Is it Time to Hold Journalists in Contempt of Court for National Security Reasons?

On Tuesday U.S. officials, under the guise of anonymity, leaked the name of the suicide bomber responsible for the attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester before the British police had officially named him causing greater skepticism for allies sharing intelligence with the United States. There is something seriously wrong in the intelligence community and it borders on TREASON.

American journalists published the name before the British journalists. The British police had not confirmed the identity of the attacker, Salman Abedi. Since it was an ongoing investigation, the British government had indicated it may not release the name at all and then the American press reported the name.

The case of Judith Miller, the New York Times journalist at the time, became embroiled in controversy after her coverage of Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction program both before and after the 2003 invasion. The New York Times later determined Miller’s stories published in the paper were inaccurate. She acknowledged in The Wall Street Journal on April 4, 2015 that some of her Times coverage was inaccurate, although she had relied on sources she had used numerous times in the past, and had won a Pulitzer Prize. Miller further stated that policymakers and intelligence analysts had relied on the same sources claiming that Iraq had huge stockpiles of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Some argue that it was her stories in the New York Times that supported the entire invasion of Iraq.

All of this aside, Miller was also involved in the Plame Affair where her status of a member of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) became widely known compromising her position. When Miller was asked to name her sources, she invoked reporter’s privilege, which does not exist in any absolute manner, and refused to reveal her sources in the CIA leak. The Supreme Court made it clear that testimonial privileges “are not lightly created nor expansively construed, for they are in derogation of the search for truth.” United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 710 (1974). She was held in contempt of court and spent 85 days in jail protecting her source, which turned out to be Scooter Libby who was the leak source. Miller later was forced to resign from her job at the New York Times in November 2005.

Libby went to trial and was convicted of one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and one count of making false statements. Between 2003 and 2005 Libby had “leaked” classified employment information about Valerie Plame to New York Times reporter Judith Miller and others. He then lied and tried to cover-up his leaks.

In the Grand Jury, Libby testified that he met with Judith Miller, a reporter with the New York Times, on July 8, 2003, and discussed Plame with her. He had signed a “blanket waiver” allowing journalists to discuss their conversations. Miller maintained that such a waiver did not serve to allow her to reveal her source to that grand jury. After refusing to testify about her July 2003 meeting with Libby, Miller was sent to prison on contempt of court on July 7, 2005. Her lawyer, Robert Bennett, told her that she already had possessed a written waiver from Libby all along and there was no privilege. Miller then agreed to testify and was released on September 29th, 2005. She then appeared before the grand jury. Miller produced a notebook from a previously undisclosed meeting with Libby on June 23, 2003. Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice and two counts of perjury in his grand jury testimony and one count of making false statements to federal investigators about when and how he learned that Plame was a CIA agent.

It seems that contempt sanction are now warranted as a matter of national security to get at those within the government as to who is leaking information about private conversations between world leaders all the way down to leaking names of terrorists to obstruct investigations. That is what the contempt power was really supposed to be – the refusal to comply when you can compl

Buckets of Awesome: Secretary T-Rex Rides With Rolling Thunder (video)…

OK, this is just buckets of all American awesome.   Secretary of State Rex Tillerson rides with Rolling Thunder in Washington DC to celebrate Memorial Day and salute our armed forces.

We knew T-Rex was awesome, but who knew T-Rex was Rolling Thunder level awesome?


Compare and Contrast:

President Trump Secretary of State

President Obama Secretary of State

Any Questions?

President Trump is Right To Call Out NATO Countries – U.S. Paying 76 Percent of Total NATO Spending…

President Trump’s political opposition, including Most Swamp Media (MSM), have claimed he went too far in calling out NATO members for their lack of funding their own military and security apparatus.

During President Trump’s latest trip to NATO he stated publicly they needed to improve and do it quickly.  The media expressed a position that President Trump was too direct; however, what the media never shows is how far out of balance the entire financial system is for NATO.

