DNI Gabbard: CIA Director Brennan suppressed intel that Russia interfered with material on Hillary Clinton

Things of beauty are a joy forever, but not in this case

It looks as if the truth just drop-kicked the Russia hoax into next week. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard unleashed a bombshell Wednesday, declassifying a House Intelligence Committee report that exposes then-CIA Director John Brennan as the ringleader of a scheme to bury explosive intel. What was he hiding? Oh, just that Vladimir Putin was sitting on a treasure trove of dirt on Hillary Clinton, stuff so juicy he planned to drop it after her expected 2016 coronation to torpedo her presidency. 

That’s right, Brennan didn’t just fumble the ball; he spiked it to protect the Clinton machine.

At a White House press briefing alongside press secretary Karoline Leavitt, Gabbard laid it all bare, quoting the September 2020 House Intelligence Committee oversight majority staff report she declassified that very day. The report reveals Putin wasn’t playing favorites in 2016, he wasn't Team Trump or Team Hillary. No, the Russian bear wanted to burn the whole system down by undermining faith in the election itself. As Gabbard put it, "In fact, this report shows Putin held back… from leaking compromising material on Hillary Clinton prior to the election, instead planning to release it after the election to weaken what Moscow viewed as an inevitable Clinton presidency."

Let that sink in. 

Putin thought Hillary was such a lock that he saved his best shots for after she won. And what did he have? According to Gabbard, the report details "possible criminal acts" by Clinton, plus high-level DNC emails exposing her "psycho emotional problems, uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and cheerfulness" and alleged daily reliance on heavy tranquilizers. Yes, you read that right; Hillary was supposedly popping pills like candy while her team was cutting shady deals. 

The report also alleges secret meetings with U.S. religious organizations, where State Department officials dangled cash for Clinton's campaign in exchange for their support. Oh, and let's not forget the State Department employees allegedly strong-armed into backing Hillary's White House bid. This is the kind of corruption that makes your skin crawl.

Gabbard didn’t hold back, pointing the finger squarely at Brennan for orchestrating a cover-up. She told reporters one of the report’s key findings: "In the January 2017 intelligence community assessment that President Obama ordered, John Brennan, who was CIA director at the time, and the intelligence community intentionally suppressed intelligence that showed Putin was saving the most damaging material that he had in his possession about Hillary Clinton until after her potential and likely victory." 

Brennan obviously didn’t just ignore the truth; he buried it deeper than Jimmy Hoffa.

But it gets worse. Gabbard revealed that Brennan and his intel cronies "mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious, substandard sources" to push the laughably fake narrative that Putin was all-in for Trump. They cooked up a story to undermine Trump’s legitimacy, and the media lapped it up like obedient lapdogs. 

This wasn’t incompetence, it was a deliberate hit job. 

Enter Charlie Kirk, the Turning Point USA firebrand, who nailed it Wednesday when he said, "If Russia was really all-in on supporting Trump and hurting Clinton, it would have leaked this information in October 2016 when her lead in the RCP average slipped to just +1.3." Exactly! If Putin was Team Trump, he’d have dumped the Clinton dirt when it could’ve swung the election. Instead, he sat on it, "completely debunking the core assumptions of the Russia hoax," Kirk added. “Rather than admit they were wrong, Brennan’s CIA buried the info and manufactured a completely alternative reality to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump.”

So, let’s recap: Brennan, the supposed guardian of truth, hid evidence that could’ve exposed Hillary’s corruption, all to prop up the Russia-Trump collusion fairy tale. This isn’t just a scandal; it’s a betrayal of the American people. The Deep State didn’t just play dirty, they rewrote the rulebook. 

Time to drain the swamp, folks, because this stench isn’t going away on its own.

Hey amazing readers! If you enjoy my content, please consider supporting Brain Flushings. A quick coffee donation via Buy Me a Coffee fuels late-night writing sessions and fresh ideas. Every sip—er, dollar—helps me create more of the posts you enjoy. Join the crew, toss in a coffee, and let’s keep the good vibes brewing! 

Tweet

Trump will be suing the Wall Street Journal, NewsCorp. and its CEO, Rupert Murdoch

Well, folks, the media’s at it again, slinging mud at President Trump with a story so absurd it sounds like it was cooked up in a tabloid’s basement, or maybe the Babylon Bee. 

On Thursday, Trump dropped a bombshell, revealing that he and his Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, got a heads-up from none other than Rupert Murdoch about a forthcoming Wall Street Journal hit piece. The claim was that Trump allegedly drew a picture of a woman’s breasts and signed it with a birthday note to the late, not so great, disgraced Jeffrey Epstein. 

Yes, that Jeffrey Epstein.

The alleged note, according to the report, read: "Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret." Sounds like something out of a bad spy novel, not a Trump letter, and not something stupid enough that a person of his standing would put in writing.

Trump and Leavitt didn’t mince words. They went straight to WSJ editor Emma Tucker and called the letter what it is: “a FAKE.” Trump himself was crystal clear when The Journal came sniffing around. "I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women," he said, adding, "It’s not my language. It’s not my words." Hard to argue with that, because nobody on this planet can really picture Trump sitting down with a sketchpad and a birthday card for Epstein.

But, in true legacy media fashion, The Wall Street Journal ran the story anyway, facts be damned. 

Trump wasn’t having it. He took to Truth Social, firing off a post that pulled no punches and announced he’s gearing up to sue The WSJ, NewsCorp, and Murdoch himself. "President Trump has already beaten George Stephanopoulos/ABC, 60 Minutes/CBS, and others, and looks forward to suing and holding accountable the once great Wall Street Journal," he wrote. "It has truly turned out to be a ‘Disgusting and Filthy Rag’ and, writing defamatory lies like this, shows their desperation to remain relevant."

Go Donny, Go!

And he didn’t stop there. Trump pointed out the obvious: if there was even a shred of truth to this so-called "Epstein Hoax," the usual suspects: Comey, Brennan, "Crooked Hillary," and the rest of the Radical Left Lunatics would’ve been waving it around years ago. "It certainly would not have sat in a file waiting for ‘TRUMP’ to have won three Elections," he added. "This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS!"

