British Intelligence Did Spy on Trump Associates Along with the Rest of Obama’s Spy Ring

2
Share

CNN was careful how they framed it, but they revealed Thursday that British and European intelligence shared communications between Trump associates and Russian officials.

British and other European intelligence agencies intercepted communications between associates of Donald Trump and Russian officials and other Russian individuals during the campaign and passed on those communications to their US counterparts, US congressional and law enforcement and US and European intelligence sources tell CNN.

We are to believe this was “routine” and “incidental”. They didn’t target Trump associates, they came upon the information.

The communications were captured during routine surveillance of Russian officials and other Russians known to western intelligence. British and European intelligence agencies, including GCHQ, the British intelligence agency responsible for communications surveillance, were not proactively targeting members of the Trump team but rather picked up these communications during what’s known as “incidental collection,” these sources tell CNN.

It was part of Obama’s five-nation spy ring which he innocuously called the “Five-Eyes”.

The European intelligence agencies detected multiple communications over several months between the Trump associates and Russian individuals — and passed on that intelligence to the US. The US and Britain are part of the so-called “Five Eyes” agreement (along with Canada, Australia and New Zealand), which calls for open sharing among member nations of a broad range of intelligence.

Of course this is to be expected according to CNN. Foreign nations sharing information about a U.S. presidential candidate’s campaign with an opponent is just what is to be expected.

“If foreign intelligence agencies share information with US intelligence, and it’s relevant to the investigation, then of course the intelligence committee will look at it,” a source close to the Senate investigation told CNN.

It was Judge Napolitano who first reported this from three of his sources and caused some questionable outrage on the part of the U.K. officials.

In March, Judge Napolitano revealed that British intelligence shared intel on Trump associates with Barack Obama.

”Three intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command” to conduct the surveillance on Trump, the Judge said.

Obama “didn’t use the NSA, he didn’t use the CIA, he didn’t use the FBI, and he didn’t use the Department of Justice,” Judge Napolitano explained. The former president went to the British intelligence services version of the NSA for the work – the GCHQ.

The GCHQ shares much of the NSA’s vast electronic database of signals intercepts and they would be able to gain access to records of Trump’s phone calls the judge said. It would also mean there are no fingerprints left behind.

Napolitano then added that the sources have informed him that the man who actually ordered the surveillance “resigned three days after Trump was inaugurated.”

While CNN reveals the information in a more modulated voice, there is reason to believe this was done for political purposes. Obama had a spy ring set up, but for what purpose? One purpose we do know about was exposed by Wikileaks and that purpose was to potentially interfere in the French presidential election.

In February, Barack Obama was tied to a five-nation spy ring that included Canada, New Zealand, Great Britain, Australia and the U.S. by Wikileaks.

Central Intelligence Agency documents released by WikiLeaks listed Canada as one of several countries asked to assist the United States while they spied on the 2012 French presidential election.

The documents appear to be 7 pages of classified orders to gather information about each of the candidates, including political strategies and internal communications.

All major French political parties were targeted for infiltration by the CIA’s human (“HUMINT”) and electronic (“SIGINT”) spies in the seven months leading up to France’s 2012 presidential election.

One of the tasking orders paid particular attention to President Sarkozy’s party. They were also very interested in economic intelligence.

To recap, Obama had a five-nation spy ring that collected data on the French election for some purpose. That same ring shared intel on Trump associates communicating with Russians which they say was incidentally uncovered and shared as a routine matter. Judge Napolitano heard they were spying at Obama’s behest.

You decide. One thing is for certain, we will likely never know that truth.

Share

2 COMMENTS

  1. Mostly, your facts are accurate, as usual. Other sources do report the same information. Some others report more detail (ie. lesser importance facts, the timeline, etc.).
    However there is much you’ve written that is not statement of facts, but is statement of your opinion or interpretation of those facts.
    Your tone is not objective, but very slanted, very unsupported by those facts you’ve presented! Seems to me you have attributed motives to certain individuals (unsupported accusations) that seem to be partisan talking-points (if not outright fabrications).
    I do follow your writings for several reasons:
    -hoping you’ll soon follow more closely the tenets of “real” journalism
    -finding good examples to educate acquaintances about the elements of critical thinking and analysis
    -sometimes, just for the amusement-value you can provide
    You are doing sort-of a service, sort-of, I feel.
    However your claim “MISSION STATEMENT We report the news that the media won’t.” is difficult to fathom as I have always been able to find print publications and other websites with “your” information.
    I do applaud the efforts of “citizen journalists” of all ilks!
    I wish you’d review the tenets or elements of journalism, as provided at:
    “poynter.org/2002/guiding-principles-for-the-journalist/1751/”
    “Guiding Principles for the Journalist” – Bob Steele • August 13, 2002
    and
    “ethicaljournalismnetwork.org”
    “Ethical Journalism Network – EJN”
    “The Ethical Journalism Network aims to strengthen the craft of journalism and to promote for the public benefit high ethical standards …”
    and
    “spj.org/pdf/spj-code-of-ethics.pdf”
    “Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics”
    “… statement of abiding principles supported by explanations and position papers that address changing journalistic practices.”

    Keep up the good fight! But strive to do better, making it “the best fight won”.

    • This isn’t a news service. It’s a blog. Why don’t you write to CNN and the other fake news media who are actually calling themselves news services. Poynter is a complete joke by the way and, as for the others, it would be nice if CNN, NBC, NY Times would follow the principles. People know what I’ve put down that is fact or analysis. I very clearly state in the mission statement that we put in analysis, commentary and opinion, mostly from the right perspective.

Comments are closed.