At this point, the biggest argument in President Donald Trump’s “SPYGATE” is all over semantics. Is a human asset placed behind enemy lines a “spy” or a “confidential informant.” That’s about where the whole SPYGATE scandal is at the moment since Rep. Mark Meadows confirmed that while the Gang of Eight did not see documents confirming the identity of the person keeping the FBI up to date on what was going on in the Trump Campaign in 2016, such a person really did exist. He appeared on CBS’s “Face The Nation” to deliver the news and confirm the reports coming from Rep. Devin Nunes’s camp.
“What we do know is, that there was indeed a confidential human source as the FBI would call it that was actually giving intel not only to the FBI … but you have to ask the question when did it start?” Meadows said. “The question begs, at whose direction, what were they collecting and who were they reporting to?”
While this might be the case, calling that individual a “spy” is apparently off limits because that isn’t the official term.
Trump has embarked on a week-long Twitter tirade, expressing his dismay with what he has dubbed “Spygate.” Trump and his allies allege that a “spy” — which by definition is different than a confidential source — was improperly sent to scope out his campaign for political purposes.
The terminology used in this particular case really doesn’t matter. President Trump does not just tweet out information like this unless he knows he’s right. All signs, regardless of Democrat denials, point toward some sort of conspiracy to find out what the Trump campaign was up to from the inside. It is in no way unheard of in politics, but rare for an elected official to actually point out that it happens.
In the meantime, watch for this particular scandal to get its proper footing, and become a focus of the Trump White House.