Who Is Lying? John Brennan or James Comey? by Publius Tacitus

Sorry to belabor the point of the Deep State conspiracy, but the tenacious insistence of TTG in clinging to Democrat talking points and refusing to step back and objectively look at the facts demands an answer.

He is upset because I refused to post his comments to my last posting. He does a masterful job of seizing on an issue, such as John Brennan's briefing to key members of Congress sometime in August 2016, and insisting that this proves that Brennan was on the up and up. What I did not put on paper was the fact that I have spoken to one of the members of Congress briefed by Brennan and the content was not as advertised. Everyone did not get the same brief.

But let's go back and look at what Brennan was leaking to the press about this supposedly damning intelligence. If it really was as clear cut and damning, as TTG and others seem willing to believe, then we are faced with having to conclude that the Obama Administration, including Obama himself, endangered America's security or that the info was based on innuendo and conjecture. 

Let's keep the timeline straight:

1. The FBI learns from Christopher Steele in early July that the Russians reportedly are in cahoots with Donald Trump, who also happens to have a golden shower fetish. The FBI opens a counter intelligence case.
2. John Brennan supposedly receives intelligence from a different source that Vladimir Putin is not only meddling in the US election in order to sow chaos but to get Donald Trump elected.
3. Brennan then, at the urging for Barack Obama, supposedly briefs this incredible material to members of Congress.

Okay, so TTG wants us to believe that all members of the Congressional leadership got the same briefing and that it had nothing to do with the Steele memo. This is total bullshit. Let's go to the record.

We know that Harry Reid was briefed by John Brennan on 25 August 2016, according to a 6 April 2017 NY Times piece by Eric Lichtblau.

What did John Brennan tell Reid? Well, we only have to look at the letter that Reid sent to Comey two days later (27 August 2016) to understand the content of what Brennan briefed. Reid states:

• The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump's presidential campaign continues to mount . . .
• questions have been raised about whether a Trump advisor who has been highly critical of U.S. and European economic sanctions on Russia, and who has conflicts of interest due to investments in Russian energy conglomerate Gazprom, met with high-ranking sanctioned individuals while in Moscow in July of 2016, well after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee.

This last point comes directly from the Steele dossier. There is no other source for it. Yet, Reid was not briefed by Comey or anyone from the FBI on the matter. He was only briefed by John Brennan.

I can hear TTG howling now. "Oh no," he'll insist, "Brennan surely had an independent source from the Steele dossier." Really?

Then how do you square the circle that James Comey, in his testimony before Congress in June of 2017, said that the dossier was "UNVERIFIED and salacious?" If the CIA actually had info corroborating the claim in the Steele dossier that Carter Page was acting as an agent of Trump and conspiring with the Russians then Comey would have had access to such information. In fact, if there actually were at least two sources confirming that Page was in Russia and collaborating with Putin on behalf of Trump, then Comey would have at least been able to say that part of the dossier was VERIFIED. He did not.

Do I think James Comey is a liar? Not on this point. I believe that if he had one shred of evidence corroborating one part of the dossier then he would have testified to that fact. He would not have said, "unverified and salacious." He would have said, "yes, some key parts but I cannot discuss that in open session."

But I do not have to rely on mere inference. I know from a source well placed in the intelligence community that Brennan was peddling the Steele memo and had no independent alternative source for such information. In fact, the intel backing up the audacious claims of Brennan and DNI Chief James Clapper was so weak that only a hand picked group of analysts were allowed to review and write up their analysis of that material.

Here again, I do not need to rely on inference. The only document supposedly coordinated in the intelligence community was the one published in January 2017 at DNI Jim Clapper's direction. TTG should know better, given his experience in the intel community, what charade and fraud this document is because only three agencies cleared on it (note, the term "clearance" refers to the process of relevant personnel from each of the named agencies certifying the language and content of the analysis).

It was a cooked, pre-determined document. Rather than let the analysts who were the actual substantive experts on the issues work on the document, DNI's Jimmy Clapper testified:

before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on May 8 that “the two dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies.”

I know for a fact that a senior CIA analyst with special expertise on the GRU and Russia, who normally would be part of such a drafting process, was excluded. And it was not because the analyst lacked the appropriate clearance.

