the most vocal opposition to president Donald Trump yet, former CIA
Director John Brennan said that if the White House tries to fire
special counsel Robert Mueller, government officials should refuse to
follow the president orders, as they would be - in his view -
“inconsistent” with the duties of the executive branch.
think it's the obligation of some executive branch officials to
refuse to carry that out. I
would just hope that this is not going to be a partisan issue. That
Republicans, Democrats are going to see that the future of this
government is at stake and something needs to be done for the good of
the future," Brennan told
CNN's Wolf Blitzer at the Aspen Security Forum,
for a coup against the president should
Trump give the order to fire Mueller.
appeared alongside his former colleague, Director of National
Intelligence James Clapper, and both men who served in the Obama
administration, told Blitzer they have total confidence in Mueller.
"Absolutely. It was an inspired choice- they don't come any
better, " Brennan said adding that "If
Mueller is fired, I hope our elected reps will stand up and say
enough is enough."
Some have responded with questions where Brennan's devotion to the
Constitution was in the aftermath of the events in Benghazi.
back on his neocon roots, James Clapper, who has waged a long-running
vendetta with Trump, once again warned about Russian interference in
US affairs. When asked about the June 2016 meeting between Donald
Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort with a Russian lawyer and
others, he responded: "I'm an old school, Cold War warrior and
all that - so I have, there's truth in advertising, great suspicions
about the Russians and what they do. A lot of this to me had kind of
the standard textbook tradecraft long deployed by Russians. It would
have been a really good idea maybe to have vetted whoever they were
was also asked about Trump's comparison of the intelligence community
to Nazi Germany.
said he called the President-elect nine days before he left the Obama
administration saying he "couldn't let that reference pass"
and it was an insult to him, CIA Director John Brennan and the
"That was a terrible, insulting affront, not just to me or John,
we get paid the big bucks, but I'm talking about the rank and file,
men and women, patriots and intelligence community -- that was
completely inappropriate and over the top - I
had to do something about it."
so he did: on the call Clapper said Trump asked him to "to put
out a statement rebutting the contents of the dossier which I
couldn't and wouldn't do. It was kind of transactional"
referring to a dossier that alleged ties between President Donald
Trump's campaign and Russia. It was not clear if he wouldn't and
couldn't do it because the contents were legitimate, in his view, or
because the dossier is what started the whole "Russian
collusion" narrative in the first place. Curiously, Clapper saw
it as a favor to Trump not to issue a statement: Clapper was asked by
Blitzer why he didn't put out a statement replying: "The whole
point of the dossier by the way was we felt an obligation to warn him
to alert him to the fact it was out there. That was the whole point."
was not clear if James Comey, whose subsequent leak to the NYT led to
the appointment of Mueller, would have applied the same reasoning
when asked by Trump to rebut the dossier's contents.
intelligence services, the Democratic Party, some Republicans
including members of President Trump’s own government, and the
presstitute US media are conspiring against American democracy and
the President of the United States.
the CIA, NSA, and FBI, the veteran intelligence professionals
performed forensic investigations. They found conclusive evidence
that the alleged “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016 intrusion into the
DNC server [these are the emails that show the DNC working for
Hillary against Sanders] was not hacked but leaked. The leaked
documents were copied onto an external storage device and doctored
with a cut-and-paste job to implicate Russia as having hacked the
other words, the alleged hack was instead a copy from the inside that
was subsequently doctored to reflect Russian origin. The veteran
intelligence professionals surmise that this was done in order to
focus attention away from the embarrassing content of the emails,
placing attention instead on “Russian interference in the US
I see it, the success of this false and orchestrated story of Russian
hacking, for which not a scrap of evidence exists, revealed to the
military/security complex the opportunity to remove Trump and thus
protect the oversized budget and power of the military/security
complex that is threatened by Trump’s intention to normalize
relations with Russia. It revealed to the Hillary forces the
opportunity to vindicate themselves with the argument that Russia
stole the election for Trump. It revealed to Israel the opportunity
to put an end to Trump’s withdrawal of US interference in the
Middle East, thus enabling Israel to continue to use the US military
to clear away obstacles to Israeli expansion. It provided the
presstitutes, who hate Trump and “the deplorables” who elected
him, with a headline story for months and months to be followed in
their expectations with the story of Trump’s removal from the
retired intelligence professionals are too circumspect to tell
President Trump outright that a conspiracy is underway to remove him
from office whether by impeachment or assassination by a right-wing
“lone nut” enraged at the traitorous president, but this does
seem to be the message between the lines. As I have provided the link
to the letter, you can read it and come to your own conclusion