And there you have it, folks. Another day, another media smear campaign. The WSJ, once a titan of journalism, seems more interested in peddling fiction than reporting facts and is best used for wrapping dead fish. 

Trump’s not backing down, and if his track record is any indication, The Journal might want to lawyer up.

Hey amazing readers! If you enjoy my content, please consider supporting Brain Flushings. A quick coffee donation via Buy Me a Coffee fuels late-night writing sessions and fresh ideas. Every sip—er, dollar—helps me create more of the posts you enjoy. Join the crew, toss in a coffee, and let’s keep the good vibes brewing! 

Tweet

The nation's biggest story the media doesn't want you to know

The FBI knew the truth behind the Russia hoax since 2017 and about Hillary Clinton's involvement with the caae. It has taken this long for the story to go public, but in spite of that, the legacy media hasn't done much with it and kept it under wraps.

The liar behind the now discredited anti-Trump dossier was taken into federal custody on Thursday while Special Counsel John Durham and his staff continue to delve into the miscreants who created and propagated the fake Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

Igor Danchenko was charged in a criminal indictment with five counts of lying to the FBI over the sources he used for the bull crap information he handed to former British spy and serial Trump-hater, Christopher Steele, which made up most of the dossier.

Danchenko is a Ukrainian-born U.S. resident working as a senior research analyst for the liberal think tank The Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. When to novel known as the dossier was being created in 2016, a close friend of 'Crooked Hillary' was president of Brookings, a Democrat known as Strobe Talbott. [Yes, his given name is Strobe.]

So it was Hillary and her cronies who came up with the Russia hoax in order to frame her nemesis, Donald Trump, with the most disgusting offense one can be accused of and win the presidential election: treasonous conspiracy with Moscow. Not surprisingly, there continues to be leftist media that never called it out as a lie and many on the left still believe that it's true. 

* * *

Why not subscribe to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against the tech giants.

* * *

The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) financed their illicit scheme by secretly funneling money to Steele, who hired Danchenko as his primary source for the dossier.

Declassified documents reveal that the CIA knew as early as July of 2016 that Crooked Hillary had personally approved the devious operation. You can't get much more aware of something if you personally approve of it--so why isn't Hillary being indicted?

Shortly thereafter the FBI tracked down Danchenko, who confessed about his role and debunked the dossier as little more than a bull crap story. If it wasn't for John Brennan and James Comey, the CIA and FBI directors respectively, Hillary and the gang would be cautious about not dropping the soap in the showers. 

So why aren't those two clowns being indicted for keeping the truth from Trump and the public?

Tweet

White men increasingly embarrassed by John Brennan being a White man

Former CIA Director John Brennan said that he was increasingly embarrassed over his own "whiteness." Maybe he knows something about himself that we don't know, but one thing is clear, we on the White don't care for his insincere lament, or even the effeminate way he speaks on MSNBC.

Brennan claims that men of his race act in embarrassing ways. We play violent sports like football, LaCross and extreme frisbee. We hunt; we fish; we love femininity and we believe there are only two sexes and the concept of gender refers mostly to words that languages attribute to them. [The Spanish word pollo for "chicken"  is masculine in spite of chickens being female, or chicks, as it were.]

And yes, some White men are gay, but they know they are men who love other men, just like those women who know they are women and love other women. Having your genitalia mutilated, or wearing a dress, or getting hormone injections, doesn't change your sex.

"I’m increasingly embarrassed to be a White male these days, when I see what my other White males [are] saying," Brennan told MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, who chuckled at the racist comment.

Wallace, Brennan, and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) were arguing that Republicans had lied about what happened during the Capitol Hill riots on Jan. 6, much like CNN lied about the severity of the riots in Portland, New York, Seattle, and Chicago, calling them "mostly peaceful" as fires raged and looting took place behind reporters as they spoke on camera.

"It just shows that with very few exceptions, like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, there are so few Republicans in Congress who value truth, honesty, and integrity," Brennan, who is and knows a liar when he hears one, said. "And so, they'll continue to gaslight the country the way that Donald Trump did," he ironically added, attributing these RINOs with a 'strange new respect.'

When people judge people by their skin color or any other immutable attribute, they generally are themselves what they are labeling others. Psychologists call this projection.

As a White man, and perhaps I speak for many White men, I am embarrassed to have John Brennan in my race. He is a disgusting racist and rejects the tenets of the American spirit.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

GA Sec. of State investigating Warnock's registration group

Wow, this is incredible! It's an allegation, but it's big news if true.

A voter registration group led by Georgia Democratic [read: socialist] Senate candidate Raphael Warnock up until February of this year, is being investigated for allegedly sending ballot applications to non-Georgia residents, the Georgia secretary of state said Monday.

The New Georgia Project, the voter registration group where Warnock served as CEO, is one of four voter sign-up groups being probed for improper registration activities, Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger said at a press conference.

By "improper," he means "illegal."

Democrats have praised Republican Raffensperger for pushing back against President Trump's allegations of election fraud in the state. That will not last long now that he is having the socialist Warnock and his group investigated.

Warnock is in a fight for a US Senate seat against Republican Kelly Loeffler. If he should win, it could determine party control of the government, all but the Supreme Court. However, the Democrats will likely stuff the SCOTUS, end the filibuster, and make Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. states, which will put immeasurable power in their hands.

Although Raffensperger stated that he hasn't seen indications of systemic fraud, he agreed there is evidence of "third-party groups working to register people in other states to vote here in Georgia."

Raffensperger said the New Georgia Project "sent voter registration applications to New York City," in a potential violation of state law.

"Voting in Georgia when you are not a resident of Georgia is a felony," said Raffensperger. "These third-party groups have a responsibility to not encourage illegal voting. If they do so, they will be held responsible."

But Warnock has nothing to worry about in any case--his party and the legacy media will protect him like they did for John Brennan, who lied to Congress, James Comey, who also lied, and Hillary Clinton, who destroyed evidence in a case against her and nothing happened.

