The Resistance strikes again

Remember when the intelligence agencies were held in contempt because they had a long history of sordid and heinous acts? But ever since HRC lost the election they have changed their minds and decided that they are now trustworthy.

New information has come out that show that Brennan might have been the one who started the Russia Gate shit storm

At war with current and former intelligence officials since before he was elected, Donald Trump on Wednesday moved to strip Barack Obama’s CIA chief of his security clearance, though worse may be in store for John Brennan, says Ray McGovern.

There’s more than meets the eye to President Donald Trump’s decision to revoke the security clearances that ex-CIA Director John Brennan enjoyed as a courtesy customarily afforded former directors. The President’s move is the second major sign that Brennan is about to be hoisted on his own petard. It is one embroidered with rhetoric charging Trump with treason and, far more important, with documents now in the hands of congressional investigators showing Brennan’s ringleader role in the so-far unsuccessful attempts to derail Trump both before and after the 2016 election.
....
Well before Monday night, when Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani let a small bomb drop on Brennan, there was strong evidence that Brennan had been quarterbacking illegal operations against Trump. Giuliani added fuel to the fire when he told Sean Hannity of Fox news:

“I’m going to tell you who orchestrated, who was the quarterback for all this. … The guy running it is Brennan, and he should be in front of a grand jury. Brennan took … a dossier that, unless he’s the biggest idiot intelligence agent that ever lived … it’s false; you can look at it and laugh at it. And he peddled it to [then Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid, and that led to the request for the investigation. So you take a false dossier, get senators involved, and you get a couple of Republican senators, and they demand an investigation—a totally phony investigation

.”

But that's not the only reason why Brennan might going to be hoisted on his own petard. Leveymg's essay has this to say about Brennan and others who worked in Obama's justice department:

In February 2017, “nine current and former officials” confirmed classified information leaked to the Washington Post and the New York Times. That information was intelligence obtained from NSA intercepts of several telephone calls between incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak.

Each of those nine could have been prosecuted for violating their security oaths which expressly forbids officials from revealing, or confirming, the contents of classified materials until they have been formally declassified by the agency that created them. Those officials could have been charged with, among other felony crimes, violation of the Espionage Act, 18 USC Sec. 793, punishable by ten years imprisonment

.

Maybe Trump is going to be bringing charges against him and the others who did that? But why didn't Obama bring charges against Brennan and the others who leaked classified information to the press? After all he wasn't shy about prosecuting others for doing that. In fact Obama prosecuted more people under the espionage act then any other president. Could it be that those people divulged information about the things that the government was doing that they wished we didn't know about and Brennan and his friends were leaking information so that people would believe that Russia interfered with the election and that Trump knew about it? That many people who worked in his campaign were also complicit in it which would make the collusion seem more realistic?

Let's review a little of Brennan's history.

Abu Jihad Brennan was the CIA's station chief in Saudi Arabia. Some assert he went native, i.e. converted to Wahhabism. Brennan was in Riyadh when the Khobar Towers were bombed. Al-Qaeda did it, but Brennan was helpful in blaming the attack on Hizbullah and Iran. He was deputy executive director of the CIA on 9/11. That 9/11 happened was an intelligence failure or, as some have it, an incident arranged by the deep state. Brennan was CIA chief of staff while the agency concocted false stories about Iraqi WMD. He was within the line of command that ran the CIA torture program. It was Brennan who conspired with the Gulf dictators to hire Jihadis to destroy Libya and to attempt the same in Syria. In short - the man was always ruthless, incompetent and dishonest.

When Obama became president he wanted to make Brennan Director of the CIA. The Democrats in Congress were opposed to that. Obama then made him his high priest of targeted killings. After Obama's reelection, Brennan finally became director. He ordered the CIA to spy on the Congress committee investigating CIA torture. He lied to Congress under oath when he denied that it had happened. When it was proven that the CIA did what it did, he had to apologize.

At that time a Washington Post editorial headlined Obama should fire John Brennan. Today the Post calls the revocation of a security clearance of a former official, who -it had opined- should have long been fired, a "political vendetta against a career intelligence officer". Hypocrites.

Most important was "Brennan’s ringleader role in the so-far unsuccessful attempts to derail Trump, both before and after the 2016 election. As far as we can tell it was Brennan who concocted and launched the conspiracy to insinuate that Trump is connected with alleged Russian influence. Brennan bet that Hillary Clinton would win the election. He lost his bet and is now out in the cold. He fears that his role, especially his conspiring with British security services and with the Steele dossier, will come to light.

Wow. What a stand up guy. And now that Trump has pulled Brennan's security clearance the democrats and their supporters are flocking to Brennan's defense. Just like they have forgiven Mueller for his history of doing many of the same types of things that Brennan and others who worked in the intelligence agencies.

