Former CIA Director Brennan Slams The Door On Dems Russia Narrative

a reply to: xuenchen

Counted? Trump can still be held accountable for any wrong doing in last years campaign / election. That's what the investigation is trying to determine. You do realize that if Trump is guilty of something that he'll have violated the trust of all Americans, not just those who voted for Hillary. IF he's guilty, his potential treason is against all of us, not just those who don't like Trump, right?

a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah, that's right. I have no answers for someone who willfully ignoring information. So, think what you want. If you're hearing witnesses say that there's no reason for concern about Trump's Russia ties, or his business interests, than you might need to get your hearing tested, or have the volume on your TV checked out, or put down whatever it is you're smoking. Or not. Like I said, I don't care at all what you think. Have a good one.

a reply to: TownCryer

But everything so far is based on .................

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah, that's right. I have no answers for someone who willfully ignoring information. So, think what you want. If you're hearing witnesses say that there's no reason for concern about Trump's Russia ties, or his business interests, than you might need to get your hearing tested, or have the volume on your TV checked out, or put down whatever it is you're smoking. Or not. Like I said, I don't care at all what you think. Have a good one.

You are responding a lot for not caring what I think.

I asked a very simple question that you failed to answer.

I am not ignoring information.
Do you realize that Trump could have colluded with the Russians without violating any law? There is, so far, no evidence presented that he did collude with them, but if he did.... What law would he be violating?

By the way.... I am not smoking anything.

Brennan....pfft

This is just the beginning Stone, Page and Flynn are going to sink Trumps ship during the special counsel investigation.

And now that Spicer has been thrown under the bus...he knows things as well!!


www.washingtonpost.com... b1e757f

originally posted by: Dfairlite
He did this in two parts. First he was questioned by Schiff (D):

In respect to a number of allegations made recently that the president or his aides may have sought to enlist the help of members the IC [intelligence community] or Director Comey himself to drop the Flynn investigation. Have any members of the IC shared with you their concerns that the president was attempting to enlist the help of people within the intelligence community to drop the Flynn investigation?

Brennan's reply: "No, Sir."

Schiff kept pushing but got nowhere.

So now Comey and Brennan are both under oath destroying the idea that trump was trying to obstruct justice. Smack-down number one.

No they are not! You are either deliberately attempting to propagate a false narrative or you truly are living in a bubble where common sense and truth are forbidden to enter.

Comey was ask if he felt like Trump had obstructed the investigation at a time when Trump had only ask him to let it go.

At that time, Comey did not view Trump's "request" to "let it go" as sufficient grounds to qualify as actual obstruction of justice, because he wasn't ordered, bribed or threatened to do so.

Once Trump decided that his "request" fell on deaf ears, he took the next step and actually fired Comey.

Then he went on national tv to say that he did so because he didn't like the FBI doing this Russian investigation thing.

Then he told the Russian dignitaries how he removed a lot of stress by firing Comey and not being under investigation.

Obstruction of justice is a charge that is not always something that one can assume or prove based on the commission of a single act, but rather by an accumulation of acts and/or statements.

If you ask Comey that same question today, I'd just bet he'd give a completely different answer.

When it comes to Brennan's answer, why would he answer any differently?

What is so unusual about him not having any knowledge of Trump asking IC personnel to help refute investigation claims regarding possible collusion?

Brennan was head of the CIA and to my knowledge, there hasn't been a single accusation regarding Trump asking favors from any CIA personnel with respect to this investigation.

So why would Brennan know anything about that?

FYI; We have more than one intelligence agency and they don't always "share" everything they're doing with each other.

originally posted by:
Dfairlite

Part two is what the left is trying to use as evidence of collusion.
Brennan was asked:

Was there intelligence that said that the Trump campaign was colluding with Moscow during their campaign?

Brennan responded:

There was intelligence that the Russian intelligence services were actively involved in this effort, and having been involved in many counter-intelligence cases in the past, I know what the Russians try to do; they try to suborn individuals and they try to get individuals, including U.S. persons, to act on their behalf, either wittingly or unwittingly. And I was worried by a number of the contacts Russians had with U.S. persons, and so therefore, by the time I left office on January 20, I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting U.S. persons involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or an unwitting fashion. And so, therefore I felt as though the FBI investigation was certainly well-founded and need to look into these issues.

While brennan doesn't come out and deny collusion, he answers the question in a way that leads far away from the idea of collusion or even an investigation into collusion. It seems the russians were trying to plant people into the campaign, not trying to collude directly with the campaign. Which makes sense (unlike the whole conspiracy about manchurian candidates). In fact, this line pretty well blows up the collusion theory:

I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting U.S. persons involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or an unwitting fashion.

