Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29

CIA Director Once Voted for Communist Presidential Candidate

 Quote:
by Natalie Johnson
September 21, 2016


CIA Director John Brennan voted for the Communist Party candidate in the 1976 presidential election.

Brennan told a congressional panel last week that he "froze" while taking a CIA polygraph test four years later when the questioner asked him if he had ever worked with or for a group that was "dedicated to overthrowing the U.S.," CNN reported.

"This was back in 1980, and I thought back to a previous election where I voted, and I voted for the Communist Party candidate," Brennan said at a panel discussion regarding diversity in the intelligence community during the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual conference.

Someone had asked whether experience in political activism could harm someone who later attempts to obtain a security clearance. Brennan said the CIA is committed to upholding the values of the Constitution.


"We’ve all had indiscretions in our past," he said. "I would not be up here if that was disqualifying."

Brennan said he decided to acknowledge his vote for Communist Gus Hall, the Communist Party USA’s four-time presidential candidate, when undergoing the lie detector test.

"I said I was neither Democratic or Republican, but it was my way, as I was going to college, of signaling my unhappiness with the system, and the need for change. I said I’m not a member of the Communist Party, so the polygrapher looked at me and said, ‘OK,’" Brennan said.

"So if back in 1980, John Brennan was allowed to say, ‘I voted for the Communist Party with Gus Hall’ … and still got through, rest assured that your rights and your expressions and your freedom of speech as Americans is something that’s not going to be disqualifying of you as you pursue a career in government," he continued.



Just coincidentally, John Brennan is one of the Deep State bureaucrats who are part of the plot to depose Trump based on a false "Russia collusion" narrative. Brennan, who has openly threatened Trump on multiple occasions in televised interviews with the backlash of his at-the-time (under Obama) CIA director power, and was part of the cabal to create the Meuller special investigation under false pretenses and falsified evidence.

Along with James Clapper, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein, Loretta Lynch, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, and an entourage of other deceitful players abusing their power in DOJ, FBI and other federal agencies.




  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29
A wider look at the Deep State network that former CIA director John Brennan is a part of. A Praetorian Guard that has a first loyalty to something other than the U.S. Constitution and the nation they were appointed to defend:




IT LOOKS LIKE OBAMA DID SPY ON TRUMP, JUST AS HE APPARENTLY DID TO ME

 Quote:
by Sharyl Attkisson
September 20, 2017


Many in the media are diving deeply into minutiae in order to discredit any notion that President Trump might have been onto something in March when he fired off a series of tweets claiming President Obama had “tapped” “wires” in Trump Tower just before the election.

According to media reports this week, the FBI did indeed “wiretap” the former head of Trump’s campaign, Paul Manafort, both before and after Trump was elected. If Trump officials — or Trump himself — communicated with Manafort during the wiretaps, they would have been recorded, too.

But we’re missing the bigger story.


If these reports are accurate, it means U.S. intelligence agencies secretly surveilled at least a half dozen Trump associates. And those are just the ones we know about.

Besides Manafort, the officials include former Trump advisers Carter Page and Michael Flynn. Last week, we discovered multiple Trump “transition officials” were “incidentally” captured during government surveillance of a foreign official. We know this because former Obama adviser Susan Rice reportedly admitted “unmasking,” or asking to know the identities of, the officials. Spying on U.S. citizens is considered so sensitive, their names are supposed to be hidden or “masked,” even inside the government, to protect their privacy.

In May, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates acknowledged they, too, reviewed communications of political figures, secretly collected under President Obama.


•Two weeks before the election, at a secret hearing before the FISA court overseeing government surveillance, NSA officials confessed they’d violated privacy safeguards “with much greater frequency” than they’d admitted. The judge accused them of “institutional lack of candor” and said, “this is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”



WEAPONIZATION OF INTEL AGENCIES

Nobody wants our intel agencies to be used like the Stasi in East Germany; the secret police spying on its own citizens for political purposes. The prospect of our own NSA, CIA and FBI becoming politically weaponized has been shrouded by untruths, accusations and justifications.

You’ll recall DNI Clapper falsely assured Congress in 2013 that the NSA was not collecting “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.”

