Ex-CIA Director John Brennan's bad year could get a lot worse: 'Maybe they have to pay a price for that'



John Brennan, former director of the CIA and chief counterterrorism adviser to former President Barack Obama, appears to be having a rough year — and it's likely to get a lot worse.

How it started

On his first day back in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order blasting Brennan and the 50 other former intelligence officials who signed the infamous Oct. 19, 2020, letter, which served to discredit the New York Post's factually accurate Oct. 14 report about the discovery and damning contents of Hunter Biden's laptop.

"The signatories willfully weaponized the gravitas of the Intelligence Community to manipulate the political process and undermine our democratic institutions," Trump noted in the order.

'All the world can now see the truth.'

To remedy this perceived injustice, Trump decided to revoke signatories' security clearances, which prompted Brennan to whine on MSNBC, claiming this was just the president's effort to "try to get back at those individuals who have criticized him openly and publicly in the past."

There were, however, more skeletons in Brennan's closet the Trump administration wanted to take for a walk.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe released a damning review last week concerning how the agency under Brennan reached the conclusion that Russia tried to sway the 2016 election in favor of then-candidate Donald Trump.

— (@)  
 

Ratcliffe's review indicates that the intelligence community's December 2016 assessment, which was conducted at the urging of Obama and became a pillar of the Russian collusion hoax, was a rushed botch job impacted by "multiple procedural anomalies."

RELATED: Deep-staters threaten to use color revolution tactics against Trump admin: Report

 Photo by Evy Mages/Getty Images

Despite high-level warnings that the Steele dossier — a political opposition research report paid for in part by the Clinton campaign — "did not meet even the most basic tradecraft standards" and posed credibility risks, Brennan reportedly included it in the assessment anyway, showing "a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness," says Ratcliffe's review.

The review also indicates that the direct engagement in the assessment's development by Brennan was "highly unusual in both scope and intensity" and "likely influenced participants, altered normal review processes, and ultimately compromised analytic rigor."

Ratcliffe noted on X, "All the world can now see the truth: Brennan, Clapper and Comey manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals — all to get Trump."

'I think they're crooked as hell.'

A week after the release of the report, Department of Justice sources revealed to Fox News Digital that Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey are under criminal investigation for potential wrongdoing related to the Russian collusion hoax, including allegedly making false statements to Congress.

While little detail has been provided about the investigation — the New York Times noted that CIA and FBI officials have declined to comment, and the DOJ has indicated it won't comment on "ongoing investigations" — DOJ sources reportedly characterized the FBI's view of Comey and Brennan's interactions as a "conspiracy."

The Washington Post confirmed, however, that Ratcliffe referred Brennan to the FBI last week to be criminally investigated for allegedly lying to Congress.

The facts outlined in Ratcliffe's review appear to disagree with Brennan's 2023 assertion to Congress, under oath, that he did not believe the Steele dossier should be included in the intelligence assessment.

How it's going

Seeing the writing on the wall, Brennan did what he does best: play the victim on cable news.

After Ratcliffe released his review, Brennan went on MSNBC's "Deadline: White House" last week to invoke Nazi Germany and suggest that the Department of Justice's investigation into him and Comey was straight out of the "authoritarian playbook."

RELATED: Vindicated? Patel's FBI uncovers apparent Chinese communist plot to rig 2020 mail-in vote for Biden

 Photographer: Will Oliver/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images

On Wednesday, Brennan picked up where he left off, telling MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, "This is, unfortunately, a very sad and tragic example of the continued politicization of the intelligence community, of the national security process."

When asked on Wednesday whether he wanted to see Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey thrown in jail, President Donald Trump said, "I think they're very dishonest people. I think they're crooked as hell, and maybe they have to pay a price for that. I believe they are truly bad people and dishonest people. So whatever happens, happens."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Are The Latest Spygate Revelations A Big Fat Misdirection?

The anti-Trump operation escalated to a coordinated assault involving the highest levels of government, about which we still know nearly nothing.

