Letter – Harry Reid to James Comey

BJ Marsh asked me Yesterday to most the text of this letter from Democratic leader to then FBI director James Comey (August 2016).

Sorry I forgot, I blame Fridayitis.

For Al in particular, I have come across this letter from Harry Reed, the Leader of the Democrats in the US Senate. I found its contents quite interesting because it summarises what the basis is of the Democrat’s claim to the “unwitting” contact by Trump with the Russians. It also shows just how important the Seth Rich case, and the claim he was responsible for passing the DNC emails to Wikileaks is to the truth. Reeds letter:

HarryReidLetter1

HarryReidLetter2

For Gezza, I have noted your rebuttal of the evidence surrounding the Seth Rich case from his investigator and considered that alongside other comments and have tentatively concluded that Freeman has been got at by the opposing forces. Also, the Rich extended family’s outspoken representative is a Democrat employed media fixer, an has been completely compromised by his bias.
Al, what doe you think of the strength of the case against Trump presented by the Democrats?

Previous Post
Next Post
Leave a comment

15 Comments

  1. I would also add the following from Reuters:

    “A Reuters report detailing how Trump campaign advisers were in contact with Russia during the last 7 months of the campaign admits that there was no evidence of collusion between the two parties to influence the election, dismantling the left’s entire Russian narrative.

    Although presented as another major scoop designed to damage Trump, the article, which is based on intelligence sources, completely vindicates him.
    “Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race, current and former U.S. officials familiar with the exchanges told Reuters.”

    However, the true substance of the story is buried down in paragraph six.
    “The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far,” states the report.
    No collusion between Trump and Russia. Let that sink in.

    The article also highlights how the back channel communications were made with Russia in an attempt to “bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations.”

    In other words, Trump wanted peace with the world’s other nuclear superpower while forging ahead with a joint plan to destroy ISIS.

    How terrible of him.

    Despite no evidence whatsoever having been presented of Trump or anyone on his campaign colluding with Russia to influence the election, the deep state and the Democratic establishment is intensifying its effort to portray Trump as illegitimate.”
    Well, in the end you have to believe in what you want to believe. Me? The people of the USA elected their President warts and all and he should be allowed to put his policies on which he was elected in place, like in all democratic countries. The failure of the Democratic side to accept the people’s decision is an indictment on their closed minds.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  May 20, 2017

      Here is the full text of the letter frm Paul Joseph Watson, published on Alex Jones’s Prison Planet website.

      “Reuters : Thu May 18, 2017 | 1:43pm BST
      Exclusive: Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians – sources

      By Ned Parker, Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel | WASHINGTON
      Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race, current and former U.S. officials familiar with the exchanges told Reuters.

      The previously undisclosed interactions form part of the record now being reviewed by FBI and congressional investigators probing Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election and contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

      Six of the previously undisclosed contacts described to Reuters were phone calls between Sergei Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the United States, and Trump advisers, including Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, three current and former officials said.

      Conversations between Flynn and Kislyak accelerated after the Nov. 8 vote as the two discussed establishing a back channel for communication between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations, four current U.S. officials said.

      In January, the Trump White House initially denied any contacts with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign. The White House and advisers to the campaign have since confirmed four meetings between Kislyak and Trump advisers during that time.

      The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far. But the disclosure could increase the pressure on Trump and his aides to provide the FBI and Congress with a full account of interactions with Russian officials and others with links to the Kremlin during and immediately after the 2016 election.

      The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

      Flynn’s lawyer declined to comment. In Moscow, a Russian foreign ministry official declined to comment on the contacts and referred Reuters to the Trump administration.

      Separately, a spokesman for the Russian embassy in Washington said: “We do not comment on our daily contacts with the local interlocutors.”

      The 18 calls and electronic messages took place between April and November 2016 as hackers engaged in what U.S. intelligence concluded in January was part of a Kremlin campaign to discredit the vote and influence the outcome of the election in favour of Trump over his Democratic challenger, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

      Those discussions focused on mending U.S.-Russian economic relations strained by sanctions imposed on Moscow, cooperating in fighting Islamic State in Syria and containing a more assertive China, the sources said.

