Posted on 09/16/2018 10:50:58 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Actors attempting to entice Donald Trump campaign officials were connected to either the U.S. government or to Hillary Clinton-retained opposition research firm Fusion GPS, or both.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, law enforcement began using a controversial technique to prevent future attacks. Reporters working for the radio podcast “This American Life” compared it to the premise of the 1998 movie, “The Truman Show.” If you haven’t watched that, it’s about a man who unwittingly stars in a complex television show in which all the figures in his life are actors.
“This American Life” No. 387 profiles the sting operation that successfully led to a felony conviction against Hemant Lakhani for selling a shoulder-fired missile to terrorists. Upon his arrest, Lakhani asked, “Where is everyone else?” referring to the numerous players in the conspiracy. His lawyer then broke the news: they were all government agents. Every aspect of the “conspiracy” was provided by the government, including the hotel room where the transaction took place, the fake missile, the fake terrorist, the fake missile supplier, etc.
Like the main character in “The Truman Show,” Lakhani unwittingly starred in an elaborately staged piece of fiction that slowly drew him into committing an overt act that led to his arrest and conviction even though all the other conspirators were simply actors using props and scripts.
“This American Life” notes these “Truman Show” prosecutions have led to several highly publicized arrests and convictions of “terrorists” who were radicalized, financed, and encouraged by federal agents. In some instances, “This American Life” reported, the “terrorists” were simply lonely, low-IQ, near-homeless people seduced by the money and attention the government used to bait them into the crimes.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
An incredibly weak article. Poorly argued, poorly stated poorly theorized.
The more the NeverTrumpers carry this charade on the more they invite the same tactics on themselves
I guess I am a weak reader because I come to a different conclusion about the article. It just holds nothing new that I can see.
.
Rubberized Bovine Excrement!
.
It waa a good article. It documents 5 specific times Trump campaign people were deliberately surrounded by intel community and Clinton campaign people, who tried to entangle them in ANY kind of “Russian” thing.
It also says the Trump people were fully innocent every time, and that they always had no Russian involvment.
I’ve seen a number of variations of this story.
The mystery is why the Trump administration doesn’t force the FBI to hand over documents related to this.
[It also says the Trump people were fully innocent every time, and that they always had no Russian involvement.]
Yep. And the plotters of the Democrat Coup know this 100% to be true.
The article told me things I didn't already know.
General assertions and general denials are all over the Internet, but unless one can find actual facts and details they aren't worth much.
This article brings together enough information to make a case that really hasn't been presented before in detail, so far as I know.
I disagree. If Trump was induced to say something as result of these interactions, then he was induced either to confirm or deny the implication of the allegations. The article must be saying that the only possible acceptable action by Trump would be to stay silent. Otherwise, he was gamed into acting.
The article talks about Mifsud. It states that either Mifsud is or was an American or Allied asset or a Russian asset so there is a 50% chance that Mifsud and his status either supports the article thesis or does not.
Then it talks about Natalie V. The Russian lawyer and makes the claim that if she was at Trump Tower for the purpose that she claimed, she should have been able to offer documents. Well there may be no documents that make or try to make the case that the Russians had dirt on HRC. The author of The article has no way of knowing that.
I am not arguing the correctness of what the article States. I am just saying it makes its case in a fairly weak fashion, and engages in largely the same kind of implied supposition that the other side is continuously engaged in. I already have my own confirmation bias.
There were some similar examples in Minnesota, in regards “gun running”, that might be better ones.
“Actors attempting to entice Donald Trump campaign officials were connected to either the U.S. government or to Hillary Clinton-retained opposition research firm Fusion GPS, or both”
And people like Paul Craig Roberts have been writing about this for over a decade.
Instead of going after real terrorists, for example, the FBI creates them with these frames.
In fact, it appears now that this is all they really do - solving actual crimes is beyond them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.