Liars, Leakers, and Liberals: The Case Against the Anti-Trump Conspiracy Page 8

  The Brennan-Obama CIA became not only the most careless in the agency’s history but the least transparent. It was Brennan’s CIA that spied on the Senate Intelligence Committee while that committee was investigating the CIA’s detention and interrogation program.3 Not only did it read senators’ emails; it sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department based on false information. So, the FBI was just following established Deep State protocol when it requested its FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. In fact, the whole Russia-collusion delusion was cooked up to get a wiretap on the campaign.

  By the time Brennan became CIA director, the post-9/11 American public had been relentlessly browbeaten into believing they had to give up their freedom for safety. To Congress and much of the public, the credibility of the CIA and NSA was unimpeachable. Exploiting this misplaced, blind trust, Brennan’s CIA wasn’t just a cloak-and-dagger outfit. It was looking for someone to stab in the back. Obama gave Brennan’s agency a million daggers and a black cloak with which to operate.

  When Donald J. Trump stormed past the other Republican candidates for president, his ascension shook the unelected career administrators, the power-hungry leadership in law enforcement and the intelligence complex, and the rest of the Deep State. The threat that a Trump victory represented to their cabal was enough to set in motion a coordinated conspiracy to keep him out of the Oval Office.

  So, it’s no surprise LIAR Brennan, working with another career bureaucrat across the Atlantic, James Bond-wannabe Christopher Steele, started the whole phony Russian collusion investigation. It was Brennan who pressured the FBI into investigating the Trump campaign, using Steele’s comic book, cobbled together from hearsay and rumor. It was Brennan who touted the now-discredited dossier all over Washington as credible evidence. That comes as no surprise. But leaving aside for a moment that the bill for this piece-of-trash dossier was split three ways between Fusion GPS, the Hillary Clinton campaign, and the Democratic National Committee—conduct far more illegal than any Donald Trump is accused of—just think about who wrote the thing.

  Christopher Steele might as well be the British John Brennan. He’s certainly every bit a LIAR and LIBERAL. He climbed the ranks of posh British society without a hitch, went to Cambridge University, and then planted himself behind a desk at MI6 before the ink on his diploma was even dry. Within a few years, he was on the Russia desk, making “friends” in the Kremlin and hanging out—you might even say colluding—with Russian officials whenever he got the chance. By the time he retired and launched his private practice, he was basically a Russian citizen.

  So, why did Steele take a piece of counterfeit opposition research and go to newspaper after newspaper trying to peddle it like a door-to-door insurance salesman? Why was he so insistent on it becoming a huge news story? He was supposed to be a spy. Isn’t keeping your trap shut one of the core competencies of his profession? Apparently not in Mr. Steele’s case, at least as far as this “research” was concerned. He couldn’t wait to spill his guts to the liberal media.

  At least one source tells me the FBI paid him fifty grand for the dossier. Maybe he was just in it for the money. Was that why he rushed to Michael Isikoff of Yahoo! News and David Corn at Mother Jones to tell his far-fetched story? Did he have dreams of a book deal and a Hollywood movie?

  Although his motives still aren’t entirely clear, one thing is certain: Christopher Steele is not who the LIBERALS say he is. He’s not a top intelligence officer with impeccable credentials, a friend of the United States, and a warrior for liberty. In fact, he’s the exact opposite. He’s a mercenary in a Harris Tweed jacket and corduroy trousers, hired out to the highest bidder.

  LIBERALS would have you believe the Russians are responsible for the political divide in our country. NEWS FLASH: the Russian Fake News stories placed on Facebook accounted for about 0.1 percent of Facebook advertising revenue. Now, compare that pop gun to the Steele dossier dirty bomb that exploded in the media and has ever since poisoned us with a phony crisis, a politically motivated investigation, and a body politic more deeply divided than ever before. Mr. Steele’s dossier caused real damage to the fabric of our nation, unlike Russia’s insignificant meddling.

