Meet the anonymous CIA whistleblower

CIA Whistleblower Invited 'Meddling' DNC Operative To Obama White House In 2015

A partisan CIA officer who secretly worked with Rep. Adam Schiff's Democratic staff before submitting a second-hand whistleblower complaint has been revealed as Eric Ciaramella - who previously worked in the Obama administration with former VP Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.

"Everyone knows who he is. CNN knows. The Washington Post knows. The New York Times knows. Congress knows. The White House knows. Even the president knows who he is," said former CIA analyst and Trump national security adviser Fred Fleitz, who added "They’re hiding him because of his political bias."

"He was accused of working against Trump and leaking against Trump," said one former NSC official on condition of anonymity.

Sperry's revelations:

- Ciaramella, a registered Democrat and Obama White House holdover, "helped initiate the Russia "collusion" investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election."

- Ciaramella was detailed over to the National Security Council from the agency in the summer of 2015, working under Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security adviser. He also worked closely with the former Vice President.

- He worked with DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa - inviting her to the White House. Chalupa, "a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government," writes Sperry (which has been documented by Politico and journalist Lee Stranahan). "He knows her. He had her in the White House," said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.

- Documents confirm the DNC opposition researcher attended at least one White House meeting with Ciaramella in November 2015. She visited the White House with a number of Ukrainian officials lobbying the Obama administration for aid for Ukraine.

- Biden's office invited Ciaramella to an October, 2016 state luncheon hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. "Other invited guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper."
....
"He was moved over to the front office" to temporarily fill a vacancy, said a former White House official, where he "saw everything, read everything," according to Sperry's report.

The official added that it soon became clear among NSC staff that Ciaramella opposed the new Republican president’s foreign policies. “My recollection of Eric is that he was very smart and very passionate, particularly about Ukraine and Russia. That was his thing – Ukraine,” he said. “He didn’t exactly hide his passion with respect to what he thought was the right thing to do with Ukraine and Russia, and his views were at odds with the president’s policies.”

“So I wouldn’t be surprised if he was the whistleblower,” the official said.

In May 2017, Ciaramella went “outside his chain of command,” according to a former NSC co-worker, to send an email alerting another agency that Trump happened to hold a meeting with Russian diplomats in the Oval Office the day after firing Comey, who led the Trump-Russia investigation. The email also noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin had phoned the president a week earlier. -RealClearInvestigations

So Ciaramella is another Obama holdover who thinks that he gets to decide what Trump does in Ukraine. Or that Trump had no right to speak to the Russians in the Oval Office even though every other president has done that. This is what being president is all about. Talking to foreign leaders about stuff important to each country. But apparently it's only bad when Trump does it because of reasons. And he then should have told the world what they discussed. And released the transcripts of their talks even though no president in history has been asked to do that. Alrighty then! New rules for just Trump. Next president can go back to being in charge by his lonesome.

Two other must read articles:

There was lots of talk today about Tim Morrison testifying to congress because he was the person who moved the Ukraine transcript to the secure server. This is who was going to nail Trump to the wall. Again...

'Nothing Illegal In Trump-Zelensky Call': NSC Official Tells Impeachment Inquiry

"I want to be clear, I was not concerned that anything illegal was discussed," said Tim Morrison, former NSC Senior Director for European Affairs who was on the July 25 call between the two leaders.

Morrison also testified that the transcript of the phone call which was declassified and released by the White House "accurately and completely reflects the substance of the call."

Morrison testified that Ukrainian officials were not even aware that certain military funding had been delayed by the Trump administration until late August 2019, more than a month after the Trump-Zelensky call, casting doubt on allegations that Trump somehow conveyed an illegal quid pro quo demand during the July 25 call.

This has always been the sticking point for why I think this impeachment is bogus. Ukraine did not know that Trump had held up the military weapons being sold to them so how could it be quid pro quo? And why doesn't congress remember that Obama's state department did not want them to have them because it risked ampimg up tensions with Russia? Why do people think it's a good idea to let Ukraine become part of NATO? Talk about poking the Bear!

John Solomon talks about the myths and facts about Ukraine Gate. You know all those things about ByeDone and his son that people keep saying have been debunked? Yeah not so much...

John Solomon Debunks MSM Lies About Ukraine, Biden And Election Interference

There is a long way to go in the impeachment process, and there are some very important issues still to be resolved. But as the process marches on, a growing number of myths and falsehoods are being spread by partisans and their allies in the news media.

The early pattern of misinformation about Ukraine, Joe Biden and election interference mirrors closely the tactics used in late 2016 and early 2017 to build the false and now-debunked narrative that Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin colluded to hijack the 2016 election.

Facts do matter. And they prove to be stubborn evidence, even in the midst of a political firestorm. So here are the facts (complete with links to the original materials) debunking some of the bigger fables in the Ukraine scandal.

Myth: There is no evidence the Democratic National Committee sought Ukraine’s assistance during the 2016 election.

