trail and time spent by FBI officials enlisted in the surveillance operation.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Roy Blakeley's picture

The Barr summary of the Mueller report does not explicitly say that Russians hacked the DNC. This could be simply unintentional ambiguity, but ambiguity from the Justice Department is rarely unintentional.

I urge everyone to read Barr's summary and the underlying indictments of the IRA employees and Russian intelligence officers. There seems to be intentional ambiguity in those as well.

up
0 users have voted.