Trump’s war against the deep state starts with the courts



We are not a nation of laws, and we never have been. We are a nation of political will, and we always will be.

For more than a generation, the right has either failed or refused to acknowledge this essential truth. Meanwhile, the left has embraced it with unwavering commitment. As a result, it was on the verge of fulfilling Antonio Gramsci’s vision of a “long march through the institutions” — until the 2024 election stopped the left just short of the goal line.

Trump has an opportunity to turn the left’s misuse of the courts against it. He has already set the stage for a second term that could make him a once-in-a-century leader.

The good news is that after the 2024 election, we’re still in the fight. The bad news? We have 99 yards to march in the opposite direction. Here’s how we got here.

The left understands that politics is ultimately about power — acquiring it and using it — not about process. Leftists start with the policy outcome they want, no matter how extreme or destructive, and then fabricate a process to make it appear “legal.” That’s how judges, with no constitutional authority to do so, can decide that Venezuelan drug lords have a greater right to live in America than unborn babies have to be born.

Meanwhile, the right has typically responded by meticulously adhering to every subsection of every constitutional doctrine in its desperate, fleeting attempts to preserve what remains of sanity. And the right has done so at a glacial pace — while the left sprints toward Gomorrah.

Aggression on many fronts

Enter Donald Trump.

Unconventional quarterbacks rarely score 99-yard touchdowns, but they change the game. The right’s shift in leadership last decade introduced a wild card that made the left feel genuinely threatened for the first time. Instead of a predictable, by-the-book leader — akin to a classic drop-back passer — Trump operates best outside the pocket, forcing opponents to react to him.

His administration shattered the traditional “first 100 days” playbook, which typically focuses on one major campaign promise at a time. Instead, from day one, Trump aggressively took on the left across multiple fronts simultaneously.

This unpredictability has sent the left into a panic, driving leftists to act in ways previously confined to their most fevered fantasies. That’s why Trump faced two coup attempts in his first term. The Russian collusion hoax, orchestrated through the intelligence community, was nothing more than a psychological operation designed to nullify the 2016 election.

The second coup attempt came in the form of COVID-19 — a manufactured crisis weaponized by the bureaucratic swamp, with Anthony Fauci leading the charge. This psyop wasn’t about public health. It was designed to ensure Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election.

When that failed, leftists tried to imprison him, hoping to prevent his return. When that, too, didn’t work, they even attempted to assassinate him. That, by sheer providence, also failed.

Now, with its back against the wall, the ruling class has deployed its ultimate weapon — the most powerful psyop of all. The one that, for decades, has made Republicans surrender without a fight the moment they hear four dreaded words: “The courts have spoken.”

Injunctions as weapons

Trump has served as president for just 18% of the 21st century, yet he has been the target of nearly 70% of all federal injunctions issued against a sitting president in that time. An overwhelming 92% of those rulings came from Democrat-appointed judges. In February alone, Trump faced more federal injunctions than Joe Biden has during his entire presidency.

The same Biden who opened the borders to drug cartels and human traffickers, mandated controversial COVID-19 vaccines as a condition for employment, and pressured Big Tech to suppress dissenting views. In a just and rational world, such corruption would be unthinkable — but it was where we lived until just a couple of months ago.

Trump has thrown the Democratic Party into chaos, but the swamp’s power structures remain intact. The intelligence community, the administrative state, and activist judges continue their work, shielding the establishment from accountability. Hardly a day passes without a leftist judge fabricating authority the Constitution never granted, imposing new “rights” and obligations as phony as a country called “Palestine.”

Just as the Russia collusion hoax and Fauci-funded COVID hysteria were used to derail Trump’s first term, the judiciary is now the left’s weapon of choice against his second. Leftists will not stop unless they are forced to stop.

Beat the system

The right has little experience — let alone success — challenging judicial supremacy. For too long, conservatives have played by the left’s rules, expecting fair outcomes in a system rigged against them.

But one example proves it can be done. I know it well because it wouldn’t have happened without me.

In 2010, Iowa made history as the first state to remove state supreme court justices through a retention election, holding them accountable for their rulings. I was one of the movement’s leaders. No one expected us to succeed. The Republican Party wanted no part of it. We had no support from GOP candidates for governor or Senate. Republican-aligned trial lawyers stayed out of it. We were an underdog coalition taking on a judicial leviathan.

On election night, we won by 10 points. All three justices we targeted received higher percentages of “no” votes than the Republican gubernatorial nominee — who had refused to support us.

We accomplished this with just $1 million, a small sum for a modern statewide campaign. Not only did we convince voters to take a stand, but we also got them to turn over their ballots and vote in a way they never had before.

For months, my three-hour radio show — broadcast on the state’s largest media platform — focused on the retention vote, providing invaluable in-kind support. After the victory, key backers of our campaign approached me with an offer to fund a national expansion of my show. They knew we wouldn’t have won without that messaging effort, and that’s how I ended up where I am today.

Opportunity of the century

That campaign taught us several lessons — lessons the Trump administration would do well to apply now.

First, this is not a debate over legal theory or constitutional interpretation. It’s a battle over authority — not just between branches of government but over whether we still have a government that operates with the consent of the governed. Who is truly sovereign in America? The people or the judges? No branch of government — especially an unelected one — should be above the will of the people.

Second, the foundation of this fight is the source of law itself. Democrat-appointed judges reject “the laws of nature and nature’s God,” acting as if they are a law unto themselves. They do not see themselves as just a Supreme Court but as supreme beings. Whatever they decree must be enforced, with no questions asked, despite their lack of any inherent enforcement power. This is the essence of dictatorship.

Third, exposing this reality is crucial. These judges must be drawn into open confrontation where they admit their unchecked power. Voters — particularly those even remotely sympathetic to us — will be infuriated by their smug entitlement.

Finally, the people need a galvanizing issue that forces them to reject the myth of judicial supremacy. Their current outrage over an urgent cause must outweigh their long-standing deference to the courts.

We haven’t had a president challenge judicial overreach since Abraham Lincoln defied the Supreme Court’s heinous Dred Scott decision by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. Thomas Jefferson, the man who wrote America’s mission statement, spent much of his public life warning about the dangers of an unchecked judiciary. He feared that if left unrestrained, corrupt judges would twist the Constitution into “a mere thing of wax.” He argued that the other branches must do their duty to prevent judicial usurpation.

Trump has an opportunity to turn the left’s misuse of the courts against it. He has already set the stage for a second term that could make him a once-in-a-century leader. Now, he faces a moment that could define his presidency. Stripping illegitimate power from unelected judges and returning it to the people who rightfully govern stands as the ultimate act of populism.

For the last 50 years, the left has imposed its most destructive policies on the country by judicial fiat. If Trump takes bold action now, he has a chance to cement his place in history alongside Lincoln and Jefferson.

Patel’s FBI Could Shine Light On Nashville Trans School Shooter’s Manifesto

The Biden FBI blocked the release of a Nashville elementary school schooler's manifesto in the name of identity politics.

How the CIA’s dirty tricks shape US elections — and you



In my new book, “Twilight of the Shadow Government: How Transparency Will Kill the Deep State,” I describe in detail how the Central Intelligence Agency manipulates the U.S. government and its military-industrial complex contract corporations. The CIA attempts to influence not only foreign government elections but U.S. elections as well — a deeply disturbing aspect of what I call the shadow government, aka the deep state.

This pattern dates to the administration of John F. Kennedy. During Kennedy’s presidency, the CIA conducted covert operations without his knowledge. Furious, JFK fired rogue CIA Director Allen Dulles, who held a deep grudge against him. It surprised no one in Congress when, after Kennedy’s assassination, Dulles was put in charge of the Warren Commission, which investigated the president's murder. Dulles handpicked and coached all CIA witnesses who testified before the committee.

The CIA is manipulating a presidential election, right in front of the American people — again.

The CIA also played a direct role in the rise of former President Bill Clinton. As governor of Arkansas, Clinton entered into a secret agreement with then-Vice President George H.W. Bush — another notorious CIA figure — to use the Mena, Arkansas, airport to run guns and drugs to and from the Nicaraguan Contras.

I was a CIA officer during that time. The CIA was under investigation for committing felonies behind Congress’ back (and, of course, behind the backs of the American people). I have no doubt that the CIA gave then-Gov. Clinton a CIA clearance, bringing him into direct contact with “the Company.”

Despite supposedly being political enemies, Bush and Clinton maintained a close relationship until Bush’s death in 2018. From my perspective, Clinton’s direct connection to the CIA helped him rise from relative obscurity to the presidency, making him yet another useful president for the CIA.

Decades of deception

George H.W. Bush had a decades-long affiliation with the CIA, which he tried to downplay by claiming he only worked with the agency during his brief tenure as director in the mid-1970s. In reality, Bush was a CIA officer as far back as 1953, when he partnered with CIA officer Thomas Devine to form Zapata Petroleum, working under commercial cover. Their oil wells were located just 40 miles from Cuba.

One of Bush’s tasks as director was to manage the fallout from the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird. During a news conference, Bush stated that the CIA would no longer recruit American journalists to be on the agency’s payroll. What many missed, however, was his follow-up comment: From now on, reporters and the news media could work with the CIA on a voluntary basis. The CIA has a unique way of turning “voluntary” into a requirement, establishing a quid pro quo with major media companies. This arrangement prevented outlets from publishing exposés on CIA activities while providing them with intelligence-derived information to manipulate public opinion.

When Bush became vice president in 1981, it essentially placed the CIA in the second-highest seat of the U.S. government. I am convinced that Bush was the agency’s mastermind behind the criminal Iran-Contra operation, once again manipulating a president to engage in illegal covert activities.

Under President Barack Obama, the CIA implemented a drone assassination program that targeted at least eight wedding parties, killing innocent civilians. The CIA convinced Obama to maintain a kill list of foreigners it considered dangerous, often based on unproven suspicions. In effect, Obama allowed the CIA to act as judge, jury, and executioner.

Obama arrested and jailed more intelligence whistleblowers than any previous president, using the outdated Espionage Act. The most notable of these was former CIA case officer John Kiriakou, a top performer in the CIA Counterterrorism Center, who was imprisoned on frivolous charges.

During the Obama administration, notorious CIA Director John Brennan made several covert trips to Ukraine to underwrite the 2014 coup, which resulted in the Russia-Ukraine war and the ensuing proxy war between the United States and Russia, bringing America to the brink of World War III.

Russian collusion and other hoaxes

While Donald Trump was president, the CIA launched a full-scale operation to remove him from office for daring to question the agency. Brennan initiated the Russia collusion hoax by leaking the “Steele dossier,” a complete fabrication based on false information from Russian intelligence officials. Brennan misled the press, claiming the dossier was CIA intelligence. I have provided an in-depth analysis of this CIA operation on YouTube (@kevinshipp1). This was the CIA’s attempt to stage a domestic coup and take down a sitting president. Although the plot failed, no CIA or FBI official faced accountability for their crimes.

After Joe Biden’s victory, evidence surfaced of Biden’s involvement in Ukraine following the 2014 CIA-orchestrated coup. This led to the discovery of Hunter Biden’s laptop, which contained salacious videos, along with evidence of sex, drugs, and guns. To protect Biden, 51 former intelligence officials, including 42 senior CIA officers, quickly signed a public statement claiming the laptop story was “Russian disinformation.” That was a lie. We must remember that the CIA’s core functions include lying, deception, and propaganda, especially when protecting its own existence.

We now know the CIA convinced Facebook and Twitter executives to promote Biden for president and censor posts supporting Trump. The cover for the operation? Posts and articles supporting Donald Trump were “Russian disinformation.” Russia is always the CIA’s boogeyman.