Another compelling fact is that the NSA only signed on as having "moderate confidence" in the conclusions and analysis presented in the document. That's a weasel word for "not sure." If there actually existed solid intel from reliable sources do you think that the NSA would insist that it only had "moderate confidence." Given my experience on working such issues the answer is a resounding, "hell no!"

Finally, there is the dog that did not bark. It was a canard to claim, as Clapper did in October 2016, that "17 intelligence agencies" agreed there was Russian meddling. That was a lie. No document had been circulated and cleared on by all "17 agencies." The reality is that one would never have all 17 clear on such a document because not all have expertise or even access to the intel that such a judgment would be based on. However, two agencies with direct and important expertise were excluded from coordinating on the DNI fraud--DIA and State's INR. Both agencies have experienced analysts with substantive knowledge. Don't believe for a minute that the "intel" (which only inspired moderate confidence in the NSA) was so sensitive that analysts with TS SCI clearances at DIA and INR could not see nor comment on such material.

Here is the bottom line. John Brennan is a proven liar and this whole charade about having some sensitive, well placed source giving us the inside dope on Putin is a new fraud and raises further questions about his credibility.

So, if TTG wants to rely on Brennan as a solid source, that is his right as a free citizen. But buyer beware. Brennan's story does not add up.

UPDATE--More mindless idiocy courtesy of Robert Mueller. His indictment of Russians for meddling in the US election is a goddamn joke. Seriously? This kind of activity has been going on between Russia and the US for 60 plus years. Anyone remember Radio Free Europe? Voice of America? (And I can't disclose what we were doing covertly to meddle in Soviet/Russia politics, but we were). And here is Mueller's conclusion:

anyone who was disparaging Clinton, may have "unwittingly" been a collaborator of the 13 Russian "specialists" who cost Hillary the election.

God help America. We've lost our damn minds.

Comments

[Ishmael Zechariah]

PT,
re"God help America. We've lost our damn minds."

I am of the opinion that the parasites infesting the US body politic have now infected the nerve centers and the brain.
God help the World. Things are reaching a breaking point all over.
Ishmael Zechariah

[eakens]

The problem is not whether the meddling did or did not happen, it's that the general populace here has no curiosity, and thus have lost their ability to think for themselves, and decide between what seems right, let alone the difference between right and wrong. We have institutional disregard for critical thinking here, and the fallout is that you have people who can be easily swayed by soundbites, 140 character twitter posts, and the onion type rags.

If they want to have a congressional hearing on something, it should be why a sitting member of congress thinks the Island of Guam might tip over if the Military continues to build on it.

We have lost our minds, but that is the question that needs answering. Maybe then you can find evidence of foreign interference.

[Fred]

Publius,

In the Mueller indictment it also notes (page 23) that "Trump is Not my President" NYC, Novermber 12 2016, was a Russian idea. So by Meuller logic the Resistance is a Russian idea. How many members of congress should get expelled over being Putin's puppets?

Is this all he has to show for millions of dollars and how many damned months of investigation? How about all the NGOs that get foreign donations? When the hell are they going to get investigated for "defrauding" the United States? Better not ask, that would violate the narrative. God help us.

[Anna]

Russian meddling -- Finally some "evidence" for the gullible: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-16/special-counsel-robert-mueller-indicts-13-russians-hacking-during-us-election
"Defendant ORGANIZATION had a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Defendants posted derogatory information about a number of candidates, and by early to mid-2016, Defendants' operations included supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump ("Trump Campaign") and disparaging Hillary Clinton."
-- Really? Somehow the righteous Mueller and Rosenstein have missed very important Intel:
Comment section: "Sixteen thousand Facebook users said that they planned to attend a Trump protest on Nov. 12, 2016, organized by the Facebook page for BlackMattersUS, a Russian-linked group [?!!] that sought to capitalize on racial tensions between black and white Americans. The event was shared with 61,000 users. As many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters actually convened at Manhattan's Union Square. They then marched to Trump Tower, according to media reports at the time. ... The group’s protest was the fourth [4th!] consecutive anti-Trump rally in New York following election night, and one of many across the country." http://thehill.com/policy/technology/358025-thousands-attended-protest-organized-by-russians-on-facebook
-- And then there was a pink-pussy D.C. riot and the DisruptJ20 protest group riot against Trump. Have Mueller and Rosenstein had a sudden onset of dementia and forgotten the mass protests? Who was financing and organizing the logistics for the anti-Trump protests? Was there any investigation of the organizers of the protests against the elected POTUS? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/what-i-saw-at-the-anti-trump-riot-in-dc/article/2612548
http://www.businessinsider.com/pussy-hats-womens-march-washington-trump-inauguration-2017-2

[BillWade]

It sounds like the indictment makes 13 Russian trolls into felons. How many trolls do we have? Where do they work, will other governments decide they are felons as well? This isn't a "nothingburger", it's a "veginothingburger". Hasn't President Trump now been exonerated as well, "unwittings" versus "colluders"?