The New Georgia Project is allegedly a "nonpartisan effort to register and civically engage Georgians," according to its website. The group, which was founded by failed gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who still claims to be the Governor of Georgia no matter what the voters say.

The New Georgia Project was the subject of a prior voter fraud probe by the secretary of state's office in 2014, when contractors working for the group were accused of forging voter registration applications. The case was referred to law enforcement in 2017, but charges were never brought.

Raffensperger said Monday that three additional voter registration groups are also under investigation by his office. One of the organizations, America Votes, allegedly sent "absentee ballot applications to people at addresses where they have not lived since 1994," said Raffensperger.

A group called Vote Forward is accused of registering at least one dead Alabama voter in Georgia who did not want to vote this time.

Operation New Voter Registration Georgia, is another group that is being accused of encouraging college students to temporarily change their residency for the purpose of voting in the state.

So far, nobody has gone to prison, and it's very unlikely anyone will. Just ask Brennan, Comey and Clinton what are the chances.

C'mon, man, gimme a break. You know you want to follow Brain Flushings--it's free and worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear. C'mon, check out the ads. Christmas is coming.

Tweet

As usual, ex-CIA chief John Brennan sides with an enemy

The former head of the US Central Intelligence Agency and current far Left talking head for the Communist News Network (CNN) called the Friday assassination of Iran's top nuclear scientist a "criminal" act and said it risks creating conflict in the region. 

John Brennan is the same tool who sat with his finger up his nether regions and watched as the Islamic Republic of Iran's Navy captured US seamen and a seawoman and humiliated them in public. 

He admitted that he had no idea who killed the terrorist scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, but he apparently believes Iran and thinks it was the JEEEWWWWZZ. Iran blames the Jews like the US legacy media blames Trump, for all of the evils and miseries in the galaxy.

"This was a criminal act & highly reckless. It risks lethal retaliation & a new round of regional conflict," Brennan said in a series of grammatically correct tweets with ampersands.

"I do not know whether a foreign government authorized or carried out the murder of Fakhrizadeh," he reluctantly admitted.

"Such an act of state-sponsored terrorism would be a flagrant violation of international law & encourage more governments to carry out lethal attacks against foreign officials."

Brennan noted that Fakhrizadeh was not a designated terrorist nor a member of Al Qaeda or the Islamic State group, designated terror groups which would be legal targets. 

At least, Brennan thinks so.

A flaming critic of President Trump, Brennan urged Iran to "resist the urge" to retaliate and "wait for the return of responsible [albeit demented] American leadership on the global stage," a reference to Joe Biden, who may or may not replace Trump on January 20 depending upon whether the courts will accept the mountains of evidence supporting Trump's efforts to prove the election was rigged.

Brennan was the impotent director of the CIA from 2013 to 2017, under the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama and then-Vice President Joseph Robinette Biden, who is not gay but who has demonstrated an affinity for young girls and married women with fragrant hair.

Brennan supposedly did "not" take part in Biden's election campaign, just like Jon Meacham didn't take part in writing Biden's speeches. But it is possible that Brennan shares a certain allegiance with Islamic countries because, as Front Page Magazine hypothesizes, it's possible Brennan converted to Islam. And according to a WND article in Feb. 2013, a former FBI agent, John Guandolo, makes the claim that Brennan did indeed convert, which might explain his reluctance to admonish Islamic countries for their jihad endeavors.

Early this week Biden named Brennan's former deputy director at the CIA, Avril Haines, as his director of national intelligence [if he is deemed to be the rightful winner of the 2020 election, which is being explored as this is being written]. 

Biden plans to fill the swamp with all the previous swamp creatures that got President Trump elected in 2016. Should the left win the Senate, G-d forbid, the left will end the filibuster, make Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. states to forever hold the Senate, stuff the Supreme Court with their ideologues, and bring Marxism to America.

Seriously, if you live in Georgia, please make sure to vote in the special election.

C'mon, man, gimme a break. You know you want to follow Brain Flushings--it's free and worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear. C'mon, check out the ads. Christmas is coming.

Tweet

Spook, vets, and libs call for Durham's resignation along with the entire GOP

Now that John Durham is increasing the pressure on former CIA director John Brennan, liberal elites and CIA veterans are calling for Durham to resign.

NBC broke the story in October that U.S. Attorney John Durham's inquiry regarding the Trump-Russia collusion probe has gone into full criminal investigation mode. In fact, Durham planned to interview Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence, James "Not Wittingly" Clapper as well as additional current and former intelligence community officials.

Brennan, who now works for the Comedy News Network [CNN] told NBC at the time that Durham’s investigation was “bizarre.” He was attempting to discredit the investigation because he has so much to lose if found guilty of criminal behavior.

 “I don’t know what the legal basis for this is,” Brennan said. 

The possible reason for his lack of understanding about the legality for the Durham inquiry may have to do with the fact that Brennan is not a lawyer. He studied political science at Fordham University and for his MA studied government at the University of Texas with a concentration of Middle East studies abroad. He speaks Arabic fluently and it is rumored that he has traveled to Mecca where only Muslims are permitted to visit. Go figure.

Ironically, it is Brennan who may have been responsible for the entire Trump-Russia collusion affair, so the fact that he's clueless about the "legal basis" brings to mind a song by The Eagles titled "Your Lying Eyes."

Brennan's fear that Trump might actually win the election in 2016 and his relentless pursuit for "dirt" on Trump while insisting the FBI perform a counterintelligence investigation on him, got the whole affair moving.

After Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) released his "Nunes memo" in the spring of 2018, the American Spectator’s George Neumayr wrote an article entitled, “John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign.” 

Neumayr called the Trump-Russia investigation “the probe from nowhere to nowhere, undertaken simply to satisfy the partisan hunches of John Brennan and other Trump haters in the Obama administration.”

Sounds kind of coup-ish, if you ask me.

Neumayr wrote that, based upon Brennan’s testimony and his leaks, he started encouraging the FBI to open an investigation in the spring of 2016. Brennan would present the FBI with what "evidence" and he would “shake down” foreign intelligence officials looking for any "dirt" to hang on Trump. He would then present the information to the now fired FBI official Peter Strzok and other government officials. 

