The CIA primarily leaks PR spin to the Washington Post. The FBI primarily leaks PR spin to the New York Times; and the State Dept. primarily leaks PR spin to CNN. This narrative distribution model is the one constant in an ever changing universe.
Cue the audio visual… Obviously the prior Washington Post effort to conflate the Durham investigation with the Horowitz investigation didn’t get the desired result. As a consequence it only took a few days before the Washington Post was back at it (Matt Zapotosky and Devlin Barrett again) to try obfuscation 2.0; this time with Joseph Mifsud.
For three years the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN have sold the FBI claim that Professor Joseph Mifsud was a Russian operative passing information about Clinton’s emails to George Papadopoulos.
That essential point underpins their defense of the predicate for the CIA and FBI to open the July 31st investigation of the Trump campaign. Again, for three years Joseph Mifsud was sold as a Russian operative; working on behalf of Russian interests.
That “Mifsud is a Russian asset” claim is the fulcrum of Crossfire Hurricane. Mifsud has to be a Russian asset, or else… George Papadopoulos talking to Australian Diplomat Alexander Downer about Mifsud is simply political gossip without merit, value or bearing.
The key point is Mifsud has to be a Russian operative in order for all of the downstream FBI activity to be justified. If Mifsud ain’t Russian, the CIA and FBI have a problem.
It doesn’t matter if Mifsud is Maltese, Taiwanese, Sicilian, Italian, British, Canadian, Chinese, or a half-breed Congolese migrant from Morocco… for the CIA and FBI justification to stick Professor Joseph Mifsud has to be a Russian operative.
Yet for some reason the PR outlet for the CIA and FBI are spending an inordinate amount of time trying to say Mifsud isn’t an American intelligence asset. A ridiculous amount of energy spent on a claim that no-one has ever made. The question remains: Is Joseph Mifsud a Russian Operative?
If no, the CIA and FBI have a world of sh!t on their hands. Period.
But the intelligence agencies said the professor was not among their assets, the people said. And Durham informed Horowitz’s office that his investigation had not produced any evidence that might contradict the inspector general’s findings on that point. (more)
No sh!t.. !! Mifsud isn’t “a U.S. intelligence asset”… and caterpillars never ever wear brown boots…. What’s the point?
No-one has ever said Mifsud was a U.S. intelligence asset. However, for three years the Washington Post, New York Times and CNN have claimed Mifsud was a Russian intelligence asset.
Are these outlets now denying that point?
Or is this media group trying to distract people from remembering their claim of Mifsud being a Russian asset, by shifting the story to disprove something no-one ever claimed… so they don’t have to admit they told a false story for three years?
The problem the Washington Post, New York Times and CNN has is that we do not forget their claims. If Mifsud is not a Russian asset then the primary evidence sold by the FBI and their complicit media -to justify the FBI origination- was all a bunch of horse-pucky.
ABOVE (L-R) Joseph Mifsud, Boris Johnson and Prasenjit Kumar
If, as FBI Director James Comey and the FBI investigators have claimed, Joseph Mifsud was a Russian asset… then every intelligence agency in the Western Intelligence Alliance has been compromised…. including our own State Department who invited Mifsud to lecture in Washington DC in January 2017; right before he “disappeared.”