That implies victim-hood of the Trump campaign, even if the Russians were successful.

If trump wasn't trying to quash the investigations into flynn and he wasn't colluding with the russians, what are they going to impeach him for?

Trump WAS trying to quash the FBI investigation into Flynn and he admitted as much to both Lester Holt and the Russian dignitaries he invited into the Oval Office.

And.....we're still not sure about the collusion.

I highly suspect that Russia was successful in their quest to infiltrate the Trump campaign and persuade them to embrace Russia friendly policies "unwittingly."

Trump is the person with no wit that they needed to favor them and so far, he seems to be doing a pretty good job at giving them access they've never had before.

Not to mention classified intelligence to boot.

a reply to: jimmyx
Call it what you want but there is more evidence in that deal than all of the Trump conspiracies combined. Of course we'll need an investigation into it that's as *cough* *cough* thorough as the Russia collusion to be sure.

Just follow the money. $150 Millionis a lot of money

a reply to: Dfairlite

Soo, in other words all politicians can be influenced by Russians Spies working behind the scenes without politicians knowing.

Yes, we should impeach every politician that in Washington because they are all been corrupted without knowing.

The stupidity of all this witch hunts is making democrat look very stupid

Wellllll ...on other news sites, the theme does seem to be the other way round.

Brennan did say that there were sufficiant contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Moscow, to justify investigation by the FBI.

Furthermore, the CIA, NSA & FBI set up a special group last july to investigate the extent of outside interference.

“I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and US persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals,”

Brennan said. “And it raised questions in my mind again whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.”

...snip...


“Having been involved in many counterintelligence cases in the past, I know what the Russians try to do. They try to suborn individuals and they try to get individuals, including US persons, to try to act on their behalf either wittingly or unwittingly. And I was worried by a number of contacts that the Russians had with US persons,” he said. “And so therefore I felt as though the FBI investigation was certainly well-founded and needed to look into those issues.”

...snip...

Brennan said the CIA came to the conclusion that Russia was seeking to influence the election in Trump’s favour. He said that for a period the Russians thought Hillary Clinton would win and sought to weaken her presidency in advance, but that they also favoured Trump because they thought his victory would be in their interests.


There was a “traditional animus” between Clinton and Putin, he said, in part because the Russian leader suspected the former secretary of state of backing anti-Kremlin protests and because the Russians thought Clinton would be more “rigid” on some issues like human rights than Trump.

Brennan also said he thought Russia cooperated with WikiLeaks through middlemen.
He said Russia had used intermediaries to work with the anti-secrecy group.
WikiLeaks released material hacked from email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign officials during last year’s presidential campaign.

Link

Sounds like *ahem* inexperienceed members of the Trump team getting caught out.
Who could that possibly be ?

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Dfairlite


The stupidity of all this witch hunts is making democrat look very stupid

It's not a witch hunt! The Trump family has been doing business with Russians for years. Trump lied. The 3 letters have been investigating his connections for years. I hardly think the FBI, CIA, NSA and others are democrats.

www.politico.com...

We as Americans have a right to know if Trump sold out the United States for profit.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Uhhh... You do know that Brennan left office on January 20th, before Flynn resigned and investigation into his Russian contacts began?

So ...how does him saying he wasn't made aware of efforts to shut down the Flynn Investigation (which hadn't started yet) work in your time-altered-reality?

that is weird...

And this is what you cite as destroying the possibility of collusion?

I was worried by a number of the contacts Russians had with U.S. persons, and so therefore, by the time I left office on January 20, I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting U.S. persons involved in the campaign or not

I don't think your unwavering loyalty to team trump is good for your brain...just my 2 cents..

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Dfairlite
He did this in two parts. First he was questioned by Schiff (D):

In respect to a number of allegations made recently that the president or his aides may have sought to enlist the help of members the IC [intelligence community] or Director Comey himself to drop the Flynn investigation. Have any members of the IC shared with you their concerns that the president was attempting to enlist the help of people within the intelligence community to drop the Flynn investigation?

Brennan's reply: "No, Sir."

Schiff kept pushing but got nowhere.

So now Comey and Brennan are both under oath destroying the idea that trump was trying to obstruct justice. Smack-down number one.

No they are not! You are either deliberately attempting to propagate a false narrative or you truly are living in a bubble where common sense and truth are forbidden to enter.

Comey was ask if he felt like Trump had obstructed the investigation at a time when Trump had only ask him to let it go.

