Unraveling of the cover up of the FBI and intel community rigging the election

Michael Goodwin:

...

The second Watergate phrase that commands our attention now is “The coverup is worse than the crime.”

That’s because we are on the cusp of the coverup phase of what the FBI, and perhaps the CIA and others, did to influence the outcome of the 2020 election. Predictable denials of “Nothing to see here” come despite clear proof that agents interfered with the First Amendment rights of the American public, and not just on Twitter.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said agents warned him about “Russian disinformation” before the election. Those warnings came in weekly meetings FBI agents had in San Francisco with the Big Tech firms and some reportedly mentioned Hunter Biden. It remains an open question to what extent free speech was infringed on by government minders across the media ­landscape.

Thanks to Elon Musk’s opening of Twitter’s files, we know the FBI had scores of agents monitoring that site’s users and directing compliant employees to ban certain tweets or restrict their reach. Agents also demanded the names and other personal information Twitter had on those users, so additional surveillance, possibly without court orders, likely followed.

The Post report that at least 12 former agents were on the Twitter payroll, including former FBI general counsel James Baker, depicts a too-cozy relationship that turned Twitter into what one independent journalist calls a “subsidiary” of the bureau.

Other reports say numerous former agents held jobs at other social media firms, suggesting a sinister revolving door that made the firms cat’s-paws for government snooping.

Another event in the 2020 election that is still shrouded involves the infamous letter signed by 51 former intelligence officers saying The Post report “had all the earmarks of Russian disinformation.” Naturally, the odious John Brennan, head of the CIA when Biden was vice president, had a hand in the scam.

It’s certainly no coincidence that the letter, which allowed Biden to accuse Trump at a debate of using false information, reflects the same talking points the FBI had made to Twitter. It specifically urged company officials to beware of Russian disinformation about Hunter Biden, especially “hacked” materials.

One of those warnings apparently came just hours before The Post’s first story on the laptop, and may have involved communication between agents and Hunter Biden’s lawyer.

Nor is it a coincidence that, while it was issuing such warnings, the FBI had in its hand for 10 months Hunter’s actual computer that contained all the incriminating information about Joe Biden.

Therefore, one possibility that must be considered is that the FBI knew The Post report was accurate, and set out to make it toxic by specifically warning that anything involving the president’s son would be disinformation and should be suppressed, which is exactly what Twitter and Facebook did.
...

Goodwin goes on to point out that unlike Watergate we cannot expect the opposition party, the Democrats, in this case, to want to get to the truth of the rigging, nor can we expect the mainstream media to be as vigorous in seeking the truth as they were in Watergate.  They seem to be doing their best to ignore the evidence revealed by the Twitter files.  And does anyone expect the Garland DOJ to act on this evidence of election rigging?

They should be held accountable by Congress, law enforcement and the voters.