After clearance pull, Democrats rush to back Brennan – who spied on them

Democrats have been vocal in condemning US President Donald Trump for revoking former CIA chief John Brennan’s security clearance, forgetting that time he spied on a Democrat-run Senate committee in the name of #Resistance.
On Wednesday, Trump revoked Brennan’s security clearance, which had allowed the ex-spymaster to continue to access classified documents since he resigned last January.

The White House said that Brennan used his security clearance to “sow division and chaos,” and lend a sheen of credibility to his public criticisms of the president. The White House looked into revoking Brennan’s clearance after he accused Trump of “treason” for meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin last month.

Here's who came to Brennan's defense.

No Adam. Revoking his SC is not dangerous, UN-American or unlawful. You colluded with James Comey on the immunity deal with Assange to come and testify that Russia had nothing to do with the DNC computers leak in order to keep Russia Gate going. Your opinion on this means squat to me.

In 2014, as the Senate Intelligence Committee was compiling a lengthy report into the CIA’s use of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ at its secret prisons, chair Dianne Feinstein (D-California) accused Brennan’s agency of secretly monitoring the committee’s computers and removing sensitive documents.

After initially denying any wrongdoing and rejecting Feinstein’s “spurious allegations,” Brennan quietly apologized to lawmakers after an internal review proved the senator right.

Despite being caught red-handed spying on his overseers, the Obama administration Department of Justice declined to press charges against Brennan, and he remained in charge of the CIA.

.......

Libertarian-minded Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), who first proposed pulling Brennan’s clearance, cheered Trump’s decision on Wednesday, and took the opportunity to remind voters that he opposed Brennan’s stewardship of the CIA from the get-go.

Of course anyone who supported Trump's decision to pull Brennan's SC has to be on Putin's payroll.

Let's hear from one of Hillary's fans.

Former Hillary Clinton aide Philippe Reines was more blunt, calling Trump a “vindictive little bitch.”

Share
up
30 users have voted.

Comments

snoopydawg's picture

IMG_2486.PNG

up
23 users have voted.

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

lotlizard's picture

Robby Mook was already catapulting the propaganda to Harvard Kennedy Institute students one month after the election.

That’s their story and they’re sticking to it.

up
15 users have voted.
Pluto's Republic's picture

up
21 users have voted.
Raggedy Ann's picture

about the revocation, indicating he thought it was unfair, because he detests Herr Drumpf. The first words out of my mouth were, why does he(Brennan) still need the clearance. Hubby stopped in his tracks and after a pause said, I don't guess he does still need it, but I hate that SOB! I get that, but I believe once you leave your job at the gubbmit, you should turn in your security clearance with your office keys. Why do they still need it? (for mischief-making reasons?) If someone wants to bring them back to run a project or something, they can reinstate the clearance with a minimal background check.

No one needs to get a free ride.
Pleasantry

up
23 users have voted.

"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn

@Raggedy Ann need clearance following employment? The reasons I've read here and there don't make much sense.

Apparently, everyone uses the clearances to cash in on their prior government service.

As far as I'm concerned, all security clearances should be revoked at the end of employment. These people already have too much power. The security clearances can be re-instated on an as needed basis.

up
11 users have voted.

dfarrah

@dfarrah @dfarrah
I heard on Public Radio that there is a law that allows the big brass to keep theirs in case the incoming administration wants advice. Sounds like a flimsy excuse to me.

EDIT: Attached one level down. Title refers to routine revocation of clearance on leaving the service.

up
8 users have voted.
k9disc's picture

up
6 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

@k9disc I hope it’s a simple technical issue and not what we fear. Chilling times.

up
7 users have voted.
k9disc's picture

requires. Drumpf MUST go, the End.

Again, look at what has not been covered in the media due to this epidemic of Drumpfenfear.

@TB mare

up
10 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

snoopydawg's picture

@k9disc

I read Ray's article earlier, but when I was writing this I had problems accessing the site. Had to try a few times and then I got there from the Moon of Alabama link.

up
6 users have voted.

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

The Aspie Corner's picture

No issues will be discussed. No policies. Nothing. Just a few toadies taking falls while the capitalist pigs continue to rape us unchecked. But hey, at least Dipshit and his mob 'did something', right?

up
7 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

@The Aspie Corner definitely that the supposedly non-political agencies worked to defeat Trump.

This is huge. No longer can the CIA, FBI, etc., hide behind a phony veneer of impartiality. Not that we didn't suspect their bias previously, but now there is hard evidence.

Had HRC been elected, we would have no knowledge of this activity, or how badly these agencies have been compromised.

up
14 users have voted.

dfarrah

The Aspie Corner's picture

@dfarrah As far as I'm concerned, Hillary and her cronies put this son of a bitch in a position he had no business being in from the start. This whole thing is nothing but really shitty theater being used to distract the masses from the continued rape of the environment and economy.

They are all complicit, including Dipshit himself (Panama Papers). If he loses, we're fucked. If he wins, we're still fucked. None of this kabuki theater McResistance bullshit matters. The pigs and their operatives will continue to keep the class collaboration up for as long as we'll continue to let them.

up
7 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

@The Aspie Corner If HRC had won, we would have never found out about what HRC, Obama, the agencies, a former British spy, Fusion GPS, etc., were doing to throw the election in HRC's favor.

up
7 users have voted.

dfarrah

snoopydawg's picture

@dfarrah

Hillary used her party's intelligence agencies to spy on Trump and how far they would go to protect her from prosecution. And that it was done with Obama's knowledge and permission. And IG she had won we'd never know about it. That Brennan and others weren't charged for leaking classified information by the Obama justice department further shows his involvement in the cover up. I'd love to see Trump bring charges against them. Will he is the question.

Obama's presidency was one of the most corrupt in history in my opinion. He did so many things that are just now coming to light, but you have to be lucky to stumble upon the websites that are talking about it. The main stream media will cover up everything they can.

up
7 users have voted.

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

lotlizard's picture

@snoopydawg  
$400,000 speech (outdoing even Hillary’s $250,000 speeches) would seem to speak for themselves.

Reward for services rendered.

The insiders can pretend there’s no quid pro quo as long as the quid are tendered sufficiently post quo.

up
4 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@lotlizard

transferring money to the one percent, but Hillary got the better deal. She got her money through her foundation during her tenure as SOS and then she got prepaid for services rendered when she gave speeches to the banks before the election. But she probably broke election laws doing that. People can't do what she did if they are running for office and people say that she hadn't declared yet. But she had already lined up the superdelegates before she declared which means that she was planning on running. Fine line she walked. So was her campaign paying people to go to websites and tell people that they were wrong about her. Fine line again. But that's what we expect from her isn't it?

up
4 users have voted.

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

Wink's picture

Her Heinous, of course,
@dfarrah
supported by 'Deep State.'

HRC's Loss was Yuuuge! And 'they' knew it. Is why the coverup.
And is likely why it took HRC so long to concede on Election Night.
(along with having to write a concession speech).
But the concession speech was secondary to "What the Fuck Do we Do Now??!"
The Clintonistas likely dreaming up the R-gate path out of their criminal-ramifications conundrum.

up
6 users have voted.

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-1.9) All about building progressive media.

I'm glad Brennan had clearance revoked, keep going! Thanks snooypydawg. Did you watch The Constant Gardner (2005)?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387131/
Ralph Fiennes did slay me, woo! A thriller to the end, I liked it a lot thirteen years ago. spy vs spy

A widower is determined to get to the bottom of a potentially explosive secret involving his wife's murder, big business, and corporate corruption.
Director: Fernando Meirelles
Writers: Jeffrey Caine (screenplay), John le Carré (based on the novel by)
Stars: Ralph Fiennes, Rachel Weisz, Danny Huston

--- skip to my bold
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16956

From: Jake Sullivan
To: Hillary Clinton
Date: 2013-01-26 04:39
Subject: HERE IS THE TOPPER I DID
RELEASE IN FULL

From: Sullivan, Jacob J
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:39 AM

To:
Subject: here is the topper i did

If wasn't as sharp as it should be because it was the first question and I hadn't collected my thoughts:

QUESTION: Okay. What would be — I have some specific questions, but
before I ask them —specific ones, maybe just from your perspective, I
think there — what is it that you think she accomplished as Secretary
of State?

And also, there's another thing that's a little trickier to get at,
but I think it's important, which is that any principal in these
administrations, they have an influence within the administration
that's not always manifest. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes their
advice isn't accepted. But since we're on background and we're not
quoting you and all that stuff unless — without your permission, maybe
you could give us our take on what you think she's accomplished and
where she was — maybe worked within the administration, as any
principal does, to try to shape things.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. So I guess I can talk about
my view of her accomplishments at three levels.

So the first is the most concrete, and that is specific policy
initiatives and diplomacy that produced results. That list includes a
major influence on the rebalance to the Asia Pacific in totality and
with respect to specific elements like South China Sea diplomacy and
the opening to Burma; her role in putting together the coalition that
led to the fall of Qadhafi; her role in putting together and holding
together the coalition on Iran sanctions; her role in putting together
an effective partnership with ISAF countries to do both the increase
in troops, including the troop contributions from those other
countries as well as their contributions to the ANSF and Afghanistan's
economic development agenda going forward; her role in the Gaza
ceasefire. [Here you could add the Sudan-South Sudan oil deal, the
NATO strategic concept, the New START treaty, responding to the coup
in Honduras, Haiti earthquake response, and her role in national
security decisions like bin Laden.] So you've got a set of kind of
very specific accomplishments that you can take a look at.