      Members of the Senate and House intelligence committees have gone to the CIA and the National Security Agency to review transcripts and other documents related to contacts between Trump campaign advisers and associates and Russian officials and others with links to Putin, people with knowledge of those investigations told Reuters.

      The U.S. Justice Department said on Wednesday it had appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate alleged Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential campaign and possible collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia. Mueller will now take charge of the FBI investigation that began last July. Trump and his aides have repeatedly denied any collusion with Russia.

      ‘IT’S RARE’
      In addition to the six phone calls involving Kislyak, the communications described to Reuters involved another 12 calls, emails or text messages between Russian officials or people considered to be close to Putin and Trump campaign advisers.

      One of those contacts was by Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian oligarch and politician, according to one person with detailed knowledge of the exchange and two others familiar with the issue.

      It was not clear with whom Medvedchuk was in contact within the Trump campaign but the themes included U.S.-Russia cooperation, the sources said. Putin is godfather to Medvedchuk’s daughter.

      Medvedchuk denied having any contact with anyone in the Trump campaign.

      “I am not acquainted with any of Donald Trump’s close associates, therefore no such conversation could have taken place,” he said in an email to Reuters.

      In the conversations during the campaign, Russian officials emphasized a pragmatic, business-style approach and stressed to Trump associates that they could make deals by focusing on common economic and other interests and leaving contentious issues aside, the sources said.

      Veterans of previous election campaigns said some contact with foreign officials during a campaign was not unusual, but the number of interactions between Trump aides and Russian officials and others with links to Putin was exceptional.
      “It’s rare to have that many phone calls to foreign officials, especially to a country we consider an adversary or a hostile power,” Richard Armitage, a Republican and former deputy secretary of state, told Reuters.

      FLYNN FIRED
      Beyond Medvedchuk and Kislyak, the identities of the other Putin-linked participants in the contacts remain classified and the names of Trump advisers other than Flynn have been “masked” in intelligence reports on the contacts because of legal protections on their privacy as American citizens. However, officials can request that they be revealed for intelligence purposes.

      U.S. and allied intelligence and law enforcement agencies routinely monitor communications and movements of Russian officials.

      After Vice President Mike Pence and others had denied in January that Trump campaign representatives had any contact with Russian officials, the White House later confirmed that Kislyak had met twice with then-Senator Jeff Sessions, who later became attorney general.

      Kislyak also attended an event in April where Trump said he would seek better relations with Russia. Senior White House adviser Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, also attended that event in Washington. In addition, Kislyak met with two other Trump campaign advisers in July on the sidelines of the Republican convention.

      Trump fired Flynn in February after it became clear that he had falsely characterized the nature of phone conversations with Kislyak in late December – after the Nov. 8 election and just after the Obama administration announced new sanctions on Russia. Flynn offered to testify to Congress in return for immunity from prosecution but his offer was turned down by the House intelligence committee.

      (Additional reporting by John Walcott in Washington, Natalia Zinets and Alessandra Prentice in Kiev and Christian Lowe in Moscow: Editing by Kevin Krolicki and Ross Colvin)”

      So the problem seems to be that after 17 Intelligence agencies concluded it was likely Russian Intelligence had interfered in the election, & the Trump team had denied any contacts from members of their team with Russian officials & people linked to Putin, there were actually contacts. Now I await disclosures from the investigations.

      Reply
  2. High Flying Duck

     /  May 20, 2017

    That is a fascinating letter in many ways.

    The letter uses media reports to build its case, which is quite incredible.

    “The evidence of a direct connection…continues to mount” (although to date no-one has been able to point to any evidence at all, and the letter adds nothing substance.)

    “Has been well documented by many news organisations” – these mainly quoting Democrats and unnamed sources creating a perfect circular argument.

