Did the FBI spy on the Trump campaign back in 2016? If so, why? Was it politically motivated? All of these questions need to be mulled over by those in Washington in order to figure out exactly what happened.
However, Sharyl Attkisson — host of Sinclair Media Group’s “Full Measure” — thinks she has some idea. In a “fractured fairytale” she wrote for The Hill, she explained just why the FBI targeted Donald J. Trump.
“Once upon a time, the FBI said some thugs planned to rob a bank in town. Thugs are always looking to rob banks. They try all the time. But at this particular time, the FBI was hyper-focused on potential bank robberies in this particular town,” she wrote. “The best way to prevent the robbery — which is the goal, after all — would be for the FBI to alert all the banks in town. ‘Be on high alert for suspicious activity,’ the FBI could tell the banks. ‘Report anything suspicious to us. We don’t want you to get robbed.’
“Instead, in this fractured fairytale, the FBI followed an oddly less effective, more time-consuming, costlier approach,” she continued. “It focused on just one bank. And, strangely, it picked the bank that was least likely to be robbed because nobody thought it would ever get elected president — excuse me, I mean, because it had almost no cash on hand. (Why would robbers want to rob the bank with no cash?)”
Attkisson noted that this presidential campa– err, sorry, bank — “happened to be owned by a man who was hated inside and outside the FBI.” To prevent the robbery, agents compiled a list of employees they thought likely to help robbers.
“These particular bank employees, the FBI said, were chosen because they worked long ago with customers who might have known bank robbers in the past — maybe not the particular robbers planning a bank robbery this time, but different people who knew people who were thought to have robbed banks in the past … or, perhaps, people who thought of robbing banks at some point but never got around to it,” Attkisson continued.
“Mind you, these targeted bank employees had never served time in prison, never been convicted of anything, never even been charged with a crime. If the FBI had just gone to them and said, ‘Hey, we think some people are going to rob this bank and we’ve got our eye on you, too,’ the bank robbery probably would be avoided. Everybody would be watching out for the robbers.
“Instead, the FBI secretly sent at least one spy — er, ‘informant’ — to commingle with the bank employees and get info. Yes, you are thinking, it would seem to make a lot more sense to spy on the would-be robbers than their intended victims. But the FBI chose to spy on the victims. You know, for their own good.”
The FBI’s “informant” found some things suspicious and the Bureau decided it was time for wiretapping and surveillance, in addition to a battery of leaks to the media. “And so, while all this was going on, the robbers robbed the bank,” Attkisson noted.
“Despite all the media innuendo, the secret surveillance and the spies/informants, the FBI said the robbers made off with a lot of cash. Even though the bank didn’t have much cash.
“Afterward, the FBI stepped up its investigation of the bank employees. It couldn’t find solid proof the employees had anything to do with any bank robbery but claimed they were present a couple of times when the robbers cased the joint, so they must have known a robbery was going to happen. The owner must have known, too, the FBI concluded.”
“In the end, the FBI held out hope that the townsfolk wouldn’t focus on the idea that all the FBI’s hard work and planning to supposedly protect the town’s banks only resulted in the utter failure of its stated mission: The bank got robbed, the cash would never be recovered, and the robbers would never serve time. Yet, some of the bank employees might — not for the robbery but for that other stuff,” Attkisson said.
“The moral of the story: It’s a weird way to prevent a bank robbery.
“On the other hand, if the FBI’s real goal — in this fractured fairytale — was to frame the hated owner of the bank and his employees, it all makes sense.”
Ouch. It’s a bit early to jump to that conclusion — but then again, this is just a “fairytale,” right?
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.