In last December The New York Times, a former newspaper, reported that they had discovered from their source that Durham had requested Brennan’s communications from the CIA. This would include all emails, call records and text messages. 

Also, it was said the Durham team would be scrutinizing transcripts of Brennan’s testimony before Congress looking for inconsistencies, i.e., lies.

But CNN stands behind Brennan as they stand behind Qassem Soleimani and Iran.

Since the Times’ report was published, calls for the resignations of both Durham and Attorney General William Barr have been growing among the ranks of the liberal elites who feel the vice tightening around their collective nuts.

John Brennan may be in deep trouble. Lucky for him he's deep state--nothing will happen to him. Unless . . .

Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings.

Tweet

CIA blasts CNN's "misguided" and "simply false" reporting about Trump and alleged spy's extraction

CNN needs to be cut down a bunch of pegs, not just two, for being the purveyors of fake news. The term fake news is one that shouldn't be used in normal conversation about journalism, but it seems as if CNN's acronym stands for Compromised Nonsense News. While we are blessed with the First Amendment in this country, there needs to be at least some oversight when the media outright lies, be it about the President of the United States, or any citizen.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) went after CNN and their report about President Trump, who the media outlet say "repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the covert source as a spy." The CNN national security "correspondent" wrote a hole-filled piece that said this but the CIA says that claim is "misguided" and "simply false." And it is entirely possible the story was leaked by John Brennan, who is now a CNN operative.

It's very out of character for the agency to chastise a so-called journalist, but even The New York Times published a powerful piece last night that contradicted the CNN fairy tale.

According to The Times, CIA officials  "made the arduous decision in late 2016 to offer to extract the source from Russia" -- weeks before Trump took office. Concerns about media reporting on Russian election interference drove the decision, according to the Times. Yes, it was the media that concerned the CIA over the safety of their asset.

"Former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Mr. Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction," The Times honestly wrote, in a change of pace for the former newspaper.

The purported spy refused the 2016 offer of Kremlin extraction, The Times reported, citing family concerns. However, the CIA "pressed again months later after more media inquiries" threatened the source, and he finally agreed.

The story deepened when NBC News exclusively reported that a possible Russia spy was currently living under U.S. protection and the idiots used his true identity and revealed that he lived in Washington, D.C., adding that his life could be in danger [no kidding].

An NBC News journalist knocked on the alleged spy's door and was soon confronted by several men presumed to be security personnel. Unfortunately, they did not punch the NBC News reporter in the face multiple times for doing what CNN claimed Trump had done.

"CNN's narrative that the Central Intelligence Agency makes life-or-death decisions based on anything other than objective analysis and sound collection is simply false," CIA Director for Public Affairs Brittany Bramell said in a statement not written in invisible ink.

The lovely Ms. Bramwell continued: "Misguided speculation that the President's handling of our nation's most sensitive intelligence — which he has access to each and every day — drove an alleged exfiltration operation is inaccurate."

Upon hearing Bramwell's statement, CNN's Jim Acosta had to excuse himself and returned soon after with swollen, reddened eyes and runny nose.

According to CNN chief national correspondent and execrable former Obama administration official Jim Scuitto, the decision to carry out the extraction "occurred soon after a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel."

The disclosure "prompted intelligence officials to renew earlier discussions about the potential risk of exposure," CNN falsely reported.

It was not clear from the CNN piece how exactly Trump's comments in the Oval Office would have further compromised the Russian source, but when you make up negative stuff about a person your audience hates, details are less important than feelings.

Many other holes quickly surfaced in CNN's reporting. For one, commentator Aaron Mate pointed out in a Twitter thread that several major news organizations had previously cited a high-level source in the Russian government as a source -- suggesting that the intelligence community itself, not Trump, had compromised the spy.

Many media outlets who jump, before they check the water in the pool, at the chance to report on Trump's foibles and chaos, picked up the CNN fairy tale: The Hill, the Guardian and Vox never questioned CNN's report. Fox News didn't take the bait.

The developments led to speculation as to who had leaked the information to CNN -- especially in light of previous anti-Trump leaks that found their way to the organization -- and led commentators to again fault the accuracy of CNN's initial reporting. I believe that it was John Brennan, but that's only speculation.

If it was Brennan who leaked, he should be indicted.


Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not. But seriously, please check out the ads as this is my source of generating revenue. And you can also see my blog on the Times of Israel.






Tweet

Two of the 3 stooges lash out at Trump for transparency

Former CIA Director and clear pronouncer of his "t's" John Brennan along with his partner in crime, former DNI James Clapper slammed President Trump on Friday for abiding by his promise of transparency and directing Attorney General William Barr to declassify documents related to the surveillance of his campaign during the 2016 election.

The two stooges [the third stooge is, of course, James Comey] called it "outrageous."

"I see it as a very, very serious and outrageous move on the part of Mr. Trump, once again, trampling on the statutory authorities of the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of the independent intelligence agencies," Brennan told the MSNBC androgynous-looking host Chris Hayes, using the Trump-esque expression "very very." 

"And it's unclear to me what Mr. Barr is actually going to do. Is he investigating a crime? Well, what's the predication of that crime [as if the left had a predication of a crime on Trump.]  Or he is just going to be looking for information... that Mr. Trump can just give to his defenders on the right and cherry-pick information that could be taken out of context?"

So the plot thickens as the shoe is on the other proverbial foot, eh, Brennan? Time to form your circular firing squad.

Brennan expressed concern about exposing "sources and methods" as well as the intelligence of "partners abroad." But he's spit-balling because he doesn't know what the documents will expose.

The 3 Stooges

"This is very serious and I know that my former colleagues in the intelligence agencies are looking upon this with great concern and worry," Brennan said.

He later said he hopes that DNI Dan Coats and CIA Director Gina Haspel will "stand up" to President Trump's "unprecedented act."

The POTUS has the authority to declassify information and that has happened in the past. There is no reason to believe that Trump will compromise sources and methods with the material he declassifies.

James Clapper told CNN's Anderson "I Can Take A Punch" Cooper that the "bigger issue" is "what exactly is the scope" of the declassification, whether it involves all of Russia's interference in the election or just the counter-intelligence probe. He expressed similar concerns that Brennan voiced regarding sources and methods being exposed and putting "people's lives at risk," [much like former Attorney General and Obama "Wingman" Eric Holder did with the "Fast and Furious" strawman gun sales he pushed with the Mexican drug cartels that got Border Agent Brian Terry killed.]

Clapper, now a CNN analyst of questionable character, insisted that the debunked Steele dossier was not used as sourcing for the intelligence community assessment in January 2017. But it looks like he's going to have a cow.

Kindly consider following Brain Flushings and please visit the ads on these pages. Thank you.

Tweet

Obama spy leaders amid Russia probe: "Throwing each other under the bus"

A new round of covert finger-pointing has begun among Obama administration officials after the launch of a formal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation. The investigation is being led by John Durham, one of the Justice Department’s toughest prosecutors. These officials just might have some explaining to do about efforts that were taken to surveil the Trump campaign.

A key issue that popped up like a wet zit this week concerns whether then-FBI Director James Comey or then-CIA Director John Brennan -- or both of these losers -- pushed the unverified and inaccurate Steele dossier containing claims about President Trump and his relationship to Russia. The dossier’s more sensational claims were never substantiated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) has long demanded to know about the origins of the Mueller probe tweeted:

“Amazing—James Comey says that in 2016, John Brennan insisted on including the dossier in their IC assessment. But Brennan says: no no, COMEY wanted to use the dossier.” 

Meadows added:

“They know the truth is coming. And now they're all throwing each other under the bus.”

It's actually quite fun to watch.

Sources told Fox News that a late-2016 email chain said that Comey told FBI subordinates that Brennan insisted the dossier be included in the intelligence community assessment (ICA) on Russian interference. That email chain has not been made public.

However, a former CIA official put the blame squarely on Comey, according to Fox News.

"Former Director Brennan, along with former [Director of National Intelligence] James Clapper, are the ones who opposed James Comey’s recommendation that the Steele Dossier be included in the intelligence report," the official said.

Clapper previously testified that the dossier was not ultimately used in the ICA, but with Clapper, the truth can be elusive.

News that Comey had briefed Trump personally on the dossier before the inauguration -- purportedly to warn him of potential blackmail threats -- leaked within days and opened the door for media outlets to publicize the dossier's harsh claims.

Another FBI top official said in a podcast that he and others worried that it could appear to people who fail to see the wonderment, wisdom and spiritual clarity of Comey that he was trying to blackmail Trump when he initially told him about the allegations in the dossier.

The trees and the road know of his purity.

The Justice Department’s watchdog, Michael Horowitz, also is expected to conclude his internal review of how the dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele was used to secure the original surveillance warrant for former Trump aide Carter Page in October 2016, as well as for three renewals since it was built on bull crap.

Horowitz’s team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele, a foreign national, a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster Steele’s credibility. Is it even remotely possible Steele, et al, hate Donald Trump?

U.S. Attorney John Huber earlier was appointed by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to review not only alleged surveillance abuses by the Justice Department and the FBI, but also their handling of the investigation into the Clinton Foundation and other matters. The status of Huber's work is not known but the sweat is starting to form above many an upper lip.


Kindly consider following Brain Flushings and please visit the ads on these pages. Thank you.




Tweet

John Brennan lies like a Persian rug

It's almost laughable that former CIA director John Brennan wants to sue the Trump administration because the president took away his security clearance. But let's not kid ourselves, it's totally laughable.

Brennan is as believable as a Stormy Daniels climax.

Let's look at his history.

In 2011 Brennan swore to Congress that scores of drones abroad have not killed even one noncombatant; not one civilian, only the bad guys. But both Brennan and Barack Obama received many reports of civilian deaths.

Perhaps he was under presidential orders to lie, but it's still a lie and if that was the case, it also makes Obama culpable as a liar. But we knew that long ago.

In 2012, Brennan released information about having a double agent in Yemen, which put the agent in jeopardy.

As CIA director in 2014, Brennan swore to Congress that the CIA never illegally accessed the computers of U.S. Senate staffers who just so happened to be looking into the CIA's role in the torturing of detainees.

In fact, Brennan told Andrea Mitchell: "As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth . . . "We wouldn't do that. I mean, that's just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we do."

Even the Democrats were angry at him and called for his resignation. And it was only after months of his lies, when the CIA's inspector general report was released, did Brennan apologize to the senators he spied on because he got caught.

In May 2017, Brennan most likely lied to Congress when questioned by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC).

Brennan said that he had no idea who commissioned the Christopher Steele dossier and lied again when he claimed that the CIA did not rely on that dossier for action on the Russia investigation. But retired NSA director Michael Rogers and former director of the National Intelligence Agency James Clapper, both admitted the dossier, along with the knowledge that it was a Clinton campaign-funded product, absolutely did help shape the Obama's intelligence community interagency assessments and actions, often with the push by Brennan.

There are many reports that, while he denied knowledge about the dossier, he was a covert conduit to ensure it was widely disseminated, as evidenced in the meeting he had with Sen. Harry Reid in August 2016.

Brennan briefed Reid on the dossier's unverified content in hopes Reid would pressure the FBI to dig deeper in the investigations which Reid actually did two days later with a call he made to James Comey.

Now Brennan is complaining that taking away his security clearance will silence him. Ironically, he hasn't shut up about this since Trump yanked it from him. He threatened to take legal action, but if he does, he will be exposed as the security risk and mentally deranged Communist-voting scumcrumpet that he is.


Please consider following Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.




Tweet

Bolton suggest Brennan may have misused classified info.

National Security Adviser John Bolton suggested on Sunday that former CIA director John "Verbose" Bolton may have misused classified information and that the "unprecedented leaks" from this administration may be the catalyst for broader change in how security clearances are handled.

It's about time.

Bolton was in the Jewish State for the first time in his role as a Trump administration official. He was there to discuss national security issues with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu along with other top officials.