The members of NATO agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDP on their own internal defense and security.   Most people are probably familiar with a graphic such as below which appears on CNN website explaining the dynamic:

However, what is rarely added to the discussion is the scope of the U.S. GDP in comparison to other nation states.  For us to spend 3.61% of our massive GDP ($18.5 Trillion) is actually $670,344,000,000  That represents 76.11% of the entire NATO budget.

In the graphic below I’ve added the GDP and extended the math to show how much the United States actually pays in whole dollars in comparison to the top 10 NATO member nations:

The US is providing $670,344,000,000  – That’s 76.11% of the entire NATO spending on military.

When you extend the amounts out you can see the fuller story of how big the disparity is between the entire NATO budget and who is contributing.

Greece, Estonia, the U.K, and Poland are the only nations meeting their promise to spend at least 2% of their GDP on the “collective defense”.

It is ridiculous in the extreme for the United States to be paying 76 percent of the total amount spent on NATO collective defense.

President Trump is right to call them out publicly.   Heck, he should go further.  I would suggest reducing our own contribution until ALL nations catch up.

Nice new fancy NATO building you got there Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg!

Caviar Socialists love to spend money that’s not theirs.  Boy does this video make more sense against the backdrop of how much our military is carrying for them:

Is May 3rd Comey Testimony the Smoking Gun?

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I respect your legal reasoning. A friend of mine is a lawyer and he said you are pretty sharp. So I pose this question. People are claiming that James Comey’s testimony on May 3, 2017 is the smoking gun that proves Trump did not ask him to stop the investigation into Russia. What is your take on this?

ANSWER: Those unfamiliar with the way law works can make up that conclusion. However, Comey did not say that at all. He was asked did the Department of Justice (DOJ) ask him to kill the investigation, to which he replied no! The question was not about Trump personally. This is like someone asking your wife if you robbed a store and she said no way. You did not answer. Your wife did. So this is “opinion” only unless she says that “you said you did not.” That makes it hearsay.

Now pay attention. Comey expressly states that from time to time they DOJ offers its “opinion” but it has never “ordered” it to stop an investigation “for political purposes.”

Now, this testimony does not prove anything with respect to Trump personally. However, Comey’s “memo” has been only released verbally to the New York Times. Nobody has even seen this memo including Congress.  Therefore, this “memo” is “alleged” and Comey when asked who has this memo him or the DOJ, he declined to answer.

Now, focus on what he testified that the DOJ has expressed its “opinion”, but never “ordered” the FBI to stop an investigation for “political” purposes. If we take the memo at face value as-is, then assuming Trump said anything, it was only his “opinion” and did not obstruct justice by ordering the FBI to stop its investigation. This would NOT be an impeachable offense.

Now it will turn on did Trump fire Comey to stop the investigation? The next question is, did firing Comey prevent a further investigation? If the answer is NO, then once again there is no impeachable offense.

However, I am preparing a special report on the history of impeachment and why Trump can be impeached, which may start a civil war, but it would by no means be legal.


Warped Priorities – British Taxpayers Paid Manchester Terrorist to Kill Their Children…

While it doesn’t come as a significant surprise the latest development in the Manchester bombing shows the financiers for the terrorist attack were U.K. taxpayers.

Yes, the British people actually paid Salman Abedi to kill themselves and their children:

Telegraph –  Salman Abedi is understood to have received thousands of pounds in state funding in the run up to Monday’s atrocity even while he was overseas receiving bomb-making training.

Police are investigating Abedi’s finances, including how he paid for frequent trips to Libya where he is thought to have been taught to make bombs at a jihadist training camp.

[…] One former detective said jihadists were enrolling on university courses to collect the student loans “often with no intention of turning up”.

Abedi was given at least £7,000 from the taxpayer-funded Student Loans Company after beginning a business administration degree at Salford University in October 2015.

It is thought he received a further £7,000 in the 2016 academic year even though by then he had already dropped out of the course. Salford University declined to say if it had informed the Student Loans Company that Abedi’s funding should have been stopped.

[…]  Abedi, 22, never held down a job, according to neighbours and friends, but was able to travel regularly between the UK and Libya. […]  Six weeks before the bombing Abedi rented a second property in a block of flats in Blackley eight miles from his home, paying £700 in cash.

He had enough money to rent a third property in the centre of Manchester from where he set off with a backpack containing the bomb.

Abedi also withdrew £250 in cash three days before the attack and transferred £2,500 to his younger brother Hashim in Libya, who is accused of knowing about the attack in advance.  (read more)

Reuters/Washington Post Publish Evidence of Obama Spying on Trump Campaign and Unmasking Americans…

Reuters/Washington Post Puts a Slice of Kushner Cheese on Russian Nothingburger and simultaneously prove the Obama Administration was spying on the Trump campaign.

The extent of the U.S. media’s straw-grasping is boundless, but this one is going to backfire. HOPEFULLY.  For the most recent example consider the Washington Post and Reuters claiming President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner participating in a proposal to set up a back-channel with Russia for communication after the November 8th election.

Firstly, Reuters and The Washington Post are idiots in their claimed “exclusive” bombast, etc.  UPI reported on the nothingburger back-channel Russian construct on April 3rd.  This “breaking” news is old news, and old nothingburger news at that.

Of course President-elect Trump’s staff would consider a back-channel set up for communications with Russian government officials in November and December 2016, just about everyone with a tinge of common sense was saying that exact construct was needed.


Well, you must remember the atmosphere after the November 8th election during the time period being discussed.  President Obama, in close coordination with his U.S. media allies, was filling the airwaves with toxic anti-Russian narratives in an explicit attempt to make any structural positive relationship between the pending Trump administration and Russia impossible.

[ALSO – Insert your memory card for CIA Director John Brennan’s recent timeline of his Russian contacts as related to congress here]  Watch from 10:30 to around 15:00 (prompted):


Eventually, to give some optical reasoning for the conspiracy theme, this entire fiasco known as the ‘muh Russian conspiracy’ led to President Obama sanctioning Russia and kicking 35 Russian diplomats out of the U.S.    Though in the past five months not a single shred of evidence showing what Russia ever did to “interfere in the election” has ever surfaced.

Allow me to provide an example:  If you’ve ever heard the term “Russia hacked the election“, ask yourself (or others): what exactly did Russia hack?…  {{{crickets}}}  The assertion is a catch-phrase soundbite, albeit a ridiculously silly one at that.

Even within John Brennan’s most recent testimony to congress, he couldn’t outline a single relevant example of factual interference; he only explained “possibilities” and various “scenarios of concern” the intelligence community were certain existed, but the certainty only goes as far as their concern – not the factual evidence.  The intelligence community was most certainly concerned.

To provide cover for the December 29th Russian Sanctions (which was actually a necessary narrative construct by President Obama), the intelligence community published a Joint Analysis Report put together by the CIA (Brennan), ODNI (Clapper), FBI (Comey) and NSA (Mike Rogers) –Reminder HERE

The report noted the NSA (Rogers) did not have the same degree of confidence in the content as Brennan, Clapper and Comey.  Notice, not coincidentally, that Brennan, Clapper and Comey are gone and Mike Rogers is still running the NSA.

The Joint Analysis Report was widely rebuked by almost everyone who looked at it.  Again, remember the conclusion of the report was that RT (Russian TV) was promoting propaganda, and there were Russian profile social media accounts pushing anti-Clinton memes on the internet.    THAT’S IT.  Reminder:


The “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” (full pdf below) is pure nonsense.  It outlines nothing more than vague and disingenuous typical hacking activity that is no more substantive than any other hacking report on any other foreign actor.

This might as well be a report blaming Nigerian fraud phone solicitors for targeting U.S. phone numbers.  DUH!  Just because your grandma didn’t actually win that Nigerian national lottery doesn’t mean the Nigerian Mafioso are targeting your employer to hold you accountable for her portion of the bill.

This FBI report is, well, quite simply, pure horse-pucky.

However, what the report does well is using ridiculous technical terminology to describe innocuous common activity.   Example: “ATPT29” is Olaf, the round faced chubby guy probably working from his kitchen table; and “ATPT28” is his unemployed socially isolated buddy living in Mom’s basement down the street.

This paragraph is priceless in it’s humorous and disengenuous gobblespeak:

Both groups have historically targeted government organizations, think tanks, universities, and corporations around the world. APT29 has been observed crafting targeted spearphishing campaigns leveraging web links to a malicious dropper; once executed, the code delivers Remote Access Tools (RATs) and evades detection using a range of techniques.

APT28 is known for leveraging domains that closely mimic those of targeted organizations and tricking potential victims into entering legitimate credentials. APT28 actors relied heavily on shortened URLs in their spearphishing email campaigns. Once APT28 and APT29 have access to victims, both groups exfiltrate and analyze information to gain intelligence value.

These groups use this information to craft highly targeted spearphishing campaigns. These actors set up operational infrastructure to obfuscate their source infrastructure, host domains and malware for targeting organizations, establish command and control nodes, and harvest credentials and other valuable information from their targets.

(*note the emphasis I placed in the quote) All that nonsense is saying is a general explanation for how hacking, any hacking, is generally carried out.  This entire FBI report is nothing more than a generalized, albeit techno-worded, explanation for how Nigerians, Indians, or in this case Russians, attempt to gain your email passwords etc., nothing more.  (read report)

Again, for emphasis: That’s the source evidence of the JAR for the “vast Russian conspiracy”: Russian TV news and social media bots pushing frog memes interfered with the 2016 U.S. election resultThat’s their conclusion.

Yes, that’s the entire final analysis within the report that led to the expulsion of 35 Russian unimportant nobody diplomats – all created to push a narrative, and only created to push a narrative.  The goal of the narrative was to undermine the election results and paint the upcoming Trump administration into a corner as it related to Russia and Vladimir Putin.

That’s the backdrop for the earlier April UPI story (link here) and that’s the environment created by President Obama where the Trump Transition team was considering a back-channel way to talk to the Russians without all of the Obama-Manufactured-Anxiety causing friction.

And here is today’s slice of Kushner Cheese for the Nothingburger.  NOTE THE DISCLAIMER customarily pushed way down into the weeds of the article:

REUTERS – […] After the Nov. 8 election, Kushner and Flynn also discussed with Kislyak the idea of creating a back channel between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could have bypassed diplomats and intelligence agencies, two of the sources said. Reuters was unable to determine how those discussions were conducted or exactly when they took place.

Reuters was first to report last week that a proposal for a back channel was discussed between Flynn and Kislyak as Trump prepared to take office. The Washington Post was first to report on Friday that Kushner participated in that conversation.

[…] FBI scrutiny of Kushner began when intelligence reports of Flynn’s contacts with Russians included mentions of U.S. citizens, whose names were redacted because of U.S. privacy laws. This prompted [FBI/Comey] investigators to ask U.S. intelligence agencies to reveal the names of the Americans, the current U.S. law enforcement official said.

Kushner’s was one of the names that was revealed, the official said, prompting a closer look at the president’s son-in-law’s dealings with Kislyak and other Russians.

FBI investigators are examining whether Russians suggested to Kushner or other Trump aides that relaxing economic sanctions would allow Russian banks to offer financing to people with ties to Trump, said the current U.S. law enforcement official.

The head of Russian state-owned Vnesheconombank, Sergei Nikolaevich Gorkov, a trained intelligence officer whom Putin appointed, met Kushner at Trump Tower in December. The bank is under U.S. sanctions and was implicated in a 2015 espionage case in which one of its New York executives pleaded guilty to spying and was jailed.

The bank said in a statement in March that it had met with Kushner along with other representatives of U.S. banks and business as part of preparing a new corporate strategy.

Officials familiar with intelligence on contacts between the Russians and Trump advisers said that so far they have not seen evidence of any wrongdoing or collusion between the Trump camp and the Kremlin.  Moreover, they said, nothing found so far indicates that Trump authorized, or was even aware of, the contacts.

There may not have been anything improper about the contacts, the current law enforcement official stressed(link)

Pay attention to this part: “[…] FBI scrutiny of Kushner began when intelligence reports of Flynn’s contacts with Russians included mentions of U.S. citizens, whose names were redacted because of U.S. privacy laws. This prompted [FBI/Comey] investigators to ask U.S. intelligence agencies to reveal the names of the Americans, the current U.S. law enforcement official said.

Reflect back on CIA Director John Brennan’s testimony to congress and reread that paragraph broken into two parts and combined with the Brennan testimony:

….FBI scrutiny of Kushner began when intelligence reports of Flynn’s contacts with Russians included mentions of U.S. citizens, whose names were redacted because of U.S. privacy laws….

That’s exactly what Director Brennan said happened.  The CIA intercepted the communications around the Russian officials attempting to gain access to the Trump circle because no-one in the Russian government knew anything about Trump’s positions.

…This prompted [FBI/Comey] investigators to ask U.S. intelligence agencies to reveal the names of the Americans, the current U.S. law enforcement official said…

That is also what Brennan said.  Brennan said he gave the raw intelligence to the FBI (James Comey) and to the White House (Susan Rice) and it was then out of his hands.  The FBI (Comey) then asked the NSA (Rogers) to reveal the names.  Brennan then briefed the gang-of-eight in congress.

Additionally, if Jared Kushner -as the WaPo claims- discussed setting up a “secret channel” of communication with Kysliak in December 2016 then common sense would tell you they didn’t have one prior to the election on Nov 8th. {{poof}} …there goes the ‘vast Russian conspiracy.

Aside from proving the Obama administration was specifically using James Comey to spy on the Trump campaign – So what if team Trump, or Candidate Trump, or President-Elect Trump, wanted a way to talk privately with representatives of the Russian government?  That’s politics.  That’s the same for every country, not just exclusive to Russia.

If anything the fact that President Obama’s political intelligence gathering operatives were spying on the Trump campaign to identify such communication, and then unmasking them to the political opposition, is evidence of the need for such communication channels….

What this Reuters and Washington Post story actually does is prove the Obama Administration was spying on the Trump campaign.  That’s the explosive angle to the story.

It’s not the nothingburger report that Jared or anyone else was trying to set up communication lines that matters – the real story is Reuters and the Washington Post proving that Obama was spying on conversations about setting up those lines of communication.

*”Когда луна попадает в глаза, как большой пирог с пиццей”…

(*When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie that’s Amore’)

Al-Sisi Strikes Back – Egyptian Fighter Jets Bomb Eastern Libya Terrorist Camps…

“America stands with President al-Sisi and all the Egyptian people today, and always, as we fight to defeat this common enemy.  America also makes clear to its friends, allies, and partners that the treasured and historic Christian Communities of the Middle East must be defended and protected.”

~ U.S. President Donald J Trump

Following the terrorist attack against Coptic Christians in Egypt, Egyptian military jets attacked Islamic extremist positions in eastern Libya.  The officials said the warplanes on Friday targeted the headquarters of the Shura Council in the city of Darna, where local militias are known to be linked to al-Qaida, not the Islamic State group.

The retaliatory bombings were aimed at terrorist outposts, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi stated: “any form of state-sponsored terrorism should be punished. Anyone who attacks Egypt, whether they’re from inside or outside Egypt’s borders, will be punished.”  According to Egyptian TV six “terrorist” camps were struck by the sortie.