[Keith Harbaugh]

Okay, let me try again.
I tried to post what appears below the line
to PT's post http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/02/pieces-of-the-coup-puzzle-fall-into-place-by-publius-tacitus.html
but it was not accepted.
Given PT's reference to RFE/VoA in the post above,
let me repeat the question:

------------------------

I have read numerous accounts of how the U.S. has attempted to influence political developments in:
Western Europe
the old Soviet Union, and its successor Russia
various other parts of the world.
Sometimes through kinetic means (Afg., Iraq, Libya, Syria, et al.)
but also through what seems to me like propaganda:
Voice of America,
Radio Free Europe.
Back during the Cold War we were told that the USSR would try to block or jam
VoA/RFE broadcasts from reaching their citizens.

So, my very sincere question is:
Just how did U.S. efforts to influence the population of the USSR via the broadcasts of VoA/RFE
differ from the alleged efforts of Russia to support
what the media calls far-right parties and policies in the U.S. and Europe?

[A Pols]

So these 13 Russians are accused of trolling and planting rumors?
Since the same thing is being done by Americans and, yes, Israelis, it seems ludicrous to suggest this is really "meddling" in the election. More like "feeding red meat to grey dogs" in the sense of stoking the fires of internecine culture wars already ongoing in this country.
If we actually end up arresting any of these individuals there will be tit for tat since there are still American financed NGOs operating in Russia whose personnel can be easily arrested on similar charges of promoting chaos and discord. Maybe the Germans can rent us that famous Berlin Bridge where "spies" were exchanged in various cold war movies.

[turcopolier]

Keith Harbaugh

Don't be stupid. I did not block your comment. pl

[Richardstevenhack]

See my comment in TTG's thread about who these "Internet Research Agency" people actually are. Scott Humor over at The Saker dug deep into these people and determined that they are actually anti-Russian Russians who were allegedly proven in court to be CIA spies!

I link to Scott's piece in the TTG thread. Hell, might as well link it here, too:

A Brief History of the “Kremlin Trolls”
https://thesaker.is/a-brief-history-of-the-kremlin-trolls/

This is a clever move on Mueller's part - indict a bunch of Russians who (some) already have been arrested by the Russians and therefore are in no position to defend themselves against a US indictment.

I suppose Brennan doesn't care that a bunch of Russians recruited as CIA assets get dumped on their own resources. Good luck recruiting any more Russians to help you!

It's a measure of Mueller's desperation, nothing more.

[Keith Harbaugh]

PT, if I understand you correctly you think the 2017 IC "assessment" that Russia meddled does not really reflect an IC consensus.
If that is your view, how do you reconcile it with these statements:
https://youtu.be/6AHaOwU0_ZY?t=45m50s
(By the way, I am not hostile to you or your view,
but simply interested in the truth.)

[Valissa]

"Russians Did Not Alter The Outcome Of The Elections": Highlights From Rosenstein's Press Conference https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-16/russians-did-not-alter-outcome-elections-highlights-rosensteins-press-conference
To summarize: in 2014, 13 Russians launched a campaign to interfere with the US political system by "disparaging" candidates. This continued until ultimately Trump was elected, meanwhile, "there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the [Russians'] conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election."
----------------

How nice and simple and tidy. '13 Russians'... has nice ring to it... will make a great propaganda movie.

Seriously though, will this face saving result in any way encourage the Dems to pick a new strategy for "success" the Republicans? Or will they simply triple down on dumb?

[Harry]

Im rather curious what TTG thinks of the 13 Russian announcement. Seems a stretch to me.

[Publius Tacitus]

The only “consensus” is those who signed their names. Not my opinion. An objective fact

[BillWade]

Aren't the economic sanctions imposed upon Russia due to Russian meddling in our elections? Might it not be prudent for Putin to round the 13 yokels up and put them on the next flight to NY (with lots of publicity)?

