[American Spectator] An article in the Guardian last week provides more confirmation that John Brennan was the American progenitor of political espionage aimed at defeating Donald Trump. One side did collude with foreign powers to tip the election ‐ Hillary’s. And in a face saving, 'just in time move' the intelligence services of perfidious Albion throw their villainous Yank partners under the red bus.
Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people. I recommend the Trump 2020 re-election campaign recruit the services of Platte River Networks and the Awan Bros. Existing Agency contracts could save time and money. Clandestine remote servers really are the future.
John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. An official in the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s retinue of political radicals didn’t even bother to hide their activism, decorating offices with "Hillary for president cups" and other campaign paraphernalia.
A supporter of the American Communist Party at the height of the Cold War, Brennan brought into the CIA a raft of subversives and gave them plum positions from which to gather and leak political espionage on Trump. He bastardized standards so that these left-wing activists could burrow in and take career positions. Under the patina of that phony professionalism, they could then present their politicized judgments as "non-partisan." "Burrowing" and "bastardizing" have long been agency mainstays. After all, it is Washington.
The Guardian story is written in a style designed to flatter its sources (they are cast as high-minded whistleblowers), but the upshot of it is devastating for them, nonetheless, and explains why all the criminal leaks against Trump first originated in the British press. According to the story, Brennan got his anti-Trump tips primarily from British spies but also Estonian spies and others. The story confirms that the seed of the espionage into Trump was planted by Estonia. The BBC’s Paul Wood reported last year that the intelligence agency of an unnamed Baltic State had tipped Brennan off in April 2016 to a conversation purporting to show that the Kremlin was funneling cash into the Trump campaign. I'd wager the "funneling" was actually to the Clinton Foundation and the reporting mysteriously morphed.
Any other CIA director would have disregarded such a flaky tip, recognizing that Estonia was eager to see Trump lose (its officials had bought into Hillary’s propaganda that Trump was going to pull out of NATO and leave Baltic countries exposed to Putin). But Brennan opportunistically seized on it, as he later that summer seized on the half-baked intelligence of British spy agencies (also full of officials who wanted to see Trump lose). So now we're blaming Estonian spies? Could Fijian Kava brewers be next. Where will it end ?
It really wasn't that difficult to figure out now was it? How many former directors and deputy directors bashing Trump must one hear from to draw reasoned conclusions ?
Can we now have the Comey, Lynch, Mueller, Clapper, and Rosenstein pieces ?
[OpsLens] If you follow my writing, you’ve probably noticed that there’s been an uptick in the amount of words I spend on speaking out against ever-softening police leadership around the country these days. It’s funny how many leaders within our profession respond to unfair criticisms pulled out of la-la land by apologizing as a gag-reflex, but then expect the public to respect police authority when it comes time for us to take away their personal freedoms under the color of law.
They say you should never back an animal into a corner lest you suffer the wrath of their survival instincts ‐ but many police leaders in 2017 have me wondering if they have a survival instinct to protect the thin blue line, or merely themselves. Through leadership’s failure to exhibit any fight or pushback in the face of damming criticism and handcuffing expectations, the American police officer isn’t really being backed into a corner so much as he/she is being backed to the edge of a cliff. Here are some examples of how our chiefs are leading us to the bottom in 2017.
Cities across California are paying violent gang members in their communities up to a thousand bucks per month to stay out of jail while partnering with a group who promises to not cooperate with police homicide investigations.
We’re seeing Seattle cops no longer allowed to designate those accused of crimes in their cities as "suspects". They’re forced to report them as "community members" instead because armed robbery suspects get to have safe spaces too.
Portland PD’s top cops have proudly tossed the baby out with the bath water in nixing their gang member database because there aren’t enough white gang members. Sadly, much more to be read.
I live near a river. One road cuts through a backwater. When the water is high during a rainy season, the brush is green and the water clear.
But as the weather dries and the water level declines, the water looks marshy. Old tires re-appear.
Think about that as the waters drain in Washington.
