James Gagliano had a few thoughts about how (and maybe why) the New York Times referred to Azra Turk as a ‘government investigator.’
What the Heck is a government investigator? Is that so they could avoid calling Azra a spy? Asking for a friend.
.@nytimes curiously describes *Azra Turk* as “government investigator.” Having served as an FBI Undercover Agent (UCA), would’ve been UCA’s assignment — F.B.I. Sent Investigator Posing as Assistant to Meet w/Trump Aide in 2016 – The New York Times https://t.co/7QNOtvSi8X
— James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) May 3, 2019
Curiously.
James is so polite.
We would have called this BS and that’s probably why he’s James Gagliano and this editor writes silly stories on Twitchy all day.
He continued.
Must caveat with — would have had to have been a “CERTIFIED” FBI Undercover Agent (UCA), who had passed the UCA course, been pre-screened (psychologicals) and been handpicked by FBIHQ for a high-profile overseas assignment. Also, Legat London would’ve assuredly coordinated w/MI5. https://t.co/so2D5RwsEK
— James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) May 3, 2019
In other words, there is a whole lot more to someone like Azra than just a ‘government investigator.’
Unless it was foreign intelligence service supplying the “honey trap.” Papadopoulos argued *Azra Turk* had thick accent — which wouldn’t preclude her from FBI service, if US citizen. Some argue Agency employee. Surmise, absent heavy redaction, pending IG report lays this bare.
— James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) May 3, 2019
Thick accent.
What was our government UP TO?! Maybe we don’t wanna know.
MAYBE this is why @nytimes helped get out in front of the news cycle that will roil following IG report that may be released this month or next.
Curious, as others have opined, that this “nugget” about *Turk* suddenly revealed in the Times. Almost TOO obvious a peremptory leak.
— James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) May 3, 2019
Like they are trying to get out in front of something.
Right.
She could have also been affecting the accent.
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) May 3, 2019
True story.
But …
True. But we are encouraged at FBI’s Certified Undercover Agent course NOT to do so.
Why?
Mistake on movie screen, when an actor mangles an unfamiliar accent, typically gets laughs and the critics pan.
In undercover world, it gets you — and whomever vouched for you — dead …
— James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) May 3, 2019
Better than a John Grisham novel.
*popcorn*
Again, in CI your goal is typically to either spot and assess someone for recruitment, or obtain foreign intelligence. Hence your targets are typically either foreign gov officials/diplomats — or the people they are targeting to recruit. Really unlikely you will end up dead.
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) May 3, 2019
Disagree. Wasn’t “spotting” or “assessing” vulnerabilities for asset recruitment Op. This was TARGETED meeting to determine potential reveal — Was Papadopoulos, et al, acting as bridge between Moscow & campaign.
IF “government investigator” was FBI, only seasoned UCA employed.
— James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) May 3, 2019
This is getting good.
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member