[iowa steve]

During the campaign any voter using social media could come across literally hundreds of posts effectively proclaiming "Hillary is trash" and "Trump is trash".

Or for that matter the voters could see much the same by reading the campaign literature in their mailboxes, or listening to speeches on television.

Yet, somehow, a few Russian trolls posting online claims that were indistinguishable from most of the "normal" election rhetoric is a threat to our democracy.

Imho, a far bigger threat to our elections is the massive amounts of money involved, and the funding of candidates by oligarchs. But the msm seems confortable with that.

And it goes without saying that one of the most immediate threats to our democracy generated by Russiagate are the ongoing attempts to silence alternative dissent to the status-quo and label it as coming from Russianbots.

[bluetonga]

"anyone who was disparaging Clinton, may have "unwittingly" been a collaborator of the 13 Russian "specialists" who cost Hillary the election"

Sounds even more desperate than simply dumb to me. Comey and his kins seem so pressed by (the lack of) facts and the overall incoherence of their ludicrous tale that they finally see no other choice than resorting to the ultimate weapon in store : direct scolding and shaming of ordinary citizen bold enough to object HRC's wrongdoings, past, present and future.

I this vein, I also read in earlier comment threads speculations regarding a new, very cunning objective of the putative Russian attackers : getting willfully spotted in order to spread chaos within the US politics and doubt within the heart of citizen. Frankly this sounds a wee bit far-fetched, like machiavelous 2.3 with Putin and the Kremlin gang upgrading to 4-D chess politics. Wouldn't it have been bold enough for them to bet on the universally predicted loser Trump? What sense does it make to interfere ostenteously when precisely their vowed nemesis is bound to win? How would that have tarnished her victory if she had won despite their meddling? Doesn't hold any water to me, but desperation stimulates imagination, and truly, confusion. Contenders of this view seem well engaged in a perillous intellectual twister game.

Besides, such an account shows very little appreciation for the intelligence and critical thinking of American voters. I bet that if many came to distrust their institutions, it is out of their own experience and reflexion rather than out of foreign engineering.

Delusion, desperation, confusion, stupidity, whatever. But for sure the seams are creaking.

[Alves]

The funny thing is that it looks like the Russian government jailed several people from IRA last year. It would be prudent to look into it and try to figure out what is going on for real.

[plantman]

One comment on the Timeline...

You say: "Harry Reid was briefed by John Brennan on 25 August 2016, according to a 6 April 2017 NY Times piece by Eric Lichtblau.

Well, now that's pretty convenient timing, don't you think? After all, Trump didn't become the GOP candidate for prez until the GOP convention on July 16, 2016. That gave the scheming Brennan a month to make up this dumb story and start passing it around Capitol Hill.

[Yeah, Right]

"anyone who was disparaging Clinton, may have "unwittingly" been a collaborator of the 13 Russian "specialists" who cost Hillary the election."

So the US-side-of-things isn't even a "conspiracy" any more, it has become a "collaboration" of dupes?

What next?

Is Mueller going to accuse Trump-followers of the heinous sin of "not being with the program"? Or of "bucking the system"?

Goddammit! Hillary was meant to be the winner. All the scales were tipped in her favour. How dare there be any other result! Heads. Must. Roll!!!

[GeneO]

Publius Tacitus -

Regarding your claim that Mueller concluded "unwittingly collaborated":

According to the text of the indictment that our host, Pat Lang, posted Mueller made no such conclusion. I note you did not put it within quotation marks.

Is there a separate indictment floating around out there with those conclusions?

[Fred]

Valissa,

You mean Robby Mook is going to blow through $3 Billion next time out and still lose?

[Publius Tacitus]

You need to do a better job of reading
“Some defendants, posing as U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities,” the indictment said.

[GeneO]

Publius -

You are reading into that something I do not see.

Unwitting? I am sure there were unwitting Clinton fans also pushing TDS memes that were not true.

So call me blind if you want, but where does it say "collaborated"?

[wisedupearly Ceo]

To PT: still no collaboration.

[Valissa]

Haha... https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2017/04/whos-blame-clinton-campaign-aides-throw-robby-mook-bus/ According to this article Mook is to blame for Clinton's loss. Nary a mention of any Russians.