    He even uses the line “It has been reported that your agency is investigating…” to ask his agency to investigate!

    All this leads to the final “series of disturbing reports…” (none specified and no actual evidence) to make the case.

    The letter sounds impressive without offering anything substantive whatsoever.

    It appears to be more a publicity piece to keep the media attention going.

    The Seth Rich thing is interesting and difficult to decipher as it is wrapped up in the whole Clinton conspiracy theory and as you say – both sides of the narrative are hopelessly compromised.

    And on the circus goes…

    Reply
  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  May 20, 2017

    As to the question posed in the post I have no opinion except that there appears to be very little substantive evidence of anything other than veiled unsupported allegations by parties with clear axes to grind.

    Reply
  4. Gezza

     /  May 20, 2017

    As to Wheeler and his claim Seth Rich was involved in leaking the DNC emails to Wikileaks, so was murdered by the “Deep State” there is no credible reason given why he should have done so, and absolutely no evidence at all that he did. Wheeler, on the other hand, appears to be a bona fide fantasist, among other dubious attributes.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Seth_Rich

    Reply
    • Brown

       /  May 20, 2017

      Seth Rich isn’t talking to anyone and that suits who? There’s a bit of a trail of corpses like his and one could be forgiven for thinking something was not quite right. We don’t know the truth but I wouldn’t be surprised if “incidents” were arranged. There is a lot at stake and very powerful people are involved.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  May 21, 2017

        http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp
        Ah yes. The Clinton Body Count. Add him to your list. There’s no end to this list & it never matters to conspiracy theory fans how often the ones they all know about have been debunked.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  May 21, 2017

          Alas, there will always be the gullible who believe that the Clintons somehow got away with being serial killers on a massive scale*, even organising people to have heart attacks and such things.

          *BYO number, according to which version you believe 😀

          Reply
        • High Flying Duck

           /  May 22, 2017

          To be fair Gezz, if Snopes had published anything different they all would have been swimming with the fishes…those Clintons take no prisoners.

          Reply
    • Do you not think that the CIA has ever murdered it’s own citizens?

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  May 22, 2017

        I don’t know trav. They’ve murdered plenty of other countries’ citizens, so I don’t see why not. Who are you thinking of specifically?

        Reply
  5. Alan Wilkinson

     /  May 21, 2017

    One last point, if the media reports are accurate about their sourced it is quite clear there is a conspiracy to leak within the high officials and ex officials in the intelligence agencies.

    That is an intervention that is much more seruous, illegal and damaging than anything the Russians can contrive.

    Reply
  6. David

     /  May 21, 2017

    So a Senator thinks that despite 10 months of investigations by intelligence agencies having turned up no evidence that they really should have another look because there have been lots of partisan reporting quoting annonymous intelligence sources that there is evidence of something. Logically if these leakers want to do in Trump why have they not just provided this evidence to the DOJ instead of the Washington Post, the letter makes no sense.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  May 21, 2017

      Harry Reid’s letter is a summary of scurrilous gossip & I agree with the criticisms of it above. But is it the reason the FBI investigation began? I don’t know. Al’s right though. Whatever people think of Trump these leaks from officials have effectively trashed the security, the integrity & the reputation of not just the FBI but the US intelligence community.

      I’m not convinced there’s a Deep State coup going on here. I think there’s every chance this is no more than a deep seated personal antipathy towards Trump by Democratic-aligned FBI officials – because they believe he is a thick, egotistical, loose-lipped, chump who shouldn’t be allowed near the levers of power & the national security apparatus. His team officials who failed to declare their contacts with the Russians, looking back, were naive & contributed to the mess by at first denying them. They actually did have a reasonably sensible rationale. Although the Democrats can’t see it, they’ve actually damaged the Obama administration, maybe more than the Trump one. And the msm really doesn’t care.

      Reply
      • Good post Blazer! I agree with your approach. I guess it will all come out in the wash or is that flush?

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s