An FBI informant in the Trump campaign? (3)

Following up on Kim Strassel’s Wall Street Journal’s columns on the FBI spy in the Trump campaign, Andrew McCarthy follows up in his NR column “Did the FBI have a spy in the Trump campaign?” Taking advantage of the unlimited space available online, McCarthy gives the necessary background to frame the question.

McCarthy orients his column on this August 2017 testimony of Glenn Simpson to the Senate Intelligence Committee (emphasis supplied by McCarthy): “Essentially, what [Christopher Steele] told me was [the FBI] had other intelligence about this matter from an internal Trump campaign source, and that — that they — my understanding was that they believed Chris at this point — that they believed Chris’s information might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing, and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump campaign.”

After deliberating over the evidence, Andy comments: “When Simpson testified that Steele told him the FBI had a human source, I think Simpson meant exactly what that testimony implied: that someone from the FBI told Steele in August 2016 — while the investigation was heating up, while the FBI was ramping up its efforts in preparation for seeking surveillance warrants from the FISA court — that the Bureau had an informant.”

Conclusion: “Christopher Steele, the former British spy with extensive British intelligence and FBI connections, told his friend Glenn Simpson that the FBI had penetrated the Trump campaign with a ‘human source’ who was helping corroborate the dossier. There seems to be more corroboration for this assertion than for the sensational allegations in Steele’s dossier.”

Quotable quote: “By now, [House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin] Nunes has learned that if he is catching flak, he is over the target.”

NOTE: Stay tuned for something from Paul Sperry if the intriguing tweet below is a preview of coming attractions in the New York Post, as it may be.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses