Posted on 11/02/2019 11:38:43 AM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
Right on!
It has to be an entire nest!
Vindman is low on this pole.
See 22. This has been orchestrated at a MUCH higher level.
On John Brennan’s continuing influence at the CIA:
“I was going to say, I heard you talking about John Brennan still having influence in the CIA, and I’ve got to reiterate that, and there is no question whatsoever about it, I can say as absolute fact that he’s got tremendous pull still in the CIA. Let’s not forget that the current director of the CIA, Gina Haspel, was a close associate of John Brennan. John Brennan’s clearance is still intact, that has not been pulled, that’s an oversight that should be taken care of, so he’s got access to them basically whenever he wants. And the three top lieutenants that are within the CIA operations end of things, running it, not like the HR or personnel sorts of people, those three individuals were also closely working for and associated with John Brennan. So the number one, number two, number three and number four people at the CIA right now, are close friends and associates that have worked closely in the past with John Brennan. So to suggest even for a moment that he isn’t pulling strings whenever he desires to in the CIA is just poorly informed. He absolutely is connected.”
The rest at this link:
RETIRED CIA CHIEF OF STATION BRAD JOHNSON ON INTEL AGENCY POLITICIZATION: MATT BRACKEN INTERVIEW
Posted by Matt Bracken | Nov 2, 2019
FR thread with comments:
RETIRED CIA CHIEF OF STATION BRAD JOHNSON ON INTEL AGENCY POLITICIZATION
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3790891/posts
On Thursday October 31, Halloween, a few hours after Nancy Pelosi’s sham House impeachment inquiry vote, I was able to interview retired CIA Chief of Station Bradley Johnson for the Alex Jones Show on Infowars. Here are some transcribed Johnson quotes of special importance, but I think the entire 20 minute interview should be watched.
On John Brennan’s continuing influence at the CIA:
“I was going to say, I heard you talking about John Brennan still having influence in the CIA, and I’ve got to reiterate that, and there is no question whatsoever about it, I can say as absolute fact that he’s got tremendous pull still in the CIA. Let’s not forget that the current director of the CIA, Gina Haspel, was a close associate of John Brennan. John Brennan’s clearance is still intact, that has not been pulled, that’s an oversight that should be taken care of, so he’s got access to them basically whenever he wants. And the three top lieutenants that are within the CIA operations end of things, running it, not like the HR or personnel sorts of people, those three individuals were also closely working for and associated with John Brennan. So the number one, number two, number three and number four people at the CIA right now, are close friends and associates that have worked closely in the past with John Brennan. So to suggest even for a moment that he isn’t pulling strings whenever he desires to in the CIA is just poorly informed. He absolutely is connected.”
Do you think the top floors of CIA still have a “protect the Deep State” agenda?
“All of the agencies are that way, the FBI, the CIA, NSA, the State Department, they are all that way. The pipeline to leadership in all of the federal agencies that are in the intelligence community have been controlled by the left for a long time. The only people who make their way up through that pipeline and get into positions of leadership are the “resist” Deep State types of people. So they’re all that way, there’s no exceptions to that. It’s not what talking heads say, ‘Oh, there’s good people there, purely professional there…’ That used to be that way, but that’s no longer that way. That was all consolidated under Obama, and that’s the way it stays, and unfortunately Trump hasn’t had the chance to fix that yet.”
On reforming the CIA and the other Intel agencies that have been co-opted by globalists and leftists:
“It’s a tough problem, and I would say that anyone I’ve talked to that are retired ‘agency’ and people like that, that I know, we’ve all concluded that essentially it cannot be fixed with what’s there, and I think that’s the bottom line.”
Speaking about the bloated numbers of personnel at the Intel agencies, and how a RIF [Reduction In Force] might improve the situation, or instead, might be used by the dominant leftists to target the remaining conservatives for firing:
“I would say there’s no patriots left, certainly not at the leadership level. At the working level, yes, but those people essentially, you have to keep your head down and your mouth shut, because if it comes out that you’re a conservative, you’re destroyed, your career is over. It’s not that you necessarily get fired on the spot, but you’re never going to get a good job, and the only way to get promoted and move up is to have a good job that tics off all those things that are required to go to the next level, and that’s how they control the pipeline. There’s a lot of laws controlling the promotion process, but there’s no laws controlling how jobs are handed out, and that’s the way that the liberals have taken it over inside all of these federal agencies. Many years ago at [the] State Department, and in recent decades at the rest of the agencies. So a RIF, especially at the higher levels, there’s no conservatives to target, so it would only be to the good. It would be a net win to do a RIF of any sort at any of these agencies.”
Then it is stated he has an ethics concern on getting a foreign government to investigate an AMCIT, which we do all the time, by the way; but I understand the quid pro quo concerns. That's nice. I can't say I know of anyone who has had similar concerns that doesn't talk to other colleagues about it, to include General Counsel. Where are those people at? I may be a little rusty on my whistle blower policy training, but I don't remember any guarantee of anonymity: the policy as I understood it, only covered non-retribution in its scope: and that goes to the respective IG.
