Here is a man who boasted of voting for a communist for the Presidency of the United States, how the hell did he get to be the Director of the CIA? Oh, I forgot, he was appointed by former President Obama who shared his views, especially the pro-Muslim, anti-Israel ones.

I wonder if former CIA Director John Brennan has any sense of irony when he wrote the following words in a New York Times Op-Ed?

which could reasonably, based on Congressional testimony and mainstream media reports, be re-written  to read …

Could Brennan’s crusade against Donald Trump have started with a joke or off-hand comment? Or was this just the pretext for Brennan using the bogus unsubstantiated dossier to start an FBI investigation?

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton maintained an insecure private server, ostensibly to hide her communications from the government, law enforcement, media, and public lest they be used against her in any political campaign. There is little doubt that the private server was compromised by unnamed third-parties, that the server was used for classified information, and that the server contents were destroyed to prevent discovery. Likewise, there is no doubt that Hillary Clinton and her various aides and associates were also complicit in mishandling classified information which was punishable under the Espionage Act. Additionally, we saw how the Department of Justice and the FBI overlooked the destruction of government documents by Hillary Clinton, her legal team, and others.

So why wouldn’t candidate Trump joke about getting the missing emails from Russia – allegedly the third-party that may have compromised Hillary Clinton’s private email server?

Brennan’s assertion that the president “revoked my security clearance to try and silence anyone who would dare challenge him” is ludicrous. One, because John Brennan had left the CIA and had no legitimate purpose for retaining his security clearance. Two, because Brennan attempted to monetize the clearance by using the credential to give weight and credence to assertions made as a television commentator. And three, John Brennan has hardly been silenced since his security clearance was pulled – witness his editorial in the largest newspaper in the United States and his numerous appearances on television programs. 

The media, especially the New York Times gets it wrong, deliberately and demonstrably wrong …

Jeffrey H. Smith, senior counsel at the law firm Arnold & Porter and general counsel of the C.I.A. from 1994 to 1995, writing in the New York Times posed the question, “Was It Illegal for Trump to Revoke Brennan’s Security Clearance?” with the subhead, “The president not only violated the former C.I.A. director’s First Amendment rights but also made it harder for the government to draw on his expertise.”

The truth is that the president’s plenary powers at the nation’s chief executive provide him with the exclusive right to classify, declassify information and grant, deny, or revoke security clearances. Holding a security clearance is a privilege of office occasioned by the “need to know” or have access to classified information. Access or “need to know” ends with the individual’s service to the government and if access is required in the future, a security clearance for limited purposes can be re-issued. As for Brennan’s First Amendment Rights, the man will simply not shut-up. He is all over television and his words are widely quoted in the mainstream media. So, one may ask, what abridgement of his “free speech rights” have been curtailed other than the ongoing obligation to protect classified information in perpetuity or until it has been declassified.

Smith adds, “I do not know whether Mr. Brennan or others who may have their security clearance revoked by the president will choose to litigate. But if they do, it will be up to the courts to decide whether the First Amendment still matters in the age of Trump.” I wonder if Smith can see a looming congressional conflict over separation of powers – where either congress or the courts attempts to constrain the President of the United States in his sworn duty to protect the constitution and the United States.

As for John Brennan, the individual, it appears that he has lied – under oath – to Congress as well as the American people. He appears to be a leaker of classified information. And, he apparently has issues with our nation, its foreign policy, and upholding the U.S. Constitution when it comes to domestic spying on American citizens.

Bottom line …

The FBI and DOJ have worked for over two years to substantiate information in the so-called Steele Dossier, created by those who wanted to derail Trump’s candidacy and promote Hillary Clinton, funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and leaked to the media after having been somewhat legitimized by Clapper, Brennan, and Comey. In spite of the expense and manpower involved, the basic allegations in the dossier remain unverified and Christopher Steele is unwilling to provide the names of his “Russian” sources. Perhaps where the real collusion with Russia took place, resulting in a disinformation campaign against Trump.

It appears that the best the Special Prosecutor can do at this time is to prosecute third-parties that were peripheral to the Trump campaign for activities that occurred long before Trump took office. In essence, trying to force someone to manufacture “evidence” of collusion in return for a lighter sentence. An old jailhouse trick being used against the President of the United States.

Whether all will be revealed in the future is unknown. Obama and those in his administration who are most at risk have little choice other than to double down on their collusion and obstruction of justice, lest the loose grasp on the tiger’s tail and be eaten.

We are so screwed.

-- steve