This brings us to the upcoming 2024 presidential election. I am an independent, and I am not endorsing either party. My goal is to remain objective and unbiased. The CIA is up to its dirty tricks again, attempting to sway public opinion in the direction of the agency's chosen candidate, Kamala Harris. All 42 of the aforementioned senior CIA officers (the most notorious being Mike Morrell, who attempted to sway the 2016 presidential election in Hillary Clinton’s favor) have issued a statement supporting Kamala Harris for president and attacking Trump. That’s along with 741 “national security leaders” who have endorsed Harris.

The CIA is manipulating a presidential election, right in front of the American people — again.

How Democrats Are Grooming Assassins To Take Out Trump

The federal government, the Democratic Party, and the legacy media have, by many small steps, assembled an assassin pipeline.

Any Assassination Investigation That Includes Merrick Garland Or Chris Wray Is A Coverup

The U.S. attorney general and FBI director, as well as all their D.C. staff, must recuse themselves from every investigation into Trump's assassination attempt.

Democratic Sen. Mark Warner is reviving the Russian collusion narrative just in time for another election



Democratic Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), was one of the leading exponents of the Russian collusion hoax. In 2019, for instance, he claimed, "There's no one that could factually say there's not plenty of evidence of collaboration or communications between Trump Organization and Russians."

Special counsels Robert Mueller and John Durham ultimately proved him wrong, revealing there was no substantive evidence of Russian collusion in the 2016 election.

Subsequent analysis revealed that to the extent there was foreign interference, it was likely inconsequential — not including the foreign-sourced Steele dossier collected for the Clinton campaign, which Democrats used to great effect. For instance, the Washington Post, whose journalists were awarded for peddling the debunked "Russia hoax" narrative, admitted that so-called Russian trolls "had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior" ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Before Durham could take some of the wind out of Warner's sails, the senator claimed ahead of the 2020 election, "the Russians who attacked us in 2016 are still attacking us."

The Virginia senator is apparently at it again, pre-emptively characterizing Nigel Farage's gains in Britain's July 4 election as the Kremlin's preferred outcome. According to Politico, Farage's Reform U.K. party could pick up as many as 17 seats in the British Parliament, including five from the Conservatives.

The Telegraph reported Tuesday that while Warner admitted that U.S. intelligence agencies "have not seen much [Russian] activity" around the British election, he has suggested "the chances are, as we saw in the past, this activity ramps up dramatically the closer it gets to the election."

According to the Telegraph, Warner "singled out Nigel Farage as he described Vladimir Putin's potential efforts to exploit different attitudes among British politicians towards defending Kyiv's frontlines."

Conservative party establishmentarians like Rishi Sunak, Boris Johnson, and Liz Truss are reportedly in agreement that Ukraine can succeed militarily so long as it keeps receiving weapons and funding.

Farage, alternatively, recently said, "I'm not saying we shouldn't support Ukraine at all. Not for one minute. But at the end of the day most wars end in negotiation and I fear, if we don't find some way of at least sitting down and talking, that we're going to finish up with a war that goes on for year after year after year."

Warner apparently regards a difference of opinion amongst British politicians on the country's foreign policy — in this case, regarding a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine — as position capture by Russia.

"Clearly, Russia does not like the fact that the UK has been as stalwart as they have been in terms of defense on Ukraine," said Warner. "It clearly meets Putin's plans if he can lessen the British or the Americans' resolve for supporting Ukraine, he can save some money on his tanks, guns, ships and planes if he can diminish support."

In a recent BBC interview, which has been grossly mischaracterized by the English press, Farage noted that Putin has "gone from prime minister, to president, he's a clever political operator. He kills journalists. I don't like him as a human being in any way at all."

"You can recognize the fact that some people are good at what they do even if they have evil intent," continued Farage.

When asked what he'd say to Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy if in a position of influence, Farage said, "I'd say to Zelensky, 'Look, the West have been supporting you, they will go on supporting you, but the percentage of your young manhood that you're losing is so bad, isn't it time we at least tried to have a negotiation?' He couldn’t say no."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Report: CIA Started Russia Collusion Hoax By Asking Foreign Governments To Spy On Trump Campaign

The CIA 'illegally mobilized foreign intelligence agencies to target Trump advisors long before the summer of 2016.'