BUT “NOT TO SPY”
by Sharon Rondeau
The Times’s article, promoted by the publication as well as one of its writers, Maggie Haberman, is titled, “F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims.”
The Times’s contention is eerily is similar to a statement made Friday by Barack Hussein Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who told CNN that “They [the Obama admin’s FBI] may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but, you know, the focus here… is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing.”
As this publication reported during the 9:00 p.m. EDT hour on Friday, FNC commentator Sean Hannity opined that The Times and The Washington Post have revealed more about the “top-secret intelligence source,” leaked by individuals in the intelligence community, than anyone else, even those suspecting the identity of the person early on such as Strassel.
On Friday Hannity said that he has known the person’s identity for “more than a week.”
The Times’s article, promoted on Twitter, identifies “the informant” as “an American academic who teaches in Britain.”
In March, prior to the revelation of an FBI “informant” or “mole” from within or outside of the Trump campaign, The Daily Caller reported, in part:
Two months before the 2016 election, George Papadopoulos received a strange request for a meeting in London, one of several the young Trump adviser would be offered — and he would accept — during the presidential campaign.
The meeting request, which has not been reported until now, came from Stefan Halper, a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.
Halper’s September 2016 outreach to Papadopoulos wasn’t his only contact with Trump campaign members. The 73-year-old professor, a veteran of three Republican administrations, met with two other campaign advisers, The Daily Caller News Foundation learned.
In response to The Times’s article in its Twitter timeline, The Post & Email tweeted, “And Barack Obama’s ‘long-form’ birth certificate is authentic.”
Since early 2012, when a former detective working under the authority of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) revealed that his then-six-month probe into the image posted at whitehouse.gov said to be a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s original birth certificate from Hawaii is a forgery, The Times, The Post and all other mainstream media outlets have marginalized the issue, ridiculed the messengers, and toed the line that Obama was “born in Hawaii.”
In its Friday article, The Times stated that Trump “accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without any evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign ‘for political purposes’…”
Neither The Times nor any other outlet has ever possessed “any evidence” that Obama was “born in Hawaii,” as no hospital will confirm the claim and no “documentation” released by the Obama campaign or White House has been proven to be authentic.
In fact, his “short-form” and “long-form” birth certificates, as well as his purported Selective Service registration form, have all been deemed forgeries by a five-year criminal investigation, something the U.S. media has worked assiduously to obscure.
In December 2016, then-Maricopa County Sheriff and current U.S. Senate candidate Joseph M. Arpaio and investigator Mike Zullo said that all of the evidence they accumulated over the 5+ years of the probe, some of which had not been made public through three press conferences, would be turned over to “federal authorities.”
Contrary to an April 27, 2011 White House blog post by then-Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer stating that Obama’s personal attorney, Judith Corley, had arranged by letter to fly to the Hawaii Department of Health to obtain two certified copies of Obama’s original birth certificate, The Times reported on July 2, 2016 that an unidentified individual traveled to Hawaii in an attempt to “find” Obama’s birth certificate.
At the same time, the “paper of record” ridiculed Trump for having been a “nonstop ‘birther,'” meaning that he questioned the public narrative that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Obama’s birthplace is at the heart of whether or not he was constitutionally eligible to serve as president and commander-in-chief. Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires that the chief executive be a “natural born Citizen.”
In addition to lingering questions which Obama’s claimed birth hospital refuses to answer, Obama claims a father who never became a U.S. citizen, which some legal scholars believe was sufficient reason to disqualify him regardless of his birthplace.
On his 2008 campaign website, Obama admitted to having been born with dual citizenship of Kenya and the United States given that his claimed father became a Kenyan citizen once that nation obtained its independence from the Crown in December 1963.
An approved 2010 revision to the Kenyan constitution, promoted by the Obama regime with U.S. taxpayer dollars, allows for anyone whose parent or parents were or are Kenyan citizens to claim the same for himself.
Additional unanswered questions are whether or not Clapper, former CIA Director James Brennan, and former FBI Directors James B. Comey and Robert S. Mueller, III have any knowledge as to the creator(s) of the Obama “document” forgeries.