Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified intelligence on Tuesday indicating that the Obama administration knew the Russian collusion story was a campaign operation by the Hillary Clinton team but pursued the investigation anyway despite its obviously dubious nature.
Ratcliffe letter indicates that former President Barack Obama was briefed by former CIA director John Brennan on the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
The Democrats are doing everything they can to deflect from this news, blaming the evil Rooskies for their own illicit behavior getting exposed.
“This is Russian disinformation,” wrote Rachel Cohen, who works as spokeswoman for Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-VA) in a tweet, adding that she believed the so-called Russian disinfo was “laundered by the Director Of National Intelligence and Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is extraordinary.”
However, Ratcliffe anticipated the spin from the Democrats and even addressed it preemptively in his letter.
“To be clear, this is not Russian disinformation and has not been assessed as such by the Intelligence Community. I’ll be briefing Congress on the sensitive sources and methods by which it was obtained in the coming days,” he wrote.
High-ranking Republican members of the Senate are certainly taking the allegations seriously.
“This latest information provided by DNI Ratcliffe shows there may have been a double standard by the FBI regarding allegations against the Clinton campaign and Russia,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said.
The entirety of the letter can be seen here:
BREAKING: According to handwritten notes, Brennan briefed Obama on Hillary's approval of a proposal to attack Trump in the 2016 election by tying him to Putin pic.twitter.com/lnwTFwjoAf
— Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) September 29, 2020
This should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following the corrupt nature of the entire sordid Russia-gate saga, which Big League Politics has covered extensively:
Former CIA Director John Brennan was dishonest in his testimony to Congress when he told them that the infamous Steele dossier was not used in the Obama administration’s Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that ultimately led to the Russian collusion investigation, according to the IG report released yesterday.
The IG report indicated that there was serious discussion about whether the infamous Steele dossier should be included in the ICA. Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe had said that “he felt strongly that the Steele election reporting belonged in the body of the ICA, because he feared that placing it in an appendix was ‘tacking it on’ in a way that would ‘minimiz[e]’ the information and prevent it from being properly considered.”
The Steele dossier was ultimately included in the ICA, although it was hidden in the appendix.
“In the appendix, the intelligence agencies explained that there was ‘only limited corroboration of the source’s reporting’ and that Steele’s election reports were not used ‘to reach analytic conclusions of the CIA/FBI/NSA assessment,’” the IG report states.
Brennan said during a colorful exchange with former Rep. Trey Gowdy while testifying before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in 2017 that the CIA did not rely on the Steele dossier while formulating the ICA:
Mr. Gowdy: Do you know if the Bureau ever relied on the Steele dossier as any — as part of any court filings, applications, petitions, pleadings?
Mr. Brennan: I have no awareness.
Mr. Gowdy: Did the CIA rely on it?
Mr. Brennan: No.
Mr. Gowdy: Why not?
Mr. Brennan: Because we — we didn’t. It wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had. It was not in any way used as a basis for the Intelligence Community assessment that was done. It was — it was not.
FBI Director James Comey also confirmed in page 179 of the IG report that Brennan personally argued that the Steele Dossier was part of the “corpus of intelligence information” that was relevant for the development of the ICA.
“I remember being part of a conversation, maybe more than one conversation, where the topic was how the [Steele] reporting would be investigated, if at all, into the IC assessment. And I don’t remember participating in debates about that. I think I was just told, in, I think, in a meeting with Clapper and Brennan and Rogers [then NSA Director], that the IC analysts found it credible on its face and gravamen of it, and consistent with our other information, but not in a position where they would integrate it into the IC assessment,” Comey said, according to the IG report.
“But they thought it was important enough and consistent enough that it ought to be part of the package in some say, and so they had come up with this idea to make an [appendix]. I remember, I don’t think I was part of a debate about that, as I said, but I remember a conversation when I was told that’s how it would be handled and my reaction was, okay, that’s reasonable,” Comey added.
This is the biggest scandal in American history, and until the conspirators behind it are prosecuted and jailed, this nation will never be great again.
Biden White House Makes YouTube Upload of Inaugural Speech ‘Unlisted’ After Being Flooded With Dislikes
The Inaugural Address wasn’t well received.
Joe Biden’s White House staff privatized an upload of his inaugural address from the White House YouTube page, after the video was rationed with a wave of dislikes.
As of late Wednesday night, Biden’s Inaugural Address has more than 17,000 dislikes, and less than 4,000 likes. Sensing that the public wasn’t responding positively, the Biden administration made the video “unlisted” some time after its initial streaming.
In a legally questionable development, the Biden White House staff have also disabled comments on the Inaugural Address. Court rulings previously forced the Trump administration to unblock fanatic liberal reply guys on Twitter, with judges ruling that they had the right to engage with the President on the platform.
The inaugural address is accessible here.
The poor reaction may have come in part from the existing YouTube subscriber demographic of the White House channel, which was primarily composed of Trump supporters. Other uploads of Biden’s Inaugural Address on the YouTube channels of mainstream media networks have a more favorable like-to-dislike ratio.
The takedown of the video could ultimately be challenged under a 2018 court ruling establishing presidential social media accounts as public forums, with comments enabled. Biden will have to face criticism- even on his official internet presence- as President.
States2 days ago
Grassroots Leaders Send Final Warning to GOP Establishment: Rejecting Trump Means Death of Republican Party
White House1 day ago
President Trump Contemplates Ditching the GOP, Starting New ‘Patriot Party’ to Put America First
Politics4 days ago
GOP Establishment Threatens President Trump with Impeachment Unless He Denies Election Fraud
Big League National Security4 days ago
DNI Ratcliffe: China Interfered in 2020 Election, CIA Suppressed Info
Tech2 days ago
Free Speech Platform Gab Receives 3 Million New Users in 12 Days
Politics3 days ago
Constituents Already Beginning to Turn on Peter Meijer, Who Admits That Voting to Impeach Trump May Have Ruined His Political Career
Free Speech3 days ago
Tennessee High School Principal Suspended for Speaking Against Big Tech Censorship
Big League National Security4 days ago
Left-Wing Extremist Charged in Alleged Florida Capitol Attack Identified Soros as “Sponsor”