I just checked.....anonymity is NOT an element in USG policy. I guess I stayed awake during that training.
If the Democrat theory is a CIA operation was instigated by DJT........then why does DJT make a phone call? The DDO of CIA would carry it out, as illegal and out of CIA charter as it would be.
Even still, Station Chiefs at all the embassies I worked with all had their limits. In fact, there were some things I could do, that they could not. The issue in question called for the execution of an investigation on an American citizen, which really doesn't stay in secretive compartments like a clan HUMINT operation does, because this is clearly out of CIA's lane. Requests like that require dialogue and coordination with the embassy staffs.........and then how does a low ranking member of the NSC have access to this? Then he has an ethical epiphany that just so happens to come to light that fits into the impeachment narrative? John Bolton must know all the facts, otherwise, it's a sham.
To be honest, I don't even think Brennan can pull it off. Gina is only a close associate to Brennan in that she was a subordinate. I have not seen anything to indicate they were BFFs. Steven Kappes? Perhaps. That is who Gina would have answered to. I have no personal knowledge of Gina, but I hear she is very savvy. Unlike Brennan who can't seem to keep his mouth shut.
TRUMP you have got to get control of your agencies...Barr and Durham where are you? the case in in the public...what do you need to investigate for Gods sack?
For GOD’s sake?
Yeah, Vindman has the look of a pasty-faced REMF who got promoted at the expense of real soldiers.
Well, lookie here. Isn’t this one of the Derp Stater coup plotter cretins that Liz Cheney said not to question his patriotism ?
Brennan met personally and privately with Strzok and others. IMHO, Brennan was the leader of the small group who carried out the Russia hoax intel op, and are attempting its continuation via the Ukraine hoax.
Ciaramella was specifically Brennan’s agent, placed in the Obama NSC with the hope (realized) that he would be carried on under the next administration. It appears that Ciaramella, (pronounced “CHAR-amella”) was the “Charlie” mentioned in new Strzok/Page/McCabe texts as their man in the White House.
How usual is it for a director of CIA to run a hip-pocket face-to-face-meetings op with the incredibly connected (one of the youngest SES ever, etc) head of FBI counterintelligence?
Strzok personally traveled to London, Rome etc concurrently when Mifsud, Halper, Downer etc were there. This tells me Strzok was serving as a human messenger specifically to avoid a by-the-book embassy electronic paper trail.
Even Alex. Downer’s supposed genesis of Russiagate “revelation” @ Papadapolous/Mifsud rumors was not inserted via standard 5-Is diplo channels, but was back-channeled to CIA and FBI. It all smacks, to me, of an operation designed to avoid an electronic paper trail.
After being fired from the NSC for anti-administration leaks, “Charlie” was not disciplined, but went right back to CIA. Others associated with him on the NSC went to work for Adam Schiff’s intel committee.
None of this is happenstance. This was and continues to be a coordinated intel operation being conducted outside of normal channels. Even now that he is officially out of CIA, Brennan retains his clearance, even after Trump ordered it pulled.
The outside normal channels operation continues, and I believe Brennan is still running it, possibly with a wink and a nod from his old pals at Langley.
Again, retired Station Chief Brad Johnson:
“I was going to say, I heard you talking about John Brennan still having influence in the CIA, and I’ve got to reiterate that, and there is no question whatsoever about it, I can say as absolute fact that he’s got tremendous pull still in the CIA. Let’s not forget that the current director of the CIA, Gina Haspel, was a close associate of John Brennan. John Brennan’s clearance is still intact, that has not been pulled, that’s an oversight that should be taken care of, so he’s got access to them basically whenever he wants. And the three top lieutenants that are within the CIA operations end of things, running it, not like the HR or personnel sorts of people, those three individuals were also closely working for and associated with John Brennan. So the number one, number two, number three and number four people at the CIA right now, are close friends and associates that have worked closely in the past with John Brennan. So to suggest even for a moment that he isn’t pulling strings whenever he desires to in the CIA is just poorly informed. He absolutely is connected.”
2 questions come to mind:
1. Who within the Administration recommended Gina to replace Brennan? She was a dark horse and not an obvious choice if I remember correctly.
2. Sedition and severe violation of Intelligence Oversight for starters— Who gets flipped to prove the intel op and its extent?
Stating the obvious, but this is beyond a mere insurance policy to keep Trump from coming to power and protect the Clintons; this is to avoid a catastrophic unraveling of major shot-callers on the Dem side, and to avoid prison.
I'm just hoping that Durham has been working his way up the food chain, gaining cooperation and taking sworn testimony, so by the time he gets to the upper tier of principals, they will be tightly boxed in.
It's a Battle Royale for sure.
Conservative Treehouse is the best at this type of analysis, I read it carefully every morning.
This CTH post today is very informative concerning matters under discussion on this thread.
Why John Brennan, Peter Strzok and DOJ Needed Julian Assange Arrested – And Why UK Officials Obliged…
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.