The Facts: The Ukrainian embassy in Washington confirmed to me this past April that a Democratic National Committee contractor named Alexandra Chalupa did, in fact, solicit dirt on Donald Trump and Paul Manafort during the spring of 2016 in hopes of spurring a pre-election congressional hearing into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. The embassy also stated Chalupa tried to get Ukraine’s president at the time, Petro Poroshenko, to do an interview on Manafort with an American investigative reporter working on the issue. The embassy said it turned down both requests.

Lots more to this article with lots of links that back up what John says. One goes to the NYS in 2015 where it discusses how Hunter came to be on the Burisma board and what ByeDone did when he found out there was going to be an investigation into it. Oops..hate it when facts get in the way of a great falsehood don't you?

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

The John Solomon link isn’t working. Otherwise, thanks for the info here.

up
0 users have voted.

Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.

snoopydawg's picture

@Dr. John Carpenter

Thanks for the heads up.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Democrats are such a spectacular breed of stupid. The impeachment was supposed to be their big moment and instead they have been discovered to have shit all over their own hands and Trump is still president. What. A. Surprise. Who here would actually be surprised if all along they were manufacturing a failed impeachment attempt to whip up some sympathy for Donald Trump at the expense of a certain candidate their corporate owners slash donors hate? I honestly would not be.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@Le Frog

There have been lots of warnings to democrats about just that. But the real danger for democrats is that the hearings will expose how many of them have ties to what happened in Ukraine before and after the coup. There is so much disinformation coming from the main stream media and it's sad to see so many people buying into it. We all remember what it was like for people during the Red Scare and McCarthy's hearings. Many people didn't recover from being called a Red and yet here we are again going down that street. All because we're afraid of Russia getting something more than we do. Sure it's more complicated than that, but I'd rather we had peace. We could have after the USSR imploded. Could have...

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Le Frog

or Warren. But a spectacular plan B would be to keep Trump in the W.H.

Let no one think that the Democrats don't understand the immense political advantage it gives them to have Trump in the White House.

Anybody who thinks concern for Black and Latino people, particularly those without money, weighs more heavily on the Democrats' minds than their own political advantage hasn't been paying attention.

Sadly, that even goes for most Black and Latino members of Congress.

up
0 users have voted.

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

@Le Frog better to burn the Dem Party down in flames before he wins and help their man Trump.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

Paul Sperry has much more than the article I used that came from his.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

The Sperry article is next.
Great stuff, snoopydawg!

up
0 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

snoopydawg's picture

This has more of the transcript of the phone call and it looks clear to me that Trump didn't ask for anything from Zelensky that wasn't his to ask for. There seems to be a few people who think they set policy for Trump and not the other way around. The WB and the military guy who testified yesterday were trying to do things their way not Trump's. I too hate defending Trump, but he is supposed to be the one in charge of things not the holdovers from Obama or the ic agencies.

The Legal Connection Between Washington and Kiev

With this background and while I don't want to appear to be pro- or anti-Trump, it is very, very clear that the current POTUS was within the law under the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the United States and Ukraine when it comes to asking Ukraine to investigate a potential criminal matter.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

But saying "who previously worked in the Obama administration with former VP Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan." as thought that's an indictment, is just meaningless noise. He was in the CIA while Obama was president. Brennan was his boss, and a CIA employee is hardly in a position to ignore the VP. Being in the CIA is indictment enough, but CIA employees are not (or didn't use to be) thrown out with every change of administration.

up
0 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@tle

who then just happens to turn up spreading dirt about the CIA's political opponents, is well worth doubting. What I mean is, it's unlikely that said (former?) agent was consumed with an Ellsbergian existential concern about the fate of the nation. It's far more likely that he's not a whistleblower at all, but merely an agent doing his job. As you point out, that's what he was in the past. That's very likely what he is in the present. Tacking the word "whistleblower" onto him doesn't change that and neither does the fact that the target is Trump.

You don't have to like Trump to see that the most significant outcome of these events is the fact that most of America now believes the CIA to be totally justified in trying to remove a sitting President.

They're likely to be really shocked when the CIA does it to a President they like (in other words, a Democrat). Or perhaps not. Given that our elections are now under the control of the Department of Homeland Security, we'll probably never have a President again who wasn't pre-approved by the CIA.

Just a small reminder: the CIA isn't actually supposed to concern itself with domestic affairs. At all.

up
0 users have voted.

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

snoopydawg's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal

That the CIA is now trying to remove the president after their first attempt to remove him through the bogus Russia Gate investigation is what people are willing to accept just because they don't like him. This is totally unacceptable and yet those that have refused to see that Russia Gate was paid opposition research by Hillary's campaign and that she got her party's intelligence agencies to do some of the work for. One article described the 7 times that the FBI tried to entrap someone from Trump's campaign.

The first one was Misfud telling PapaD.... that the Russians had dirt on Hillary. Misfud had ties to both Mueller and Hillary's foundation.

The second was the Trump tower meeting that was set up by Fusion GPS.