  And while our nation tore itself apart, Steele went underground in Great Britain. He lied to the Congressional committee, lied to the FBI and that’s perjury. I don’t care if he’s from the UK or Mars—actually I do, we don’t have an extradition treaty with Mars. And if Martha Stewart can go to jail for lying to the FBI and Roger Clemens can be indicted for lying to Congress, why not equal justice for the Brit? I think he needs to be brought back to the United States and prosecuted!

  Meanwhile, LEAKER Brennan conducted a campaign of disinformation by leaking false information about the Trump campaign’s collusion with the Russians without a shred of evidence, other than information from the discredited dossier itself. But this wasn’t the first time Brennan abused the power and secrecy of his position to deceive the American people. Not even close.

  It was LIAR Brennan who helped put together the Obama administration’s talking points to cover its deplorable handling of the Benghazi attack and Crooked Hillary’s complicity.4 It was LEAKER Brennan who had to apologize to US senators for the CIA spying on their computers. And now LIBERAL Brennan will go to any length to disparage, slander and sabotage the duly elected forty-fifth president.

  LIAR Brennan talks a tough game, but he’s a snowflake at heart. Like his FBI friends on the seventh floor of the J. Edgar Hoover Building, he’s a desk cop, not a street cop. And when the shit hits the fan, you don’t want a desk cop coming to your rescue. By the way, if you’re a Homeland fan, wipe Saul Berenson out of your head—Brennan ain’t no Berenson. He’s been pushing papers around his desk his whole career, at least when he’s not out in the hallway hoping to bump into someone to whom he can whisper his top-secret garbage—like the Steele dossier.

  For months, he was hyping the dossier to just about anyone who would listen. In July 2016, he tried to get the FBI to investigate the Trump campaign, but Cardinal Comey turned a deaf ear. Back then, the Cardinal, another desk cop, was too busy neutering the investigation into Hillary’s emails to buy the crap Brennan was selling. One conspiracy at a time, please. That’s when everyone was sure she was going to win, remember?

  That August, Brennan went over the Cardinal’s head, directly to President Obama. According to the Washington Post,5 a story based on leaks that just might have come from LEAKER Brennan himself, the CIA was the only intelligence agency present at that briefing. Brennan was still the only member of the intelligence community who was publicly saying that Russian president Vladimir Putin was trying to get Donald Trump elected. At that time, none of the other agencies bought Brennan’s fairy tale. I don’t even think the writers of Homeland would have been interested.

  Still Brennan wouldn’t quit. Like a one-man band with an accordion on his chest and cymbals on his knees, he made as much noise as he could. He next went to Congress and briefed leaders from both parties. He didn’t get much traction there, either. Desperate, he took his story to the one person of any note who would believe him.

  Minority Leader Harry Reid was at the end of his career in the US Senate. The 2012 midterm elections had rendered old Harry about as politically impotent as Anthony Weiner (sorry, couldn’t help myself). Literally adding injury to insult, he’d smacked himself in the eye with an exercise band and was walking around with one lens of his glasses covered in duct tape.

  Okay, I’m joking. It wasn’t duct tape. And I don’t mean to make fun of the senator’s injury; I just wanted to set the scene. But it is true that Senator Reid was doing just about anything to make himself relevant. When Donald Trump became the Republican nominee and was therefore eligible to read the classified daily briefs given by the intelligence agencies, Reid wanted intel analysts to send Trump phony briefs. I kid you not.6

  So, when LIAR Brennan cornered Harry and spewed his cooked-up tale about Putin and Trump, the mi
nority leader swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Reid sent a letter posthaste off to the FBI director, urging him to open an investigation. Cardinal Comey didn’t open one, at least that the public knew about. He was still too busy fudging Crooked Hillary’s investigation. Two months later, Senator Reid pounded the keys on his computer again, this time scolding the Cardinal for reopening the investigation into Hillary while not doing a thing about Putin’s interference. Comey and the FBI responded, taking the official position that there was no clear evidence linking the Trump campaign with Russia.7

  The Cardinal would eventually change that official position. He had a habit of doing that. Meanwhile, with Brennan as ringleader, the anti-Trump conspiracy’s numbers began to grow.