The second level is what she did to sort of reorient the building, to
change the way this building does business. And there you have an
economic statecraft agenda that has put economics more at the center
of our foreign policy, both on the commercial diplomacy side and in
terms of using economics as a tool of statecraft. So in the Middle
East and North Africa; through the New Silk Road, et cetera. Her
technology and innovation agenda, putting women at the center of
basically every aspect of diplomacy and development, elevating
development as a core pillar of American power. So a set of
fundamental institutional changes that really mark a profound
difference in the way diplomacy is practiced and institutional changes
within the State Department from the creation of new bureaus to
changed practices, changed training, changed promotion principles and
so forth, that are all sort of collectively embodied in the QDDR but
can be parceled out in more concrete terms.

And then the third and I think most profound impact that she's had
over the last four years has to do with American — the question of
American leadership and what diplomacy looks like today as compared
with 60 years ago. So your present at the creation generation, your
Achesons, basically could create a few major organizations, and that
is the global architecture —the UN, the Bretton-Woods system, NATO.

Today you don't — you have to deal with an exponentially greater
number of actors, both on the government side and the nongovernment
side. So it's not about creating or advancing a couple of
institutions. It's about putting the U.S. at the center of an
incredible number of different types of partnerships and networks,
some of which are formal institutions, some of which are strategic
dialogues, some of which are public-private.

And if you look at the list of things that she has done to build that
and the way in which she has made the job of Secretary of State be a
constant gardener.
From the Global Counterterrorism Forum to the
Climate and Clean Air Coalition to her work with ASEAN and the Arab
League and the AU to this entire operation around public-private
partnerships to her reaching beyond government to engage with the
private sector
, civil society, et cetera, that, I think, is going to
have to be the way that the United States practices leadership in
mobilizing coalitions of actors to solve global problems. And it's
going to be marked by persistent shoe-leather diplomacy combined with
kind of innovative networks and new ways of doing business. And the
results are going to come drop by drop as opposed to in big sweeping
changes.

And I think her recognizing the moment that we're in, the landscape
that we face, and adjusting America's role and the role of American
diplomacy is probably going to end up over time being her most
profound legacy
.

And just on that point, I would add that it's easy to forget now four
years later just what a deep hole we were in when she came into
office. So much of the work that she had to do was repair work,
restoring our alliances, both in Europe and in the Asia Pacific;
strengthening partnerships with the emerging powers that were on more
shaky foundations; returning the United States to the center of
various international institutions; elevating our standing and our
voice at not just policy levels but at values levels. And now we're
sort of used to an Obama-Clinton era in foreign policy
, but back when
we started things looked a heck of a lot different. So she deserves a
lot of credit for that too.

https://ballotpedia.org/Jake_Sullivan

On the domestic side, I think the fundamental question — the touchstone of everything — is whether a policy is going to contribute to strengthening the middle class or to hollowing out the middle class. That is the question that I ask about any domestic policy issue

Hollow Man! I hate Trump, but her heinous, and all her court jesters should be in prison, that's what I think. And everyone should read wikileaks, daily. heh

free assange

up
15 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@eyo

Thanks for this. In a just world Hillary, Barry and probably every president would have been brought up on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes. That Hill's and Barry's supporters could turn a blind eye to what they did to Libya is just mind boggling. Hillary is just as big a warmonger as McCain is, but I was told that she wasn't. Sure. Just a peace loving feminist who looked out for women and children everywhere. Yuck!

up
5 users have voted.

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

this information to C99.

I have been waiting and waiting to see if the topic would ever be addressed here, since the reporting came from Fox news. I think Sara Carter did most of the leg-work with the reporting.

It was the democrats who colluded (with whomever) and abused their power in an attempt to throw the election, and they are now using/abusing it to overthrow Trump.

All of the corruption that is being exposed explains the hysteria over the Trump presidency on both sides of the aisle. Their gravy trains are being exposed. Their world of corruption is, hopefully, crashing down.

up
14 users have voted.

dfarrah

snoopydawg's picture

@dfarrah

What they did is just as bad if not worse than what Nixon and crew did.

BTW. John Dean has started weighing in.

Manafort is being charged for things he did years ago not for colluding with Putin, but apparently Dean thinks that Manafort is the key to bringing Trump down.

What actions has Trump taken against his so called enemies? The only thing he has done is to revoke Brennan's security clearance. Unless he decides to charge him for leaking classified information to the press. But Dean thinks otherwise. It's sad to see so many respected people falling for this or more probably pushing it. Either way I have lost my respect for John Dean.

up
2 users have voted.

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

@snoopydawg dead over and over.

Frankly, I get a laugh of the way he can run circles around his enemies. Just like I got a laugh out of Bill Clinton when he did the same.

up
3 users have voted.

dfarrah