CIA Fake Intel Reports on Trump-Russia Collusion Evidence of Deep State Corruption

“Contrary to what’s been said about the Obama presidency, he possesses a record of success in his creation of an intelligence community that’s become as complicit with the globalist Democrats as the majority of members of the U.S. news media. In fact, it’s been shown that in certain situations a U.S. agency such as the CIA will obtain the cooperation of foreign spy agencies to go after an American who is running for president as a Republican. Democrats appear to despise the United States while they passionately embrace a New World Order.” – Jim Kouri

Whenever questioned about proof that President Donald Trump colluded with the Russian government to “steal” the presidency from Hillary Clinton, one of the Democrats — and their news media cohorts — favorite talking points is that the U.S. intelligence community’s secret probe revealed the Trump campaign’s culpability.

They will say that secret documents revealed that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, according to Democratic Party officials. Intelligence agencies also claimed they’ve identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with hacked emails from the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta.

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected. That’s the consensus view,” according to the Washington Post, a newspaper with a reputation of printing fake news denigrating President Trump.

“But without the public actually reading these secret reports, how can they possibly know what occurred during the 2016 election cycle?” asks Carlton Hampt, a former police intelligence analyst. “While every move Trump makes is dissected by the denizens of the nation’s newsrooms, very few covered a story that blew the whistle on corruption within the intelligence community during the Obama administration. These intel operatives were part of the emerging ‘Deep State’ that now harasses the new administration, its supporters and its defenders,” said Det. Lt. Hampt (Ret.).

The story ignored by news organizations would have angered most clear-thinking Americans: there were a number of U.S. intelligence officers during the fierce presidential race who blew the whistle on President Obama playing loose and fancy free with reports on  his “war on extremism” that should have not only outraged reporters and news editors, but opened the door to the appointment of a real special prosecutor.

Unfortunately, since it was a Democratic president with a leftist political philosophy and a “blame America first” mentality, the nation’s purveyors of information ignored the story or relegated the reports to the back pages of newspapers. And to this day, the “Magnificent 50” intelligence analysts have not seen their loyalty to the U.S. Constitution and to the American people even acknowledged.

The more than four dozen U.S. intelligence analysts formally filed complaints that their honest intelligence evaluations regarding the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and al-Qaida’s branch Al Nusra Front in Syria were altered by superiors to prop up President Barack Obama’s false proclamations that he and his “national security team” are winning the war.

As previously reported in the Conservative Base, Fox News’ Chief Intelligence Correspondent Catherine Herridge was informed by her anonymous but reliable source, who is an associate of the CENTCOM intelligence analysts, that they were instructed to avoid negative reports. In fact, they received two emails saying the analysts needed to “cut it out” and “toe the line,” when submitting reports.

In an earlier report published by the Conservative Base, it was reported that some of the intelligence community’s top analysts informed the Pentagon’s official watchdog that their reports have been systematically edited to backup President Obama’s — and his national security team’s — false narrative in which they claimed the air campaign against ISIS was more successful than it actually was.

An example of this alleged fraud was the sworn testimony of General Lloyd Austin, commander of the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Gen. Austin testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that a multi-million dollar military program that was supposed to train a large number of Syrian rebels — about 1,000 was the number circulated by the White House — to fight ISIS resulted in producing an embarrassing four or five anti-ISIS fighters for front lines.

According to the general’s testimony, American taxpayers are pouring an estimated $9 million per day on the war against ISIS since August 2014 and we have only Obama’s almost constant self-congratulations and amateur comedy act poking fun at those who point out the abysmal results of his foreign policy in the Middle East.

Two of the intelligence analysts assigned to the U.S. Central Command, or CENTCOM, wrote an official complaint and sent it to the Defense Department’s inspector general in July accusing their superiors of doctoring up their reports to make it appear that the Obama administration is winning against ISIS. Since then, more than 50 analysts given their own complaints in the hopes that someone in the U.S. government takes action. Some of those 50 analysts are officially employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and others are contractors.

Their complaints accuse their superiors that at times key elements contained in their intelligence reports were removed. They said that in the end an intelligence assessment did not reflect the analysts’ conclusions.

Unfortunately, the reports by Fox News’ Catherine Herridge, the Conservative Base and other news and commentary publications aren’t the whole story of deception and fraud by intelligence officials and news editors. The complaints go far beyond alleged altering of reports. Some of the complaints have to do with accusations that some senior intelligence leaders at CENTCOM created an unprofessional and hostile work environment.

One source who is very familiar with the contents of one of the written complaints sent to the inspector general claims that the word “Stalinist” was used to describe officials overseeing CENTCOM’s intelligence analysis.

“Although the analysts should be praised for not only coming forward as whistleblowers, but they should also be congratulated for blowing the whistle in a mature and constructive manner. This is one of the worst allegations of government corruption I’ve heard about since the days of Richard M. Nixon and Watergate,” said former military intelligence operative and police detective unit commander Franklyn Lovell, Jr.

“There’s only one problem: the reporters in the early 1970s despised Nixon and were more than happy to bash him, but the news media today loves Obama and although they will publish or air negative stories about him, they don’t want to see him fail. In fact, I will bet that these reporters already wrote their ‘comeback kid’ news stories in anticipation that nothing will come of any of the scandals in the Obama administration,” said Lovell.