By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe asserted that Donald Trump’s actions raise serious questions about his relationship with Russia, though not necessarily as a formally recruited asset. McCabe cited Trump’s public admiration for Vladimir Putin, questionable approach to the Ukraine conflict, and willingness to negotiate with Russia even at the expense of US interests as significant concerns. These behaviors, McCabe argued, warrant further investigation into potential compromises or undue influence from Russia. The lack of investigation into pro-Trump influencers spreading pro-Russia narratives further fuels such concerns.
Read the original article here
Donald Trump, a de facto Russian asset, is a claim made by a former FBI official he fired. This assertion, while controversial, highlights a pattern of behavior that raises serious concerns. The sheer volume of evidence suggesting a close relationship between Trump and Russian interests, coupled with his actions while in office, fuels this narrative.
This isn’t merely speculation. The claim originates from a high-ranking official within the FBI, someone directly involved in investigating these matters, lending significant weight to the accusation. His dismissal from the FBI further adds to the sense of a potential cover-up, suggesting a deliberate attempt to silence dissent and suppress information.
The claim goes beyond mere suggestion. It asserts that Trump’s actions consistently aligned with Russian interests, extending across various points in his career, long before his presidential bid. This suggests a long-standing and possibly pre-existing relationship with Russian entities, making his presidency appear less of a coincidence and more a calculated outcome.
This isn’t about partisan politics; it’s about national security. The implications of a U.S. president acting as a de facto Russian asset are profound and potentially devastating. The access to classified information, the influence on foreign policy decisions, and the potential for compromising national secrets all pose immense risks to the United States.
The potential for compromise extends beyond simple cooperation. There’s the suggestion of potential kompromat, suggesting that compromising information may have been used to influence Trump’s behavior and decisions. The fact that such information might exist further emphasizes the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for a thorough investigation.
There are numerous examples of Trump’s actions seemingly benefiting Russia. His attempts to influence U.S. foreign policy towards Russia, his public pronouncements seemingly echoing Russian talking points, and his reluctance to hold Russia accountable for its actions all contribute to this narrative.
This isn’t just about past actions; it’s about the ongoing threat. The continued silence from some quarters, combined with the lack of a full and transparent investigation, only serve to amplify concerns about the potential for continued influence and manipulation. The idea that Trump might still be acting in Russia’s interest, even after leaving office, adds a chilling layer to this already concerning situation.
This situation is further complicated by the possibility of multiple actors involved. It’s suggested that Trump may have had ties to both the CIA and the KGB, acting as an asset for both, a possibility that would create a highly complex and dangerous situation for U.S. national security.
The assertion that Trump was a de facto Russian asset isn’t simply a matter of opinion; it’s a serious allegation backed by circumstantial evidence and the testimony of a credible source. The lack of a thorough and transparent investigation leaves the American people vulnerable and unable to fully understand the depth and breadth of this potentially catastrophic relationship.
The sheer audacity of the suggestion that a U.S. President might have actively worked against the interests of their own country, aided by a foreign power, is alarming. The failure to fully investigate this claim only serves to erode public trust and further destabilize the nation. The need for a full and impartial investigation is not merely a political debate; it is a matter of national security and democratic integrity.
It’s a question that demands answers, not just for the sake of historical accuracy, but for the continued safety and security of the United States. The longer these questions remain unanswered, the greater the risk of future vulnerability to foreign influence and manipulation.