  Unmasking the Unmaskers

  On the day Donald J. Trump was sworn in as the forty-fifth president, Susan Rice, Obama’s last National Security Advisor, sat in front of her computer composing an email she was about to send to herself. Her purpose, she later said, was to create a “permanent record” of a meeting she’d had with Obama and his top national security advisors a few days before.8 The discussion at the meeting centered on how much of their investigation into the phony Russian collusion story they were willing to share with the incoming administration.

  So, let me try to get this straight. Obama’s NSA chief wanted a permanent record of the outgoing president’s directive to keep national security information secret from the incoming president?

  However, just because it’s in an email doesn’t make it any less a lie. What is it with the Deep State that they think putting words on a page magically makes them true? I guess Susan learned after lying about the “spontaneous protest” in Benghazi that it would be better to put her lies in an email.

  Second, Susan, the fact that you were conspiring against the incoming administration is simply more proof the shadow government was looking to control the intelligence community during the Trump presidency. In truth, your career is a testament to how one can rise in the government if lies are your stock-in-trade. What your actions say to me is that, at the very least, your allegiance to the country you swore to protect is suspect. At worst, you were plotting to take down the commander in chief.

  LIAR Rice first waded into the Swamp under Bill Clinton’s administration. Bill’s secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, recommended Rice for a senior job in the State Department. Albright and Rice’s mother had known each other for years. Rice was named the assistant secretary of state for African affairs. In that post, she stood by with the rest of the Clinton administration as the ruling Hutus conducted a mass execution of ethnic minorities in Rwanda. Rice was more worried about politics than the lives of eight hundred thousand Tutsis and other minorities. Of all people, it was Samantha Power, who would become Obama’s UN ambassador and card-carrying member of the Deep State, who would expose Rice’s true feelings about the Rwandan slaughter. In an article Power wrote for The Atlantic, she quoted Rice as saying: “If we use the word ‘genocide’ and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect in the November [congressional] elections?” It was so callous and incendiary; the comment might have stopped Rice’s government career in its tracks had the article not been published in September 2001.9 The events of 9/11 overwhelmed all other news coverage.

  Rice crawled deeper into the Swamp in Obama’s first presidential campaign as a national security advisor. After his election, Obama rewarded her with a plum job as United States ambassador to the United Nations (the same job he would give Samantha Power, ironically), which turned out to be a complete disaster. Out of her depth, Ambassador Rice failed to get either Russia or China to join the US to deal with Syria or to impose sanctions against Iran.10

  Rice’s most memorable moment during her time at the UN had nothing to with her role as US ambassador.

  I’m sure you remember.

  On September 16th, 2012, the Obama administration needed to go on television to explain the deaths of a US ambassador and three others six weeks prior to the 2012 presidential election. The White House wanted Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, and the natural person to comment and explain on the Sunday-morning talk shows, to tell the lie, which she would end up telling repeatedly, but that day she was nowhere to be found. Several officials, including Ben Rhodes, reached out to her, but Hillary had either gone into hiding or was busy planning a cover-up at the highest levels of government and bungling foreign policy—there’s only so much you can ask from one woman.

  And so, Susan Rice ended up doing what is known as the full Ginsburg:11 interviews on all five Sunday-morning news shows. On each of those shows, she looked right into the camera and told us the September 11 attack five days earlier on our diplomatic compound in Libya was a “spontaneous” reaction to an anti-Muslim YouTube video. She told us that, and yet she knew full well it was a premeditated terrorist attack.