"In terms of what [Brennan] said, since he left, a number of people have commented that he couldn't be in the position he is in, criticizing Trump, unless he did use classified info," Bolton told the leftist ABC's "This Week" on Sunday. "I don't know the specifics, but I do know when he was [CIA] director, I was troubled by comments in public, and the politicization."

The mustachioed Bolton added: "My opinion is that he was politicizing intelligence," and saying that Brennan failed to keep intact the "wall of separation between intelligence and policy."

POTUS revoked Brennan's unnecessary security clearance on Wednesday, saying [Trump never suggests, he says] that Brennan has politicized his security clearance and misled Congress about CIA spying in the Senate.

He also voted for the Communist Party and called Trump treasonous, which is a death penalty offense.

Bolton suggested that a broader review of who should retain their security clearance after leaving government service may be needed.

"I think it's certainly appropriate in a time of unprecedented leaks of classified info," he said. "I don't see that there would be anything wrong if it were determined to go that way to review the policies about former officials having clearances. Sometimes it can be useful."

Please consider following Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.



Tweet

CNN guest screams at Trump supporter to 'We're done, get out!'

A debate-challenged Creative News Network (CNN) guest named Phil Mudd was on a panel with Paris Dennard, a deplorable Trump supporter. They were discussing the John Brennan situation in which Democratic operative, Brennan, lost his security clearance.

The debate got very heated over the issue of President Trump revoking Brennans's clearance on Friday night.

It went like this:

"A lot of these people that have these security clearances, and this is the secret in swampy Washington, D.C., they have them and they keep them because it's profitable for them after they leave government," Dennard said. "Because if you have a security clearance, especially high level security clearances, your contracts and your consultation gig pay you a lot more money because of the access you have."

Mudd tried to debate with: "When I am requested to sit on an advisory board, let me ask you one question, how much do you think I'm paid to do that at the request of the U.S. Government? Give me one answer, and you've got ten seconds. How much?"

Dennard was being timed by Mudd and said, "Well, I will be clear in saying that everybody in Washington, D.C. knows if you don't want to be honest about it, that's on you, but if you have a security clearance and you keep it, you get more money to have it."

Mudd, who forgot that it wasn't his show shouted: "We're done. We're done. Get out!" He looked as if he was going to spit and maybe shout the "N" word, but he held it together.

See the video below for the entire confrontation.

Dennard wasn't a bit flustered. He came back with: "It's not your show. I'm staying right here. Don't be so defensive about this. Your voice is still here. You can still do whatever you want. But the politicalization [sic] of the intelligence community under this administration with the people coming on here every day, tweeting and talking about this administration, you all have made it about politics."

Mudd reaction is no different than those of many Democrats who can't stand it when conservatives or anyone with different views try to debate them publicly. Ocasio-Cortez is a good example of this, but her reason is not that she can't stand the opposite viewpoint, she's afraid to debate the opposition. Mudd thinks by trying to intimidate the other side that he's a winner.

The only winners he has are in his nose.

Finally, notice how the host on CNN never takes a neutral position but does all that he can to defend Mudd.

Security clearances are a privilege not an entitlement. If these people are called in to discuss matters [and Brennan never will be one of those people] there can be a way to restore the clearance quickly rather than paying $20,000 every few years to renew them for each individual.

Your comments are welcome here whether you agree or disagree.

Please consider following Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.



Tweet

POTUS pulls Brennan's security clearance

President Trump has revoked former CIA director John Brennan's security clearance on Wednesday. What took so long?

This is the first decision from a review of access for several top Obama administration intelligence and law enforcement officials.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders read a statement on behalf of President Trump at the start of the press briefing. She read that Brennan "has a history that calls his credibility into question."

The statement said that Brennan was "leveraging" his clearance to make "wild outbursts" and claims against the present administration.

"The president has a constitutional responsibility to protect classified information and who has access to it, and that's what he's doing is fulfilling that responsibility in this action," Sanders said.

The White House is also looking into the security clearances of other former officials and Trump critics, including former FBI director James "Lordy" Comey; former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe; former director of national intelligence James "Not Wittingly" Clapper; and former CIA director Michael Hayden.

The statement also mentioned Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, former FBI agent Peter Strzok, and former FBI special counsel Lisa Page [the married woman Strzok was having an extra-marital affair with].

Sanders said, "This is specific to Mr. Brennan and the others are currently under review."

And if they're allowed to keep their clearances, Trump will be making a yooge mistake.

Please consider following Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

BREAKING: Obama knowingly funded an Al Qaeda affiliate, report reveals

Barack Hussein Obama knowingly funded an Al-Qaeda affiliate, a new report revealed on Wednesday.

Knowingly--that's the operant word.

The Obama administration provided an Islamic terrorist-financing organization with hundreds of thousands of dollars, and just because the group doesn't personally do the beheading and killing with their own hands, doesn't make them any less culpable for the terrorism of their henchmen.

Obama was well aware the Khartoum-based Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA) was a terrorist-finance agency--it was designated such for a decade by the government. In spite of this, his administration approved the release of well over $100,000 AFTER they were informed ISRA was affiliated with Osama bin Laden and Maktab al-Khidamat (MK), which later became al-Qaeda.

ISRA received a $200,000 taxpayer-funded grant from the Obama administration, which released no less than $115,000 to the terrorist-financing organization, according to National Review:

According to the U.S. Treasury, in 1997 ISRA established formal cooperation with MK. By 2000, ISRA had raised $5 million for bin Laden's group. The Treasury Department notes that ISRA officials even sought to help "relocate [bin Laden] to secure safe harbor for him." It further reports that ISRA raised funds in 2003 in Western Europe specifically earmarked for Hamas suicide bombings.

Perhaps this was Obama's strategy for defeating the extremists--let them blow themselves up with explosives we paid for.

The 2004 designation included all of ISRA's branches, including a U.S. office called the Islamic American Relief Agency (IARA-USA). Eventually it became known that this American branch had illegally transferred over $1.2 million to Iraqi insurgents and other terror groups, including, reportedly, the Afghan terrorist Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

In July 2014 the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) approved $723,405 of our taxpayer funds to be sent to World Vision Inc., and from that money, "$200,000 was to be directed to a sub-grantee: ISRA," the National Review noted.

This was done even though World Vision told USAID in 2014 that ISRA was on the terrorist organization watch list and subsequently had to wait until the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) could assess the situation before releasing any funds to these scum-buckets.

In January 2015, OFAC confirmed that ISRA was a designated terrorist organization and rejected World Vision from getting "a license to engage in transactions with [ISRA]."

Even though OFAC ruled ISRA to be a terrorist organization, World Vision wrote to OFAC and Jeremy Konyndyk of the Obama administration (who then served as director of USAID's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance) requesting to apply for a new license from USAID to pay ISRA "monies owed for work performed."

Larry Meserve, USAID's mission director for Sudan, asserted that World Vision argued that if they didn't pay ISRA "their whole program will be jeopardized." ...

Low and behold, on May 7, 2015--after "close collaboration and consultation with the Department of State" OFAC went ahead and issued a license to World Vision International, a World Vision affiliate. The license authorized a "one-time transfer of approximately $125,000 to ISRA," whereby "$115,000 was for services performed under the sub-award with USAID" and $10,000 was "for an unrelated funding arrangement between Irish Aid and World Vision."

This is exactly why terrorist organizations grew and prospered under the Obama administration.

"[In 2014], when the U.S. first began its campaign against the terror group, ISIS had a presence in seven countries," The Hill reported in 2016. "That figure rose to 13 in 2015, and today the White House document shows that ISIS is operating in 18 countries."

And to demonstrate just where Obama's sympathies lied, he killed a huge investigation into Hezbollah, allowing them to "become one of the biggest transnational organized crime groups in the world," DEA supervisory agent Jack Kelly told Politico.

Barack Obama tried to convince the public that his failure to reduce or contain terrorism never happened and "the number of terrorist incidents [had] not substantially increased," even the left-leaning Politifact rated his statement as "mostly false."

And John Brennan, the guy who voted for a Communist, calls President Trump a "traitor."

But what's breathtaking is how the left continuously gets away with their seditious behavior.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

Rand Paul calls to revoke John Brennan's top secret clearance

Somebody had an "accident"

Sen. Rand Paul called for POTUS to revoke former CIA director John Brennan's security clearance and questioned whether or not Brennan was "monetizing" his access to classified information as he is now a political pundit for MSNBC and NBC. Both networks are highly anti-U.S. President and purveyors of fake news to make their case.

Paul tweeted early Monday:

"Is John Brennan monetizing his security clearance? Is John Brennan making millions of dollars divulging secrets to the mainstream media with his attacks on @realDonaldTrump?"

Brennan joined the networks in February as a senior national security and intelligence analyst. He has nostrils comparable to those of Chuck Schumer. The networks did not as yet respond to Fox News' request for comment on Sen. Paul's tweet.

Paul, a Kentucky Republican, defended Trump's plan to have a second summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. He tweeted again:

"Today I will meet with the President and I will ask him to revoke John Brennan's security clearance!"

The White House has not commented on the issue.


Tweet

Documents suggest coordination between FBI, CIA, Obama WH and Dems in Trump-Russia probe

Photo: Reuters

Text messages between FBI lovers/officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were recently uncovered suggesting a possible covert coordination between high-ranking officials at the Obama White House, Justice Department, CIA, FBI and former Senate Democratic leadership in the early days of the investigation into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

According to investigators, the information provided to Fox News "strongly" suggests collusion between Obama's Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, then-Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (aka "Hairy Weed") and former CIA Director and possible closet Muslim John Brennan. This would clearly "contradict" the Obama administration's public claim about its hand in the process.

Photo: AP

A text by Lisa Page to Strzok on Aug. 2, 2016 read: 

"Make sure you can lawfully protect what you sign. Just thinking about congress, foia, etc. You probably know better than me."

The next day Strzok texted Page describing former FBI Deputy Director Andrew (Andy) McCable as being concerned with "information control" related to the initial investigation into Trump's campaign. Brennan was sent to Capitol Hill around the same time to brief members of Congress about possible election interference, according to the New York Times.

Five days later, Strzok texted Page:

"Internal joint cyber cd intel piece for D, scenesetter for McDonough brief, Trainor [head of FBI cyber division] directed all cyber info be pulled. I'd let Bill and Jim hammer it out first, though it would be best for D to have it before the Wed WH session."

"D" refers to since fired FBI Director James Comey and "McDonough" refers to Obama's Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, the GOP investigators said.

"We are not making conclusions. What we are saying is that the timeline is concerning enough to warrant the appointment of an independent investigator to look at whether or not the Obama White House was involved [in the Trump-Russia investigation]," a GOP congressional source told Fox News."

Of course, the CIA and FBI are independent agencies and are supposed to be non-partisan. Any coordination with the White House would be inappropriate.

Photo: AP

But does anyone doubt the existence of partisanship with Comey, Strzok, Page, Brennan and McCabe?

It seems as if they collectively believed they were being patriotic by thwarting Trump from remaining in office, that somehow it was their patriotic duty to get him impeached.

But alas, semi-useless Attorney General Jeff Sessions has now determined there will be no second special counsel and nobody will be held accountable in any of the aforementioned agencies.

And Hillary Clinton will never pay for her use of an illegal server. 

And Susan Rice will still be on the Netflix board of directors in spite of her lies and deception to the American public about Benghazi being inspired by a stupid video. 

And Obama will continue to make asinine, self-aggrandizing speeches about how there may one day be "a million Obamas." 

And Facebook will continue to farm our data to the Democrats.

And the sun will rise, and the sun will set, and nothing changes.



Tweet

Paul slams Brennan, America's hypocrite

Sen.Rand Paul (R-KY) slammed ex-CIA chief John Brennan for saying that President Trump will be remembered as a "disgraced demagogue." Rand said that Brennan's spying on Americans while he headed the agency was disgraceful.

"This man had the power to search every American's records without a warrant," Paul began in a tweet Sunday. "What's disgraceful is attacking the Bill of Rights and the freedom of every American."