Intel agencies secretly monitored conversations of members of Congress while the Obama administration negotiated the Iran nuclear deal.

In 2014, the CIA got caught spying on Senate Intelligence Committee staffers, though CIA Director John Brennan had explicitly denied that.

There were also wiretaps on then-Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) in 2011 under Obama. The same happened under President George W. Bush to former Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Calif.).

Journalists have been targeted, too. This internal email, exposed by WikiLeaks, should give everyone chills. It did me.

Dated Sept. 21, 2010, the “global intelligence” firm Stratfor wrote:


[John] Brennan [then an Obama Homeland Security adviser] is behind the witch hunts of investigative journalists learning information from inside the beltway sources.

Note -- There is specific tasker from the WH to go after anyone printing materials negative to the Obama agenda (oh my.) Even the FBI is shocked. The Wonder Boys must be in meltdown mode...

The government subsequently got caught monitoring journalists at Fox News, The Associated Press, and, as I allege in a federal lawsuit, my computers while I worked as an investigative correspondent at CBS News
On Aug. 7, 2013, CBS News publicly announced:


… correspondent Sharyl Attkisson’s computer was hacked by ‘an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions,’ confirming Attkisson’s previous revelation of the hacking.

Then, as now, instead of getting the bigger story, some in the news media and quasi-news media published false and misleading narratives pushed by government interests. They implied the computer intrusions were the stuff of vivid imagination, conveniently dismissed forensic evidence from three independent examinations that they didn’t review. All seemed happy enough to let news of the government’s alleged unlawful behavior fade away, rather than get to the bottom of it.

I have spent more than two years litigating against the Department of Justice for the computer intrusions. Forensics have revealed dates, times and methods of some of the illegal activities. The software used was proprietary to a federal intel agency. The intruders deployed a keystroke monitoring program, accessed the CBS News corporate computer system, listened in on my conversations by activating the computer’s microphone and used Skype to exfiltrate files.

We survived the government’s latest attempt to dismiss my lawsuit. There’s another hearing Friday. To date, the Trump Department of Justice — like the Obama Department of Justice — is fighting me in court and working to keep hidden the identities of those who accessed a government internet protocol address found in my computers.

Evidence continues to build. I recently filed new information unearthed through forensic exams. As one expert told the court, it was “not a mistake; it is not a random event; and it is not technically possible for these IP addresses to simply appear on her computer systems without activity by someone using them as part of the cyber-attack.”


PATTERNS

It’s difficult not to see patterns in the government’s behavior, unless you’re wearing blinders.
  • •The intelligence community secretly expanded its authority in 2011 so it can monitor innocent U.S. citizens like you and me for doing nothing more than mentioning a target’s name a single time.

    •In January 2016, a top secret inspector general report found the NSA violated the very laws designed to prevent abuse.

    •In 2016, Obama officials searched through intelligence on U.S. citizens a record 30,000 times, up from 9,500 in 2013.

    •Two weeks before the election, at a secret hearing before the FISA court overseeing government surveillance, NSA officials confessed they’d violated privacy safeguards “with much greater frequency” than they’d admitted. The judge accused them of “institutional lack of candor” and said, “this is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”


Officials involved in the surveillance and unmasking of U.S. citizens have said their actions were legal and not politically motivated. And there are certainly legitimate areas of inquiry to be made by law enforcement and intelligence agencies. But look at the patterns. It seems that government monitoring of journalists, members of Congress and political enemies — under multiple administrations — has become more common than anyone would have imagined two decades ago. So has the unmasking of sensitive and highly protected names by political officials.

Those deflecting with minutiae are missing the point. To me, they sound like the ones who aren’t thinking.
____________________________________________

Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) is an Emmy-award winning investigative journalist, author of The New York Times bestsellers “The Smear” and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program “Full Measure.”





An award-winning journalist of CNN and CBS, who took the federal government to court, with technology experts to attest that the technology used to hack her computer was from federal intelligence/law enforcement agencies.