  When the deputy chief of the Libyan mission, Greg Hicks, heard LIAR Rice on the Sunday shows, he couldn’t believe his ears. Hicks was the last person to speak with Ambassador Chris Stevens before he was murdered during the attack. He had firsthand knowledge of what occurred in the Benghazi diplomatic compound. In emotional testimony in front of a congressional committee, Hicks refuted the Obama administration’s version of events. “I was stunned. My jaw dropped, and I was embarrassed,” he said about watching Rice’s remarks on television. He was questioned for about two hours on the matter, giving a chilling minute-by-minute account of the attacks. None of it sounded anything like the minor incident Susan Rice was peddling on television. He called it a “demonstrably false narrative.” The most emotional moment of his testimony came when he spoke of learning of Ambassador Stevens’s death. He called it, “the saddest phone call I have ever had in my life.”

  Hicks told the committee that he and the others trapped in the compound expected US military reinforcements, but Washington never sent them.

  “Okay, we’re on our own,” he recalled telling his colleagues. “We’re going to have to try to pull this off with the resources that we have available.”

  Four brave Americans, Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, gave their lives that night in Benghazi.

  Despite Rice’s dismal track record in international politics, and after she lied to America on national television, Obama rewarded Rice by making her his secretary of state. In one of the only good decisions she’s ever made, Rice withdrew her name from consideration. But that didn’t stop Obama. Six months later he named her his national security advisor. Rice was accused of “unmasking,” which means revealing the names of US citizens who are incidentally surveilled during targeted surveillance of foreigners, during her tenure as national security advisor. Intelligence officers are required to follow a “minimization” policy, which directs them to leave identifying information on US citizens incidentally surveilled out of intelligence reports unless very specific circumstances warrant revealing their identities.

  Initially, Rice said she knew of no such unmasking. Privately she told House investigators she unmasked the identities of senior Trump campaign officials to understand why the crown prince of the UAE was in New York.

  Of course, her lying continued. Again, she went on a Sunday-morning news show and said that Bowe Bergdahl served the United States with honor and distinction. “Sergeant Bergdahl wasn’t simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield.”12 Bergdahl would later plead guilty to deserting his fellow soldiers. What made the lie even more egregious was Obama’s exchange of five high-risk detainees at Guantanamo, the “Taliban Five,” some of whom have predictably returned to the battlefield, for deserter Bergdahl.

  So why in God’s name should we believe LIAR Susan Rice when she says she never sought to uncover the names of American citizens being surveilled for political purposes? “The allegation is that somehow the Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes. That’s
absolutely false,” she told NBC’s Andrea Mitchell.

  How invested was she in the Deep State’s campaign against Trump? Well, according to a former US attorney, Susan Rice put together spreadsheets detailing phone calls of many of the people who worked in the Trump organization and for the campaign—including President Trump!—which President Obama then made available to all intelligence agencies.13

  How big is this pool of LEAKERS? No one seems to know for sure. Six people? Ten? Two dozen? Enough to sink the Titanic? Flood Washington? Who knows?

  One thing is certain: with each new person who gained access to the Obama administration’s database of unmasked names, the chance of a leak increased exponentially. And every so-called journalist with a laptop and a cell phone was rubbing his or her hands.

  The unmasking of Americans by Obama’s Deep State began with General Michael Flynn. In early January 2017, just before Trump took office and just after Obama ripped up privacy protections by expanding the limits on sharing of raw NSA intelligence, the Washington Post published a story about Michael Flynn discussing Russian sanctions with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.14

  First, allow me to explain to you what’s legal and what isn’t in that last paragraph. What’s legal, and appropriate, is for a top security adviser of an incoming president to talk with officials of foreign countries, including officials representing countries that have difficult relationships with the United States. What’s not legal is leaking the name of an American citizen captured in an intelligence report.

  Here’s how the illegal process of unmasking can happen: analysts from the NSA are allowed to surveil the phones of anyone whose communications are even remotely tied up with a person like Kislyak. If someone happens to find him-or herself on the same email chain, that information goes straight to the intelligence gatherers. If Kislyak orders a pizza, the kid who answers the phone at Domino’s is fair game. Under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, communications of US persons can be legally captured during surveillance of a foreign target.15 This is how a bunch of people sitting at their laptops in some NSA office would manage to justify tapping the phone lines and email correspondence of the president-elect of the United States a few months later. But I’m getting ahead of myself.