TONIGHT 8pm ET 📺👉https://t.co/nT5simhWyH— Jan Jekielek 😷 (@JanJekielek) May 3, 2020
Former NSC chief-of-staff: There’s an unpublished @HouseIntel report stuck at @CIA since 2018 which contradicts the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 election.
@FredFleitz on @AmThoughtLeader🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/b9eDgg3h4t
UPDATE: I really should have added an explanation for why I find this important. The point of this is that the ICA was the justification for everything that came afterwards, it was the "proof" of what "everybody" claimed to know: That Trump had to be investigated for colluding with the Russians who had tried to help him win the election. It was behind the DNC hack narrative, the Wikileaks narrative, the Roger Stone persecution. But most of all it was behind the Mueller Witchhunt.
By revealing Brennan's dishonesty in overriding the CIA analysts Durham can use that as evidence of conspiratorial intent. It's an element of proving intent--not the whole ball of wax--but it's important in that respect. This explains why Durham has apparently spent so much time interviewing analysts who were part of the ICA team, and also why he wants to talk to Gina Haspel--if he hasn't done so already. Has she been concealing that report? She and Chris Wray may find themselves in the same or similar boats, very soon.
Here’s my question Mr Wauk -
ReplyDeleteHow did the CIA/Intel agencies become so politicized? I’m old enough to remember the days of Ron Dellums saying the CIA had to be “torn down brick by brick.”
Fast forward to 2020 & I find myself in - amazingly - agreement with him albeit for very different reasons.
Keep up the stupendous work - don’t always comment by I stop by here several times a day. You, Dave Blackmon, Praying Medic, & Zman are the time of the spear! ;<)
Boarwild
CIA has always been heavily liberal because they recruit from "elite" universities.
Deletethat would explain why the CIA has been such a consistent screw up for most of its history, but it doesn't explain why the Dems hated the CIA for such a long time.
DeleteI heard once that Clinton substantially RIF'd the CIA shortly into his administration, and then hired it up again not long after. This would have allowed him to flush a lot of conservatives (assuming they existed) and replace them with Ivy-certified libs. And it would explain why Dems seem to trust the CIA now.
Is this incorrect?
I'd be skeptical of that, since I believe many or most CIA employees would have had civil service protections and couldn't be simply RIFed.
DeleteI suspect that Haspel is as bad or worse than Wray in not allowing disclosure of info that will shake the status quo. If Ratcliffe gets approval as DNI from the Senate, would be nice to have Grenell replace either of them as acting Director. Which one would be better, FBI or CIA?
ReplyDeleteYeah, that thought occurred to me, too. Get rid of someone else and insert Grenell to force them to confirm someone Trump can live with.
DeleteFirst, Grenell can replace Wray once the replacement DNI is in confirmed. Then, when the replacement FBI director is confirmed, Grenell could serve a stint as director of the CIA. Let's give Grenell the most stellar resume ever, and nominate him to a whole slew of top level government positions :)
DeleteI'd be tempted to go with CIA first. FBI is a component of DoJ, so Trump already has significant leverage. CIA is still enemy controlled territory.
DeleteThe Change of the Cabal's Attitude Toward Steele
ReplyDeleteMy new blog article.
I argue that the cabal initially focused on preparing for an October Surprise. If incriminating e-mails of Clinton were revealed a few days before Election Day, then top officials of the US Intelligence Community would assure the public that the e-mails had been stolen AND ALTERED by Russian Intelligence.
From that perspective, Steele's Dossier might cause trouble. Attention to the top officials' confident assurances might be distracted by dubious stories that, for example, Trump had been filmed watching prostitutes urinate on a hotel bed. Therefore, the cabal told FBI official Michael Gaeta, receiving Steele's reports in Rome, to block the delivery of some reports to FBI offices in the USA.
In mid-August, however, the cabal's attitude toward Steele began to shift. The cabal began discussing "an insurance policy" for the possibility that Trump won by a small margin in the Electoral College. For such "an insurance policy", the Dossier might turn out to be very useful.
These discussions within the cabal continued from mid-August until mid-September, when the cabal belatedly allowed the delivery of Dossier reports to the Crossfire Hurricane team.
Just a thought: you cannot separate the Russia Collusion Hoax from the Hillary Email Exoneration "Matter" -- many of the same players in FBI HQ and DOJ are in involved deeply in both (and then smoothly and seamlessly transition onto the Mueller Impeachment Show.) There is no way that was a coincidence.
ReplyDeleteThe focus by FBI/DOJ up to the beginning of July was getting Hillary off the hook regardless of what laws she broke. Obviously, there was overlap -- somebody was plotting out the Russia Collusion Hoax going back to late 2015 early 2016, likely involving some players in the IC.
JEDyer says the center of the plot had to have been the NSC, because it was the only "unaudited" site. It makes sense.
Delete