Gee, I wonder how opinionated jerks like Phil/Sammitch and Izzy will dismiss this as conspiracy theory and ranting/screeds of paranoia. Not easily. Because it's not paranoia when it's factually proven by much of the conservative press, Julian Assange/WikiLeaks, Judicial Watch, and other award-winning journalists and legal experts all agree this is happening. As do players like James Comey and James Clapper and John Brennan themselves, when they are forced to admit it when it is proven.

Through illegally obtained FISA warrants, four of them, the FBI did spy on Trump officials, as opposition research during the 2016 campaign, and to set a trap and discredit the incoming Trump administration. The weaponization of government.

Just as the IRS was used by the Obama administration from 2010 to 2012, to harass, intimidate and audit Republican donors and Tea Party/ Religious groups.

Using these FISA warrants and leaked documents that James Comey admitted ON CAMERA in Congressional hearings to leaking, for the expressed purpose to deceitfully create the pretense for starting a Meuller special investigation.

Rod Rosenstein HIMSELF recommended in a WRITTEN REPORT that Trump fire James Comey as "the only way to restore internal and external confidence in the FBI". And then used the firing that HE RECOMMENDED as his excuse to appoint a special investigation. To which Rosenstein appointed Robert Meuller to head. Robert Meuller, who was a decades personal friend and ally of both Comey and Rosenstein, who had also just been passed over within days by Trump as a nominee to replace James Comey as head of the FBI. So Meuller from the outset has an axe to grind against Trump. As do 13 of the 17 lawyers on his special investigative team, 13 of whom have donated to Democrat campaigns they are investigating, 9 of whom have donated sums in the hundreds or thousands to Obama and Hillary campaigns. Campaigns they are appointed to investigate, while simultaneously they are deeply invested in.

The biases, the outright animus, and the incestuous conflicts of interest boggle the mind. As do the authoritarian abuses of power. And as many in their ranks (Obama, wife Michelle, Hillary, Anita Dunn, Valerie Jarrett, Ron Bloom, on down) are disciples of Lenin, Mao, Saul Alinsky and their ruthless authoritarian exercise of power, why would one expect them NOT to abuse their power to the hilt.
Why expect them to preserve, protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, rather than exercise their ability to abuse power to the hilt in the tradition of Mao or Alinsky?:



Yes! Like Obama official Ron Bloom cited, Mao has taught us that "power is mostly administered at the barrel of a gun."

Unless, of course, those guns belong to conservative Republicans. In which case they are clinging to their guns and their religion and their antipathy toward other who are not like them (who want to destroy them). In which case their guns need to be confiscated.

But of course that's just my tinfoil hat talking. None of these sourced facts and quotes are real, right?

Actually, they are.





  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,791
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,791
Likes: 40
So Brennan is honest about a vote he made when he was young. Is that supposed to mean anything?


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29



It means Brennan early on showed a contempt for the values of this country. That as head of the CIA, he was sworn to preserve, protect and defend. Supporting Communist Party USA no less, an ideological group as in opposition to our Constitutional/ capitalist government as you can get.

That he similarly is now part of a revolution to displace our Constitution in a Deep State coup against Trump, to seize power by any means available. By any abuse of power.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,791
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,791
Likes: 40
He considered that vote a mistake that he was being honest about. Compare that to somebody who was meeting with Russians and lied about it to the authorities. You defend folks like Manafort but attack Brennan for being upfront about a vote he made when he was young. We have different values


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,940
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
He considered that vote a mistake that he was being honest about. Compare that to somebody who was meeting with Russians and lied about it to the authorities. You defend folks like Manafort but attack Brennan for being upfront about a vote he made when he was young. We have different values


If that were true, the anti-Trump Deep State army of federal investigators would be indicting Trump now.

But we all know the truth:
Brennan was part of a conspiracy to KGB-style depose Trump.
Manafort did some questionable things that FBI investigated in 2004-2007, and ultimately decided there was no case to prosecute. That they re-opened in 2016 just to set Trump up, and possibly leverage perjury from Manafort to falsely convict Trump on evidence that doesn't actually exist.
Same with Michael Flynn.
And so many others who these evil DOJ and FBI officials are forcing to mortgage their homes to pay for defense against malicious prosecution, when these guys in fact did nothing wrong.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5