To be specific...Comey was asked if DOJ had ever shut down an FBI investigation for political purposes...and he said no.

Nothing about Trump attempting to obstruct justice.

originally posted by: Flatfish

Trump WAS trying to quash the FBI investigation into Flynn and he admitted as much to both Lester Holt and the Russian dignitaries he invited into the Oval Office.

And.....we're still not sure about the collusion.

Two things here....Obstructing Justice is about the attempt.

All you need to prove is an attempt to obstruct justice...

If the perpetrator had to be successful in obstructing justice for there to be a charge, then no one would ever get charged because justice was successfully obstructed.

AND..you do not need to be guilty of the original charge to be found guilty of obstructing justice. Plenty of people get dragged into investigations that don't result in charges, but they get slapped for obstructing justice for covering stuff up.

Trump has gone out and hired an outside legal team to defend him for a reason..

a reply to: marg6043

Of course all politicians CAN be influenced. That doesn't mean all politicians ARE influenced. These arguments you guys have wouldn't work on a 7th grader. It's no wonder you don't understand what's going on with the investigations.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Whether it was intentional or not on Trumps vehalf.. that still relegates our election as a farce

Do you seriously think that :

1) This was the first time they've done this
2) That they have anywhere near the influence needed to affect the Presidential election on a National level
3) That if they hadn't done anything that they are accused of, that Hillary would have won (Given what the DNC did to Bernie, and the feeding of debate questions to Hillary, etc)

I say Trump would have won against her regardless. It was HER not the Russians that lost her the election. The vast majority of Trump voters, had decided long ago to vote against Hillary. They already didn't like her.

Bernie would have had a much better shot at beating him, but I still think Trump would have won against him.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
It would be a farce due to the fact Hillary won the popular vote by a large margin and therefore the election was incredibly close... so close that Russian interference could have literally had an election deciding impact

FYI, there is no such thing as the popular vote in The United States of America presidential election.

Simply because we ARE the United STATES of America.

It's about state's rights, and prevention of mob rule that we have the Electoral College. New York, and California do NOT get to dictate their will on the other 48 states. Because if the popular vote did exist, that's what would happen, with EVERY Presidential election. Every. Single. One.

So, yeah. There's that.

Here's one, Kushner 'under FBI scrutiny' - US sources
a reply to: Damiel

President Donald Trump's son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner, is under FBI scrutiny as part of the Russia investigation, US media report.

Investigators believe Mr Kushner, 36, has significant information relevant to their inquiry, US officials told NBC News. The FBI is looking into potential links between Mr Trump's campaign team and Russia during the 2016 elections. Mr Trump denies any collusion between his campaign and Russia.

The US officials, who were not named, said that the interest in Mr Kushner did not mean the investigators suspected him of a crime or intended to charge him. Separately, the Washington Post reported that the investigators were focusing on a series of meetings he held with the Russian ambassador to the US, Sergei Kislyak, and a banker from Moscow.

Congress is also looking into potential links between Mr Trump's campaign team and Russia.

Ongoing in the link...

Soo, Brennan thought, think about it, believe and again think more about, now, where is the prove that indeed Trump was influenced by the Russians.

Show me the prof Brennan, think and thinking more about is not prof, is just you know thinking.

originally posted by: poncho1982

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Whether it was intentional or not on Trumps vehalf.. that still relegates our election as a farce

Do you seriously think that :

1) This was the first time they've done this

To a US election and with this severity? No.
They have been messing with former soviet republics and a couple European nations on a much smaller scale, but we arrogantly thought they would never eff with us. Putin's hate for HRC drove him to take the risk.

2) That they have anywhere near the influence needed to affect the Presidential election on a National level

I don't know? The gullible right wing sure ran with all the fake news and cheered all the Russian Troll bots on twitter and hacked emails etc.

But honestly don't care if it had an impact..Someone shoots at you and misses, they need to be dealt with immediately before they take another shot.

3) That if they hadn't done anything that they are accused of, that Hillary would have won (Given what the DNC did to Bernie, and the feeding of debate questions to Hillary, etc)

Don't care...again..someone shoots at you, you don't wait until they hit you before ducking and returning fire.

As far as whether the DNC treated Bernie fairly or not...that is a wildly separate issue. Ever pick a side and throw a punch in a fight between two brothers and you can expect to get your ass kicked by both of them...Or were trump supporters just talking trash with the "America First" BS?

I say Trump would have won against her regardless.

I say that is irrelevant to the topics of Interference, Collusion, Treason et al..

Brennan's opinions are like butt holes everybody have one.

what a joke.