Other than carelessly slinging around scatalogical characterizations of paradisiacal countries in congressional negotiation meetings (**sarcasm off**), Trump doesn’t say things without deliberate intent. So this moment in his interview with the Wall Street Journal, published yesterday while CNN was brewing up a shitholestorm, got my attention:
“A man [FBI agent Peter Strzok] is tweeting to his lover that if [Clinton] loses, we’ll essentially do the insurance policy,” Trump said in The Wall Street Journal interview. “’We’ll go to phase two and we’ll get this guy out of office.’”
“This is the FBI we’re talking about — that is treason,” Trump continued. “That is a treasonous act. What he tweeted to his lover is a treasonous act.”
Trump deliberately used the word “treason” three times in three sentences. (That may be more times than he used the word “shithole” in his congressional meeting yesterday, although Dick Durbin, alone of everyone there, is adamant that he used it “repeatedly.”) Whether Trump has in mind Article III, section 3 of the Constitution, or the broader 18 U.S.C. 792 et. seq., otherwise known as the Espionage Act, which is often conflated with “treason,” I don’t know.
Trump’s opponents accuse him of exaggerating, like they did his tweeting about the “wiretapping” of Trump Tower, which we now know was actually being done. But “treason”? “Espionage”? Really? However, when he accuses FBI agent Strzok of treason (so odd, seems like the sort of Trumpian name-calling the media would be all over like flies on… whatever… but they aren’t), if Trump is thinking about the Espionage Act, which we generally associate with spying or working with a foreign power against the United States, Trump might be thinking about… the Brits.
As we’ve been learning, the creator of the Russia dossier, Christopher Steele, a “retired” MI6 agent, is up to his eyeballs not only in the creation of the dossier (although I think Fushion GPS is being entirely too modest about their role in making this all up), but also in pushing it to the media.
In British court filings, Mr. Steele’s lawyers said that he and Fusion GPS briefed journalists from a range of media outlets, including The New York Times, on his research starting in September 2016.
It could be argued (and certainly will be by the British Government, GCHQ, Fushion GPS, et. al.) that Steele was strictly free-lance. Just a retired MI6 guy. But was he? Reading through the almost impossibly long CTH comment threads, I came upon this:
A Treeper last night was posting about her hubby who had lived in the UK for a long time. Her hubby said that this Christopher Steele wasn’t just any old retired MI6 guy, he was the head of the Russia House which was a BFD, and there is no way he got involved in this without the knowledge/tacit approval of MI6, retired or not.
I also read an article somewhere written by a Brit at least a month ago saying essentially the same thing but adding further that there is no way that this would have happened without MI6 letting the PM know and getting the PM’s approval, and the PM would be kept apprised.
So, if we want to talk foreign interference in our election, we need to stop yapping about Macedonian content farmers and Russian bots and look squarely at the Brits.
Which also comports with what the Russians themselves are telling us:
Christopher Steele story: MI6 officers are never ex: briefing both ways – against Russia and US President
And so, as it turns out, a lot of people are looking squarely at the Brits, at GCHQ. I won’t review all the ways in which GCHQ is turning out to be connected to U.S. intelligence, to the NSA data hub, to Fushion GPS, and all sorts of other things, because it’s time to return to the point:
When Trump says “treason” (which may also include violations of the Espionage Act), he may know whereof he speaks. A foreign power colluding with the DOJ/FBI to harm the United States, specifically to overthrow its duly-elected President. UK Steele and US FBI Strzok.
Treason. No wonder he cancelled London.