This week's attack on President Trump by his predecessors is a sign of desperation.
Somebody called in his markers and got Bush to speak. He spent eight years in silence, unwilling to defend himself from Obama's bully pulpit bullying of all things Bush.
Now Dubya enters the arena again?
From the Washington Post:
George W. Bush has stayed out of the political fray for nine years now, and Barack Obama has kept his head down for the past nine months. On Thursday, both former presidents used major speeches to repudiate President Trump’s brand of politics and approach to the world.
Neither mentioned Trump by name. They didn’t need to. Instead, they preached patriotic sermons that appealed to America’s better angels.
Better angels.
You go first.
Denounce the fascist Antifa first.
But Antifa serves Washington well, just as Occupy Wall Street gave cover to the equities industry that Obama served.
Dubya would not defend himself. His father did not either. If you will not defend yourself, then why should I trust you to defend me?
They refuse to support President Trump because they are still sucking their wounds from his stomping of Low Energy Jeb.
Impolite?
Go back over what Bush 41 said about Bob Dole in 1988, or what Bush 43 said about John McCain in 2000.
Oh, and Jeb's son supported Trump. Sure. Jeb's son wants to be the third President George Bush, this time with a P.
Family honor.
Obama and Bush are just the swamp speaking.
From Politico:
Former President George W. Bush offered an unmistakable denunciation of Trumpism on Thursday without mentioning the president by name, urging citizens to oppose threats to American democracy.
“Bigotry seems emboldened. Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication,” Bush warned in remarks at the Bush Institute’s Spirit of Liberty event in New York.
By chance, Bush was standing in the same spot at the Time Warner Center where former President Barack Obama made a similar plea for democracy and American leadership in late September, shortly after President Donald Trump had finished a belligerent, isolationist speech to the United Nations General Assembly.
Bush has befriended the people who called him Hitler -- Bushitler -- and a monkey.
His father called Reaganomics "voodoo economics," but befriended the Clintons.
President Trump is saving America from these critters. I am saddened to see Bush stand up for the corruption and incompetence of Washington.
But he failed America, just as Obama did. He FAILED to line Memorial Bridge with the heads of the Intelligence services who were evidently asleep at the switch prior to 9/11.
If they want to know who divided the country, they may wish to look in the mirror.
President Trump is the result of their neglect of the American people. They served the elites. Trump serves the rest of us.
#2
Yes, yes, yes, your 'low energy' brother lost the election along with a $43m USD. Please, will you now get over it and return to acting post-presidential.
#3
George W Bush is my favorite president.
George W Bush was unfairly criticized by Democrats and the liberals over the war in Iraq in order to destroy his presidency
and to gain power at the cost of undermining the Iraq war especially after Obama took office and withdrew forces prematurely allowing things to rapidly fall apart into opposing factions in Iraq.
Neither President Trump nor Steve Bannon are wise enough to judge President Bush on the Iraq war and all the undermining in Iraq that has occurred since the two Obama terms.
So they should not blame President Bush for the results of the Iraq war.
President Obama made the mistake of blaming president Bush 43 for everything and thus was blinded into a foolish fix "premature withdraw of troops from Iraq",
the failure of which created ISIS and caused the Syrian crisis allowing Putin and Russia to go into the power vacuum created in the middle east,
and allowing Iran to go into Iraq and into Syria and undermine other places.
Then Obama added fuel to the fire of the Arab uprising by going into Libya and allowing the terrorists to take over there and allowing Egypt to be taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Then Obama allowed Yemen to fall to terrorists and let the Taliban take over in Afghanistan.
Then Obama used the nuclear deal with Iran as an excuse to remove the trade sanctions from the Islamic terrorist nation and legitimize Iran as a future nuclear weapons and military regional power which will now promote a nuclear arms race.
Obama did not do a thing about North Korea, but instead attacked Israel our only anti-terrorist ally in the middle east.
President Bush did not blame others about Iraq, but bowed to the criticism of John McCain and ordered the troop surge in Iraq when most others thought Iraq was already lost for good.
