Like Ahab, the obsessive sea captain who sought revenge on the great white whale Moby Dick, the left and their cohorts in the mainstream media continue their obsessive quest for “evidence” to bring down their nemesis, President Trump. Unfortunately for the destroy-Trump crowd, their Russia conspiracy narrative has been undercut by none other than the anti-Trump former CIA Director, John Brennan. Mr. Brennan has just delivered his first public remarks on the alleged ties between Russia and the Trump campaign since he left office last January.
Mr. Brennan admitted, during his congressional testimony before the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, that he could not say whether there was any evidence pointing to alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia. In fact, Brennan was very careful in the way he phrased what had been uncovered while he was the CIA director – “information intelligence about _interactions_ and _contacts _between U.S. persons and the Russians.” (Emphasis added) Although “interactions” and contacts” do not amount to collusion, and Brennan conceded that contacts between foreign governments and a presidential campaign are not inherently suspicious, Brennan still thought they warranted a full-scale intelligence investigation in Trump’s case.
Not satisfied with Brennan’s attempt to dance around the issue of whether he knew of any evidence of actual collusion, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) said to Brennan, “I asked you about collusion, coordination, and conspiracy, and you used the word ‘contact’. Contact could be benign or not benign. So was it contact you saw…what was the nature of what you saw?”
Stating that he focused on intelligence, not on analyzing evidence of potential criminal wrong-doing, Brennan replied, “I saw interaction. But I don’t know. I don’t have sufficient information to make a determination whether or not there was cooperation or complicity or collusion.”
Neither does anyone else who has been searching for proof of alleged collusion, as far as we know.
In a complete state of denial, a writer for the left wing ThinkProgress claimed that Congressman Gowdy’s questioning “backfired.” In truth, Gowdy’s questioning was right on the mark.
Brennan also testified that he was not aware of any inappropriate requests from President Trump to the intelligence community for help in dealing with the “Russian collusion” or Flynn investigations. More specifically, when asked by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) whether he was aware of any efforts the president had made to enlist the support of the intelligence community personnel to push back on a narrative involving alleged collusion, Brennan replied that he was “unaware of that.” Brennan also said that he was “unaware” of any attempts by President Trump to enlist the help of members of the intelligence community to drop the Flynn investigation.
Again, the left wing writer for ThinkProgress got it all wrong, citing a story in the Washington Post to support his contention that “Trump and others in his inner circle have repeatedly tried to enlist officials to publicly downplay the situation.” Brennan, certainly no friend of Trump’s, testified that he was unaware of such efforts. As for the Washington Post, several of its recent stories seeking to embarrass President Trump have been discredited.
Brennan also testified that, as far back as last summer, he knew that Russia was trying to interfere in the presidential election. He even warned the head of Russia’s FSB security service that such interference would hurt ties between Russia and the United States. “It should be clear to everyone Russia brazenly interfered in our 2016 presidential election process and that they undertook these activities despite our strong protests and explicit warning that they do not do so,” Brennan testified.
In essence, Brennan admitted that the Obama administration knowingly let the Russians continue their interference in the U.S. election with only a warning that U.S.-Russian ties would be affected if they did not stop. Obviously, they did not stop. Yet, Obama did not impose any new sanctions or take any other concrete action against Russia on account of such interference until after the election. That’s when the Russian interference, blown up into unsupported collusion allegations, became a Democratic Party talking point in trying to explain away President Trump’s victory over hapless Hillary Clinton.
John Brennan’s testimony provides nothing new that would advance the left’s conspiracy narrative against President Trump. To the contrary, his testimony demonstrates once again that there is smoke but no fire to the whole “Russia-Trump campaign collusion” story. It also raises the question why the Obama administration did not take more forceful immediate action against Russia as soon as it knew the Russians’ interference in last year’s election was underway. Could it be that Obama administration officials and deep state bureaucrats were waiting to ensnare Donald Trump in a manufactured scandal, buttressed by illegal leaks of out of context classified information, in case he actually won the election?