(National Sentinel) Cornered: The more Obama CIA Director John Brennan speaks, the more unhinged he becomes — almost as if he fears that the walls of justice are closing in on him for his ‘alleged’ role in Spygate.
Earlier this week POTUS Donald Trump jerked Brennan’s security clearance in an unprecedented move after months of taking flak from the former Deep State spook. Rather than viewing POTUS’ action as the act of a petulant child, however, political insiders believe it had much more to do with the belief that Brennan was the guy who started — and ran — Spygate [for a full recount of the scandal, get “The Spygate Files” free when you subscribe to our daily email newsletter — sign up below].
Writing in The New York Times (of course) after losing his clearance, Brennan repeated earlier allegations that the Trump campaign did indeed “collude” with Moscow to ‘steal the election’ from his beloved Hillary Clinton, despite there being no evidence of it and no allegations of it from Robert Mueller, who has obviously moved on from that charge.
“Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion are, in a word, hogwash,” wrote Brennan. “The only questions that remain are whether the collusion that took place constituted criminally liable conspiracy, whether obstruction of justice occurred to cover up any collusion or conspiracy, and how many members of ‘Trump Incorporated’ attempted to defraud the government by laundering and concealing the movement of money into their pockets.”
Not so fast, said Sen. Robert Burr, R-N.C., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
He backhanded Brennan in a statement challenging his allegations and defending POTUS Trump.
“Director Brennan’s recent statements purport to know as fact that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign power,” said Burr.
“If Director Brennan’s statement is based on intelligence he received while still leading the CIA, why didn’t he include it in the Intelligence Community Assessment released in 2017? If his statement is based on intelligence he has seen since leaving office, it constitutes an intelligence breach,” Burr continued.
“If he has some other personal knowledge of or evidence of collusion, it should be disclosed to the Special Counsel, not The New York Times.”
Continuing, Burr noted that if Brennan is just talking out of his [you know what] and doesn’t have any evidence of “collusion” the president was spot-on to revoke his clearance.
“If, however, Director Brennan’s statement is purely political and based on conjecture, the president has full authority to revoke his security clearance as head of the Executive Branch,” he said.
Oh, and obviously the president didn’t “silence” Brennan, as the disgraced former CIA director claims; otherwise, how’d he get a column published by the Times?