The jihadist targets selected by Egypt are thought to be the Islamic assailants’ training grounds. In the aftermath of Gaddafi’s fall, Libya has become a failed state where terrorists organize and coordinate without much central government opposition. Eastern Libya is a stronghold for radical Islamic sentiment.

President Donald Trump condemned the murder of the Coptic Christians. “Evil organizations of terror” with a “thuggish ideology” are responsible for the attacks against Christians, they will be crushed, he said.

Don’t be surprised to see the U.S. support al-Sisi with additional strikes launched from U.S. Naval Airbase in Sigonella Italy.  (He’s right next door

Media: “Republican Greg Gianforte wins Montana special election after body-slamming reporter”…

Too funny.  Um, I don’t think the political opinion writers at ABC are “writing” that headline with the same perspective as voters “reading” it.  [Story Here]

Republican candidate Greg Gianforte easily won his election bid for congress.   The media are apoplectic about the brazen victory – without even considering the possibility that Gianforte is less angry with national media than the voters who elected him.

Too funny.  Um, I don’t think the political opinion writers at ABC are “writing” that headline with the same perspective as voters “reading” it.  [Story Here]

Republican candidate Greg Gianforte easily won his election bid for congress.   The media are apoplectic about the brazen victory – without even considering the possibility that Gianforte is less angry with national media than the voters who elected him.

Obama Administration Intervened in Canadian, British, and French elections

There is a very serious hypocrisy over this whole issue of Russia trying to influence the 2016 election when the Obama Administration directly intervened in Canada, Britain, and France and is expected to do so again in Britain and Germany. The New York Times, Washington Post, and just about every other mainstream media, are biased and are NOT REPORTING THE TRUTH. They act as if this is something unusual and sinister yet Obama has continued in this very posture even after leaving office with respect to the French elections. Obama also intervened to overthrow Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and failed as he did in BREXIT. The United States routinely interferes in foreign elections. So what is the big deal with Russia? Mainstream Media is not telling the truth that this is standard operational procedure. The United States has far too over stages coups to overthrow leaders they dislike. The propaganda about Iran and weapons of mass destruction is but a recent example. The Vietnam War was also a hoax with President Johnson is famous for saying in 1965: “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.” There never was any attack to start that war and Johnson made a very deceitful speech of August 4th, 1964, while New York Times editorial writers cheered and proclaimed that Johnson “went to the American people last night with the somber facts.” The recorded American soldier deaths for the Vietnam War was 58,220 U.S. military fatal casualties.

The New York Times has deliberately misled everyone with its latest story once again: “Top Russian Officials Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer”. They wrote that two of Trump’s people “had indirect ties to Russian officials” and after all the ifs, possibilities, and perhaps, they conclude “It is unclear, however, whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn.”

We all know that Obama sought to influence the British BREXIT vote telling the British if they voted for BREXIT, they would have to get queque . We all have watched the video intervening in the French Election for Macron. However, what has not been widely know is that the Obama Administration intervened in Canada with operative and money to overthrow the conservatives.

The real question is what is going on with the New York Times and the Washington Post? They both endorsed Hillary and this seems like a desperate act to claim that Trump is not a legitimate president and he should be overthrown. In the years of research studying the economy and the press accounts over the centuries, I have never seen such a totally dishonest level of reporting than we see today. They have devolved into a biased media that withholding the truth to shape opinions as they desire. This, in my view, is the ultimate treason against the sovereignty of the people. The Washington Post boldly claims as their motto: “Democracy Dies in Darkness” which is exactly what they are doing. PRINT THE TRUTH!

Massive Contradiction – John Brennan Completely Contradicts FBI Director James Comey on Congressional Notification…


Today former CIA Director John Brennan testified to congress on the Russian counter-intelligence operation which began in July 2016.  Today, John Brennan completely contradicted the March 20th, 2017, testimony of former FBI Director James Comey.