Just a small reminder: the CIA isn't actually supposed to concern itself with domestic affairs. At all.

Brennan was the ring leader who was behind cooking up this sh*t on Trump and he had Obama's blessing to do so. Whether Barr and Durham will have the authority to take their investigation to the top remains to be seen. No president has ever been held accountable for their many crimes while in office. Let's hope Obama is the first.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

lotlizard's picture

@snoopydawg  
and the next incremental step is accepting the CIA engineering removal of a president (or anyone else they don’t like) the JFK - RFK - MLK way.

up
0 users have voted.

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal But then I realized that there were a lot of them, and I would just have to repeat your entire comment. Smile

Yet my minor point about framing still stands.

up
0 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@tle

and then realized at the end that you had already made the main point I was making!

up
0 users have voted.

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@tle

being in the CIA is indictment enough.

up
0 users have voted.

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

snoopydawg's picture

@tle

Whatever one may think of Trump, it beggars belief that the very people who cry the loudest about “our democracy” are elevating an unelected bureaucracy, spies and counter-spies as the arbiters of it. It almost makes you think the people responsible for pushing the ‘Russian meddling’ conspiracy theory may have done it as a smokescreen for their own (mis)deeds.
up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

I printed out all the links so I can sit and read them all together.

I heard someone in a commentary on TV (don't remember who) who said that what Trump did might have been awkward and a bit unethical, but it does not rise to the level of impeachment.

My spouse pointed out that the language the Founders wrote for this provision goes from high crimes to misdemeanors... quite a range and totally unclear.

Maybe on purpose???

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Lookout's picture

Same trick as Russiagate...take what you're guilty of and throw it at your opponent. I've come to the conclusion that the demonrats want Trump to win to appease their big money donors. Ukrainegate opens a can of worm for the dimwits. Of course I thought Imran Awan was going to be big news...like the quid pro quo arms deals for foundation donations for the Clintons. The news media, CIA, and DNC are all in bed subverting our joke of a demockrazy.
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2017/05/11/declassified-cia-documen...

The document states that the CIA task force “now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation,” and that “this has helped us turn some ‘intelligence failure’ stories into ‘intelligence success” stories,’ and has contributed to the accuracy of countless others.” Furthermore, it explains how the agency has “persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold, or even scrap stories that could have adversely affected national security interests or jeopardized sources and methods.”

Thanks for all the links and evidence, SD.

up
0 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

snoopydawg's picture

@Lookout

That we have ex leaders of the intelligence agencies on our news network and people are listening to them is a huge problem. But just like people don't see any problem having so many ex IC people running and winning in the DP is just truly frightening.

Throw shade at your opponent is exactly what Hillary did to Trump. And not just have connection to Russia, but even worse, having a quid pro quo to get the deal done.

Back in June 2015, the Clinton campaign tested a bunch of negatives about her, among New Hampshire primary voters. According to the internal results:

Secretary Clinton’s top vulnerability tested in this poll is the attack that claims as Secretary of State she signed off on a deal that gave the Russian government control over twenty percent of America's uranium production, after investors in the deal donated over one hundred and forty million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. Half of all likely voters (53%) are less likely to support Clinton after hearing that statement and 17% are much less likely to support her after that statement

.

Most voters probably don't know that fact about her record off the top of their head, and the media have scarcely covered it. It turns out that they don't appreciate our Secretary of State handing over 20% of our uranium to a rival nuclear superpower, let alone when she profits $140 million through her crooked foundation. Pay to play in a nutshell.

And of course Bill met with Putin just before he gave a speech to a Russian bank and received $500,000 for it. This was the pattern the Clintons had all during Hillary's stint as SOS. She got deals done for foreign governments who donated to her foundation and the Bill would just happen to be in the area to get paid to give a speech.

Lots of shade there. But people insist these are Russian talking points.

The news media, CIA, and DNC are all in bed subverting our joke of a demockrazy.

Indeed. Thanks for the reminder of the Awans who weren't prosecuted for their many deeds. Gawd our political system sucks as does our justice system.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

wholly owned DNC, a bunch of fake progressive radio hosts, cheating, lying, and rigging on her behalf, plus geysers of cash, and she still lost to Trump.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@entrepreneur

That really is something isn't it? She cheated her way through the primary and then cheated her way through the election and she still lost to the worst candidate in history. Now that is some legacy. And instead of dying from embarrassment she is out there blaming everyone but herself for her loss. Now that is funny. Sorest loser in history.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

edg's picture

Democrats and the Deep State love Ukraine, a nothing shitbag of a country run on and off by Nazi wannabes. They hate Russia, a country with enough nuclear weapons to destroy the US ten times over. They want to arm Ukraine, which sits smack dab on the border with Russia. They want to threaten and provoke Russia, a country paranoid about invasion after suffering 20 million dead during World War 2.

Sure, why not?

up
0 users have voted.

@edg

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

wendy davis's picture

here's the house roll call vote on Pelosi's impeachment inquiry.

up
0 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

up
0 users have voted.

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver