““It’s the oldest question of all, George. Who can spy on the spies?” ”
— John Le Carre, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
Yesterday we posted a lengthy excavation of the wider cultural questions surrounding artistic responses to ideas of espionage, intrigue and the world of, “spy vs spy.”
This was intended to offer a different contextualization of responses to the Mueller Report with emphasis on the odd, if not downright questionable views expressed by Pulitzer Prize winner, Glenn Greenwald specifically, and the “left” generally.
In particular we emphasized Greenwald’s claim that Mueller had access to the “entire apparatus of the US surveillance system” and that as a result the absence of a charge of “collusion” (which does not exist as a crime in the US legal system) was “proof” that no “collusion” had taken place.
Greenwald then asserted that this was in turn proof that the entire saga of “Russia and collusion” had been a scam – a conjob cooked up by the intelligence agencies and abetted by the establishment media.
An interesting claim except, as we pointed out, the ongoing counterintelligence investigation belies Greenwald’s claims and as the Mueller Report states (emphasis added):
“From its inception, the Office recognized that its investigation could identify foreign intelligence and counterintelligence information relevant to the FBI’s broader national security mission. FBI personnel who assisted the Office established procedures to identify and convey such information to the FBI. The FBI’s Counterintelligence Division met with the Office regularly for that purpose for most of the Office’s tenure. For more than the past year, the FBI also embedded personnel at the Office who did not work on the Special Counsel’s investigation, but whose purpose was to review the results of the investigation and to send-in writing-summaries of foreign intelligence and counterintelligence information to FBIHQ and FBI Field Offices. Those communications and other correspondence between the Office and the FBI contain information derived from the investigation, not all of which is contained in this Volume. This Volume is a summary. It contains, in the Office’s judgment, that information necessary to account for the Special Counsel’s prosecution and declination decisions and to describe the investigation’s main factual results.”
Greenwald’s claim, and the claims of his remoras (Jimmy Dore, Kyle Kulinski, and bigger fish like Noam Chomsky) are revealed to be as absurd as we outlined previously.
Additionally take note of how the summary states that the traffic was one way – that is, the Hoovers from counterintelligence, received information from Mueller’s team, summarized it, and passed it on along the food chain but, per the SOP of compartmentilization (as we outlined previously) Mueller and his investigators were kept out of the loop.
This of course is as we explained a standard element of counterintelligence that keeps things on a “need to know” basis and allows for the counterintelligence operatives to dangle information along the rat line, while minimizing potential contamination and maximizing the opportunities for catching their targets.
This in turn highlights the fact that as the counterintelligence investigation is ongoing, we have no idea if there is or is not evidence of “collusion” between Trump or his family and assorted thugs, with the Russians or for that matter other foreign nationals.
Greenwald’s claims are not just factually wrong they represent a serious if not fatal defect in the attitude of the “left” opposition.
The generals, goes an old saying, are always prepared to fight the previous war.
In this case the “left” has its head stuck in the ass of the 1960s and the world has passed them by.
We may never find out what the counterintelligence investigation has or will uncover.
We do not know what has happened but we are certain that Glenn Greenwald sure as fuck doesn’t either.
Update: For a problematic if interesting look at Greenwald and The Intercept see the link below and take note of the following:
“But internally, some employees say Greenwald’s presence undermines the site’s work. “People assume Glenn’s tweets reflect some sort of internal consensus, but the truth is I don’t think there’s a single other person here who agreed with him on Trump/Russia,” says one Intercept staffer. “I’d hope people don’t view us as less legitimate just because of one guy.””