I recommend Trump, his advisors and supporters not judge Bush or blame everything on the "swamp" or make other excuses, but carefully consider their own actions, judgments and words.
If you hate Bush, you are not wise and are more like the Democrat haters.
I am personally offended by attacks on Bush from both sides, the liberals and the nationalists, or anti-establishment or whatever the me crowd is using at the time.
The opposite of hatred is humility.
This web site, our leaders and this country needs more humility and less pride.
The proverb is "pride comes before the fall".
Right now I am sensing a lot of pride, which means the fall is not far off.
Bush was proud when he went into Iraq.
But Iraq made him humble.
What kind of tragedy will it take to humble you?
#5
President Bush did not blame others about Iraq, but bowed to the criticism of John McCain and ordered the troop surge in Iraq when most others thought Iraq was already lost for good. Posted by: boomerc
President Bush is responsible for the unnecessary deaths of thousands of young American soldiers in Iraq. Period. There is no one else to "blame." Those soldiers are lost forever...and their blood is on his hands alone.
A heavy raid into Iraq, removal of Saddam, and subsequent withdrawal leaving a heavy Coalition corps in the South was the plan...a plan that played to our strengths...and would've left a deterrent in place...not disbanding the Iraqi army and a bloody occupation.
Bush's result...first ISIS...now a Shia crescent that extends from Yemen, through Iran, through a Shia dominated Iraq and into Syria.
I sense Bush not taking responsibility for his failures is what I sense...and not using the good sense to shut his mouth...he is prideful for thinking we want to hear any more of his stupidness. He just needs to go away. We've already suffered our tragedy at the hands of 'W'
#6
I wanted to believe that Bush was doing the right thing in Iraq. I wanted to believe that he knew what he was doing. But the facts are now pretty clear. He screwed up. As bad as Saddam was, who can say that Iraq is better off now? It's a mess. You wanna blame Baraq for withdrawing our troops? Bush should have known that was a possibility. He should have known better than to leave his successors with that kind of a burden. Democracy will not work there or anywhere else in the Arab world. The best we can do is leave them to their own devices and keep them out of our country.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
10/23/2017 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I basically agree with all the criticism but I also think that it comes back to his inability to call out the Islamic problem.
Turkey knifing us in the back didn't help but I think the right approach was to kick the shit out of them taking out Saddam in the process then leaving with the "Don't make us come back!"
message. Rinse and repeat as necessary.
[DAWN] ALTHOUGH the myrmidonIslamic State ...formerly ISIS or ISIL, depending on your preference. Before that al-Qaeda in Iraq, as shaped by Abu Musab Zarqawi. They're very devout, committing every atrocity they can find in the Koran and inventing a few more. They fling Allah around with every other sentence, but to hear the pols talk they're not really Moslems.... (IS) group is fast losing the territory under its control, its ideological attraction is not subsiding at the same pace because the idea of a global ’Islamic caliphate’ still glows in the minds of many in Moslem societies.
It is ironic that a militant group has become the custodian of the national ideology.
Some leading Moslem scholars have made strenuous intellectual efforts to challenge myrmidon ideologies ‐ or myrmidons’ interpretations of Islamic precepts to justify their actions including violent ones ‐ but these efforts have largely failed to develop an alternative ideological narrative. That keeps the Moslem populace, mainly the youth, prone to being influenced by myrmidons’ narratives; the threat is far more complex in Pakistain where there exists a plethora of competing radical and violent ideologies, including in the form of rival sectarian streams.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
10/23/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Some leading Moslem scholars have made strenuous intellectual efforts to challenge myrmidon ideologies ‐ or myrmidons’ interpretations of Islamic precepts
The issue at base is really simple as has been said. There is no radical Islam there is only Islam.
It is the IS type groups that are practicing what Islam preaches.
[Jpost] Ramping-up its confrontation with Israel, the European Union has gone into the business of establishing "settlements" for the Beduin and Paleostinians in Judea and Samaria, tower and stockade style.
