brennan’s jew-lies

Brennan’s testimony fuels new round of anti-Russian agitation
Patrick Martin, WSWS, May 24 2017

Ex D/CI Brennan appeared before the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday, giving lengthy testimony that sparked an avalanche of headlines about allegations of collusion between the Trump presidential campaign and Russian intelligence. The greatest attention was given to Brennan’s declaration that there had been a pattern of contacts between Trump aides and Russian officials that aroused the suspicion of the CIA during the summer of 2016. He told the panel:

I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and Pindo persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals, and it raised questions in my mind again whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.

Brennan refused to identify any of these individuals or answer a direct question about whether Trump was one of those targeted. Later in his testimony, after considerable badgering by Thugs, he reiterated that there were still matters to investigate. He said:

When I left office on Jan 20 2017, I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting Pindo persons to work on their behalf, whether witting or unwitting, whether involved in the campaign or not.

Brennan never actually said that there was any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials, claiming that was something still to be determined in ongoing investigations by the FBI and DoJ counsel Mueller. But he referred repeatedly to “contacts” between unnamed Trump aides and Russian government operatives. Rep Mike Turner asked:

If someone left this hearing today and said that you had indicated that those contacts were evidence of collusion or collaboration, they would be misrepresenting your statements, correct?

Brennan conceded:

I would say it was not an accurate portrayal of my statement.

While Thugs on the intelligence committee sought to defend Trump, Demagogs indulged in anti-Russian witch-hunting that recalled the heyday of Joseph McCarthy. Several representatives slipped in references to “Soviet” as well as Russian intelligence operatives and techniques. One Democrat, Jim Himes of Connecticut, bemoaned what he called the refusal of Trump’s supporters to face facts and their tendency to “attack the messenger,” i.e., those in the intelligence agencies leaking material against Trump. He concluded:

We’re playing precisely into Russia’s fondest hopes. We’re doing something that in my opinion the great cold warriors, be it Ronald Reagan or Harry Truman, would never have allowed.

The chronology outlined by Brennan actually suggests that alleged Russian interference in the 2016 campaign was not considered an urgent issue by the Obama administration and the intelligence apparatus during that period, despite claims to the contrary more recently. Brennan indicated that the CIA was the first agency to become aware of alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the election campaign during Jul 2016, on the eve of the DeNC, when the Clinton campaign and the Demagog Party first made the claim that the Russian government was responsible for hacking DNC emails and collaborating with WikiLeaks to leak them, so as to embarrass Clinton and tip the election to Trump. In his testimony Tuesday, Brennan said he raised the matter with the White House and on Aug 4 gave a warning to Alexander Bortnikov, head of the FSB. The warning came at the end of a phone call in which the main subject was Syria, with (alleged) Russian harassment of Pindo diplomats in Moscow and Russian actions in relation to the Pindo elections raised only at the end. This is an indication that the matter was not a high priority or considered a serious danger. Making the chronology even more curious, Brennan added:

I believe I was the first Pindo boxtop to brace Russia on this matter.

According to the semi-official narrative, the FBI learned of hacking attacks on the DNC in the summer of 2015 and the attacks were supposedly linked soon after to two units of Russian military intelligence. If that story is true, why did Brennan become the first Pindo boxtop to raise the issue with Moscow, a full year later? Moreover, if Brennan’s call to Bortnikov on Aug 4 2016 was an expression of great concern on the part of the Obama administration, why did Obama wait until Dec 29 2016 to take any retaliatory action? The time sequence actually suggests that the White House regarded Russian actions vis-a-vis the elections (if any) as a minor irritant, fully expecting a Clinton victory, until after the actual debacle for the Demagogs on Election Day. Significantly, Brennan seemed to downplay claims that Trump had committed a gross breach of national security by disclosing classified information about an alleged Daesh terrorist threat at a White House meeting earlier this month with Sergei Lavrov and Sergei Kislyak. He routinely shared classified information on terrorist threats with his Russian counterpart, Brennan said, although he added that Trump had apparently breached protocols on how such information was to be shared. But he sided with the White House in condemning leaks about Trump’s discussions with the Russians as a greater danger to national security than the discussions themselves. A second hearing on Tuesday brought another high-level intelligence official to Capitol Hill to be questioned about the alleged Trump-Russia connection. (New) DNI Coats refused to answer questions about whether, as reported this week by the WaPo, Trump had pressured him to publicly deny that there was any evidence of collusion between the Trump presidential campaign and the Russian government. Appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Coats, a former senator, said he would not discuss conversations with the president at a public Senate hearing. He did indicate that he would be prepared to respond to such questions if they came from the special counsel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s