Plus the fact that nobody knows the deal with Brennan, He visited the Muslim holy site, the Hajj, which only Muslims can visit. What's going on with that?

Paul has held strong disdain for Brennan for years, as does anyone who truly holds the U.S. Constitution as the final say in American democracy.

In 2013, Paul filibustered the Senate floor for 13 hours to block Obama's nomination for Brennan, a disgusting piece of floating effluvia in the scum pond of the gorilla cage at the Bronx Zoo in August. Paul's concern is whether the administration would execute a drone strike on an American on U.S. soil--after all, Obama executed a drone strike of an American citizen on foreign soil, not that the POS al Awlaki didn't deserve to be blown to bits.

The problem is, if you can kill an American, regardless of their terrorist ties, what's stopping the president from justifying the killing of an American he simply wants to kill? 

The president cannot be the judge and jury.

A year and a half after the filibuster, Rand joined a bipartisan call for the removal of Brennan as CIA chief after it was revealed his agency spied on Senate Intelligence Committee staffers.

Rands most recent criticism comes after Brennan's response to Trump on Friday night after AG Jeff Sessions fired FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe just two days before he was ready to retire on full taxpayer funded pension.

Sessions fired McCabe after an FBI report and an inspector general's report on McCabe showed his mishandling of the Hillary Clinton illegal email servers while pretending to be secretary of state.

Brennan tweeted:

"When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America ... America will triumph over you."

Brennan's Twitter pages claims that he is non-partisan.

With such a copious vocabulary as Brennan, you think he knew the definition of non-partisan.


Tweet

Obama official made 'hundreds of unmasking requests'

In the final year of Obama's failed presidency, one of his officials made "hundreds of unmasking requests" according to a letter from a top Republican who raised concerns that the requests were made for "improper purposes."

"Unmasking" refers to a formal request to identify Americans in an intelligence document.

Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the House Intelligence Committee Chairman, has questioned whether the unmasking was improperly sought by Obama officials in unmasking the names of the Trump transition team.

The person he seemed to be referring to regarding the hundreds of unmasking requests is Samantha Power. 

"[T]his Committee has learned that one official, whose position has no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration," Nunes wrote to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.

Nunes wrote that only one request "offered a justification that was not boilerplate and articulated why" the identity was needed for official duties.

Three top Obama administration officials were specifically named: Former CIA director John Brennan; former national security adviser Susan "It Was The Video" Rice; and former U.N. ambassador Samantha Power.

David Pressman, Power's lawyer, stressed that her responsibilities in her capacity as a member of the National Security Council but said she will cooperate with Congress.

"Ambassador Power strongly supports any bipartisan effort to address the serious threat to our national security posed by Russia's interference in our electoral process, and is eager to engage with the Senate and House committees on the timeline they have requested," he wrote. "While serving as our Permanent Representative to the United Nations and as a member of the National Security Council responsible for advising the President on the full-range of threats confronting the United States, and long before receiving an invitation to engage the Congressional committees, Ambassador Power was unambiguous about her support of bipartisan efforts to determine the full extent of this threat to our national security."

Which is why she unmasked as many Donald Trump campaign team personnel that she could get away with and not raise eyebrows.

Nunes' letter said he plans to introduce a bill requiring "individual, fact-based justifications" for unmasking requests.

"Cabinet members and other senior political leaders cannot be permitted to continue to seek access to U.S. person information within disseminated intelligence reports without documenting a specific, fact-based requirement for the information," he wrote.

Nunes said that "Obama-era officials sought the identities of Trump transition officials within intelligence reports" without offering any "meaningful explanation" as to why they needed or how they would use the information.

Nunes is concerned the information could be used for nefarious purposes, including leaking. He even noted that some of the requests were "followed by anonymous leaks of those name to the media."

So it walks and quacks like a duck.


Tweet

Bilderberg group secretly meets Thursday to control the world

Global power brokers, politicians, bankers, captains of industry, along with European royalty, will quietly meet for four days starting Thursday. They will discuss, behind closed doors, the merits and problems with Donald J. Trump's U.S. presidency.

The meeting is in Chantilly, Virginia where 131 elites, such as Henry Kissinger, civil rights activist Vernon Jordan and NATO secretary Jens Stoltenberg, will discuss transatlantic relations, a "progress report" on the Trump administration, and the future of the European Union.

If the Bilderberg group does not like what it sees, they will destroy the world. 

Or maybe not.

This year's meeting is a chance for Trump supporters like Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and tech entrepreneur Peter Thiel to face his critics such as Eric Schmidt, the executive director of Google's parent company.

Schmidt, the man behind all the information Google has on all of us, and who knows where we are at every minute of the day and wants our photos and comments to store away for some future purpose, warned us in January that Trump's administration will do "evil things."

And Schmidt knows this because Google knows everything and would never use this information to do "evil things" or, at least nothing that they determine is evil.


Bilderberg Group has met annually since 1954 and its purpose (allegedly, if you're an Alex Jones fan, which I'm not) is to foster dialogue between Europoe and North America. Although this meeting will be a mere 30 miles from the White House, they will be totally out of the public eye.

And if you're an Alex Jones fan, you will find that fact very disturbing because you will know they are up to no good as they run the world without any resistance.

Only a few journalists will participate in the forum: London Evening Standard editor George Osborne and the Washington bureau chief for Turkey's Hurriyet newspaper. 

However, it is the tradition of Bilderberg to exclude news outlets from the event, which, if you're an Alex Jones fan, you would find that very, very suspicious and probably malevolent.

"There is no desired outcome, no minutes are taken and no report is written," the group states. "Furthermore, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued."

Alex Jones: "Very fishy, if you ask me."

The meeting is expected to address Russia, China, globalization, nuclear proliferation, and "the war on information."

"And world domination," Jones mutters.

Some guests invited include: Dutch King Willem-Alexander; David Rubenstein, co-founder of The Carlyle Group; and John Brennan, former CIA chief and "secret Muslim because he visited the Hajj, which only Muslims are allowed to visit," Jones might say.

Anti-globalization protesters, those people who still believe in sovereign nations, have descended on the location of the meeting while in-between jobs.


Tweet