Israel should repulse the escalating European Union ...the successor to the Holy Roman Empire, only without the Hapsburgs and the nifty uniforms and the dancing... campaign of intimidation.
Continued on Page 49
#1
People always ask me "grom, why do you like Putin - don't you see that he's an autocrat?"
(a) If democracy is impossible - which it isn't for most of humanity, pragmatic autocrat is the best thing possible. No? Think of how much you like El Sisi.
(b) I believe that current EU ideology is just as dangerous as its Communism* and Nazism predecessors. And Vlad is the only natural enemy EU has.
*You do remember that Communism wasn't invented in Russia?
No this is flat out self loathing racist liberal JeW hating Christaphobic westerN civilization down the toilet future Dhimitude Moon Goddess worshippers.
The list of countries supporting the Jihad settlements could be mirrored in another.
That being former nations who have turned said fading civilizations into Disney Worlds for Muslim rape and terror hubs.
[Institute for the Study of War] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - The United States will continue to risk its vital strategic interests in the Middle East unless it changes its policies in Syria and Iraq. President Donald Trump and his administration inherited a weakened U.S. position, with Russia imposing constraints on American freedom of action and options. The Trump administration has taken initial steps to advance U.S. prestige in the region by reassuring America’s traditional allies and acting more firmly against its enemies and adversaries. The tactical tasks of recapturing Mosul and liberating Raqqa from the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) are complete and nearly complete, respectively. Nevertheless, its efforts to define and execute policies that secure America’s vital interests are moving more slowly than those of America’s enemies, adversaries, and spoilers who are more agile than the U.S. These actors include Russia, Iran and its proxies, Turkey, ISIS, al Qaeda, and some Kurdish elements, who are pursuing goals that threaten American objectives and are exploiting the current situation to make strategic gains as the U.S. champions short-term gains and tactical success.
The Trump administration has not yet broken with its predecessor’s approach to the Middle East, particularly in Syria and Iraq. It has prioritized conducting counterterrorism operations against ISIS to recapture ISIS’s territory. American military forces have accelerated this campaign by relying on the most readily available local forces, including Kurdish forces in northern Syria that are aligned with terrorists targeting Turkey. The administration has eschewed a U.S. role in addressing the regional war’s underlying drivers, including the role of the Bashar al Assad regime in Syria and sectarianism in Iraq stoked by Iran. The main effort of the counter-ISIS fight must become preventing the organization from reconstituting and its rivals from inheriting its leadership of the Iraqi and global jihad. ISIS re-emerged from a defeated al Qaeda in Iraq and controlled Iraqi cities only three years after American troops departed in 2011.
The Trump administration has also acquiesced to an expanding Russian and Iranian ground campaign in Syria and a growing role for Iran inside Iraq. Its diplomatic efforts to end the wars have focused on the most expedient political outcomes shaped by dominant local and regional actors. It does not appear committed to shaping a long-term stabilization congruent with a wider set of American regional interests. The administration has expressed that it will confront and roll back Iran’s destabilizing campaign but has neither set the conditions for such a campaign nor undertaken sufficient policy action that will set conditions for such an outcome. A quite lengthy EXSUM. Full PDF available at the link.
#2
Nevertheless, its efforts to define and execute policies that secure America’s vital interests
WHAT vital interests? We have zero vital interests in Syria. What the fuck? These globalist scum can't see outside their bubble. It was readily evident from the outset the only winners in the Syrian civil war were those who stayed out of it. And yet we were plunged into yet another stupid unwinnable war by our oh-so-educated elites.
Posted by: Herb McCoy7309 ||
10/23/2017 8:45 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Unfortunately we have new adversaries to contend with. Namely the EU with its commitment to the destruction of Israel.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[American Spectator] An article in the Guardian last week provides more confirmation that John Brennan was the American progenitor of political espionage aimed at defeating Donald Trump. One side did collude with foreign powers to tip the election ‐ Hillary’s.
I can almost hear Mr. Brennan taking the 5th. 