We have previously drawn attention to a particular part of former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony to congress from March 20th.  The issue is when was congressional leadership, specifically the congressional intelligence oversight group called the “Gang-of-Eight”, notified of the Russian investigation (a counter-intelligence operation).

Pay close attention.  On March 20th FBI Director James Comey -together with NSA head Admiral Mike Rogers- testified to congress specifically about this notification (first three minutes of the video):

Rep. Stefanik: [01:12] …”when did you notify the White House, the DNI or congressional leadership”?

James Comey: …”good question.  Congressional leadership, sometime recently they were briefed on the nature of the investigation, as I said.  Obviously the department of justice has been aware of it all along”…

Watch the first 3 minutes of that video.  Notice the discomfort etc.  We have previously outlined why THAT is such a big deal –SEE HERE–  Comey is discussing the recent notification to congress that took place approximately a week earlier.  Prior to that congressional notification FBI Director Comey admits to keeping congress in the dark “because of the sensitivity of the matter” from July 2016 through March 2017.

Now, watch the opening statement from former CIA Director John Brennan today:

Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan’s testimony:

Brennan: [13:35]  “Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight process we kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them.”

“Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

“Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”…

Brennan goes on to say the main substance of those Go8 meetings was the same as the main judgements of the January classified and unclassified intelligence assessments published by the CIA, FBI, DNI and NSA (intelligence community).

That January reference was the infamous 17 agencies report, from CIA (Brennan), DNI (Clapper), FBI (Comey) and NSA (Rogers), all who had confidence, according to the report, that Russia was attempting to interfere in the 2016 election.

Now, a critic might think that Brennan is informing congress on one thing, and Comey is NOT INFORMING congress on another.  However, that angle is rebuked by Brennan’s own testimony that his specific intelligence product (CIA) was given to the FBI who were exclusively in charge of the “counter-intelligence investigation“.

What’s happening here is actually John Brennan throwing James Comey under the bus.

Dan has encapsulated it nicely in this paragraph:

[…] Brennan gave Comey the investigative product -which had nothing to do with the Trump team-  and Comey used it to carry out Obama, Hillary, and Susan Rice’s dirty work for them. Of course Brennan was in on the whole thing and is now saving his own skin by saying ” I briefed ya’ll on everything I had with regards to Russia, anything additional that arose please talk to my buddy Comey”.

Brennan is making Comey own the “Counter-Intelligence ‘Muh Russia’” claims about the Trump campaign.  Brennan trying to make Comey the fall-guy for a Robert Mueller investigative outcome.  Brennan knows there’s no ‘there’ there.

The entire construct of the “Russian Investigation” was the political use of a claimed investigation in order to weaken President-Elect Trump.  There simply is no ‘there’ there because there’s no substantive evidence to support a “Trump Campaign Collusion Narrative”.

As such, John Brennan has realized that someone has focused attention on Comey’s admission to congress that the FBI intentionally kept congress in the dark during the construct of the counter-intel narrative.  Congress was kept in the dark during this phase because the narrative can only thrive with innuendo, rumor, gossip etc.   The appearance of the investigation itself was the political need; the substance was non-existent and immaterial to the creation of the narrative.

If Comey notified congress, via the Gang of Eight oversight, the counter-intel narrative would have been harder to manufacture as details would have to be consistent.  That’s the benefit to keeping any oversight away while creating the politically useful narrative.

John Brennan, facing the looming certainty of the underlying Russian ‘collusion evidence’ being non-existent, is now trying to give the appearance that he briefed congress on larger Russian election interference issues.  However , the trouble for Brennan is his own admission that these issues were the underlying principle for the FBI counter-intelligence investigation.  Brennan specifically says he gave his intelligence product to the FBI.

Brennan is throwing Comey under the bus and attempting to create plausible deniability for his role in a constructing a political narrative; a false narrative.



It’s not accidental this Brennan retreat is facilitated by a member of congress John Brennan admits to briefing last year.  Gang-of-Eight member, Adam Schiff.