once a CIA man, always a CIA man, let’s not forget that

What Did John Brennan and Anonymous Sources Really Say?
Philip Giraldi, Unz Review, May 30 2017

The WaPo and a number of other mainstream media outlets are sensing blood in the water in the wake of former DCI Brennan’s public testimony before the House Intelligence Committee. The WaPo headlined a front page featured article with Brennan’s explosive testimony just made it harder for the GOP to protect Trump. The article states that Brennan during the 2016 campaign “reviewed intelligence that showed ‘contacts and interaction’ between Russian actors and people associated with the Trump campaign.” Politico was also in on the chase in an article entitled Brennan: Russia may have successfully recruited Trump campaign aides. The precise money quote by Brennan that the two articles chiefly rely on is this:

I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian boxtops and Pindo persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. It raised questions in my mind whether or not Russia was able to gain the co-operation of those individuals.

Now first of all, the CIA is not supposed to keep tabs on Pindo citizens and tracking the activities of known associates of a presidential candidate should have set off warning bells, yet Brennan clearly persisted in following the trail. What Brennan did not describe, because it was “classified,” was how he came upon the information in the first place. We know from the NYT and other sources that it came from foreign intelligence services, including the British, the Dutch and the Estonians (ie NATO – RB). There has to be a strong suspicion that the forwarding of at least some of that information might have been unofficially sought or possibly inspired by Brennan in the first place. But whatever the provenance of the intelligence, it is clear that Brennan then used that information to request an FBI investigation into a possible Russian operation directed against potential key advisers, if Trump were to somehow get nominated and elected, which admittedly seemed a longshot at the time. That is how Russiagate began. But where the information ultimately came from, as well as its reliability, is just speculation as the source documents have not been made public. What is not speculation is what Brennan actually said in his testimony. He said that Pindostanis associated with Trump and his campaign had met with Russian boxtops of some sort (‘intelligence officials’ – RB). He was “concerned” because of known Russian efforts to “suborn such individuals.” Note that Brennan, presumably deliberately, did not say “suborn those individuals.” Brennan is not saying that he has, or saw, any evidence that anybody was seking to recruit the Trump associates. He is speaking generically of “such individuals.” At a later point in his testimony, Brennan also said:

I had unresolved questions in my mind about whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting Pindo persons, (whether) involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or unwitting fashion.

This statement is clearly meant to imply that some friends of Trump might have become Russian agents voluntarily, but others might have cooperated without knowing it. It is a line that has surfaced elsewhere previously, most notably in the demented meanderings of former acting DCI Michael Morell. As the purpose of recruiting an intelligence agent is to have a resource that can be directed to do things for you, the statement is an absurdity and as former DCI and former acting DCI respectively, Brennan and Morrell should know better. That they don’t explains a lot of things about today’s CIA. Brennan confirms his lack of any hard evidence when he also poses the question “whether or not Russia was able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.” He doesn’t know whether these Pindostanis were approached and asked to cooperate by Russian intelligence officers and, even if they were, he doesn’t know whether they agreed to do so. That means that the Pindosis in question were guilty only of meeting and talking to Russians, which was presumably enough to open an FBI investigation. One might well consider that at the time and even to this day, Russia was not and is not a declared enemy of Pindostan, and meeting Russians is not a criminal offense. In his testimony, Brennan also hit the main theme that appears to be accepted by nearly everyone inside the beltway, namely that Russian sought to influence and even pervert the outcome of the 2016 election. Interpreting his testimony, the WaPo article asserts:

Russia was engaged in an ‘aggressive’ and ‘multifaceted‘ effort to interfere in our election.

As has been noted frequently before, even though this assertion has apparently been endorsed by nearly everyone in the power structure, aka “those who matter,” it is singularly lacking in any actual evidence. Nor has any evidence been produced to support the claim that it was Russia that hacked the DNC server, which now is accepted as gospel, but that is just one side to the story being promoted. Last Wednesday, the NYT led off its front page with a piece entitled Top Russian Boxtops Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer. Based as always on anonymous sources citing “highly classified” intelligence, the article claimed:

Pindo spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political boxtops were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J Trump through his advisers …

The “discussions,” which are presumably NSA intercepts of phone calls, reportedly focused on two aides in particular, Manafort and Flynn, both of whom had established relationships with Russian business people and government boxtops. The article goes on to concede:

It is unclear, however, whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Mr Manafort and Mr Flynn …

That’s about all there is to the tale, though the NYT wanders on for another three pages, recapping Brennan and the Flynn saga lest anyone has forgotten. So what do we have? Russians were talking on the phone about the possibility of influencing an American’s presidential candidate’s advisers, an observation alluded to by Brennan and also revealed in somewhat more detail by anonymous sources. Pretty thin gruel, isn’t it? Isn’t that what diplomats and intelligence officers do? It would appear that the NYT editors are unaware that Pindostan routinely interferes in elections world-wide, and that the action taken in various places including Ukraine goes far beyond phone conversations. In some other places like Libya, Syria, Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan the interference is particularly robust, taking place at the point of a bayonet, but the NYT and WaPo don’t appear to have any problem when the regime change is being accomplished ostensibly to make the world more democratic, even if it almost never has that result. How one regards all of the dreck coming out of the Fourth Estate and poseurs like John Brennan pretty much depends on the extent one is willing to trust that what the government, its highly-politicized bureaucrats and the media tell the public is true. For me, that would be not a lot. The desire to bring down Trump is understandable, but buying into government and media lies will only lead to more lies that have real consequences, up to and including the impending wars against NK and Iran. It is imperative that every Pindostani should question everything s/he reads in a newspaper, sees on television “news” or hears coming out of the mouths of former and current government employees.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s