DNI declassifies Brennan notes, CIA memo on Hillary Clinton 'stirring up' scandal between Trump, Russia
A source said Brennan's handwritten notes were taken after briefing Obama on the matter
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified documents that revealed former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election, Fox News has learned.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dni-bre...mo-clinton
This is a "smoking gun" that will be ignored by the DNC media. It's in black-and-white, yet they will ignore it.
There was a meeting between Brennan and Obama on July 28th, and somebody in that meeting mention that Hillary's campaign strategy would be to tie Trump to Russia.
But at this point, the hack into the DNC server was already publicly acknowledged, and people were going off the record to say that all indications were it was the Russian military who did the hacking.
Hillary was a private citizen, and it would have been perfectly legal for her to tell whatever kind of lies she wanted to tell about Donald Trump interacting with foreigners, and perfectly legal for her to call for whatever type of investigation she thought might benefit her campaign.
And we know that an FBI investigation, into whether Russia was trying to coordinate with Trump, started around this time, probably a little bit prior actually.
The operative questions are, did the FBI start the investigation because of their own reasonable suspicion based on the evidence they had at the time, or did they start it because Hillary wanted it started?
We haven't seen anything that answers that question.
(10-06-2020, 06:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There was a meeting between Brennan and Obama on July 28th, and somebody in that meeting mention that Hillary's campaign strategy would be to tie Trump to Russia.
But at this point, the hack into the DNC server was already publicly acknowledged, and people were going off the record to say that all indications were it was the Russian military who did the hacking.
Hillary was a private citizen, and it would have been perfectly legal for her to tell whatever kind of lies she wanted to tell about Donald Trump interacting with foreigners, and perfectly legal for her to call for whatever type of investigation she thought might benefit her campaign.
And we know that an FBI investigation, into whether Russia was trying to coordinate with Trump, started around this time, probably a little bit prior actually.
The operative questions are, did the FBI start the investigation because of their own reasonable suspicion based on the evidence they had at the time, or did they start it because Hillary wanted it started?
We haven't seen anything that answers that question.
You haven't, dont bring us normal people into your denial.
(10-06-2020, 07:23 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (10-06-2020, 06:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There was a meeting between Brennan and Obama on July 28th, and somebody in that meeting mention that Hillary's campaign strategy would be to tie Trump to Russia.
But at this point, the hack into the DNC server was already publicly acknowledged, and people were going off the record to say that all indications were it was the Russian military who did the hacking.
Hillary was a private citizen, and it would have been perfectly legal for her to tell whatever kind of lies she wanted to tell about Donald Trump interacting with foreigners, and perfectly legal for her to call for whatever type of investigation she thought might benefit her campaign.
And we know that an FBI investigation, into whether Russia was trying to coordinate with Trump, started around this time, probably a little bit prior actually.
The operative questions are, did the FBI start the investigation because of their own reasonable suspicion based on the evidence they had at the time, or did they start it because Hillary wanted it started?
We haven't seen anything that answers that question.
You haven't, dont bring us normal people into your denial.
Show me. Help me snap out of it.
(10-06-2020, 06:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There was a meeting between Brennan and Obama on July 28th, and somebody in that meeting mention that Hillary's campaign strategy would be to tie Trump to Russia.
But at this point, the hack into the DNC server was already publicly acknowledged, and people were going off the record to say that all indications were it was the Russian military who did the hacking.
Hillary was a private citizen, and it would have been perfectly legal for her to tell whatever kind of lies she wanted to tell about Donald Trump interacting with foreigners, and perfectly legal for her to call for whatever type of investigation she thought might benefit her campaign.
And we know that an FBI investigation, into whether Russia was trying to coordinate with Trump, started around this time, probably a little bit prior actually.
The operative questions are, did the FBI start the investigation because of their own reasonable suspicion based on the evidence they had at the time, or did they start it because Hillary wanted it started?
We haven't seen anything that answers that question.
Part of me always wonders if you actually believe the bs you type or are you just a troll typing out words to stir the pot? Regardless, please don’t stop, you are entertaining either way.
(10-06-2020, 05:47 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]This is a "smoking gun" that will be ignored by the DNC media. It's in black-and-white, yet they will ignore it.
A smoking gun indicating, what?
I read the article. It said Brennan told Obama that Hillary intended to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract from the email server issue. That seems like politics as usual to me. What am I missing?
(10-06-2020, 10:46 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (10-06-2020, 06:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There was a meeting between Brennan and Obama on July 28th, and somebody in that meeting mention that Hillary's campaign strategy would be to tie Trump to Russia.
But at this point, the hack into the DNC server was already publicly acknowledged, and people were going off the record to say that all indications were it was the Russian military who did the hacking.
Hillary was a private citizen, and it would have been perfectly legal for her to tell whatever kind of lies she wanted to tell about Donald Trump interacting with foreigners, and perfectly legal for her to call for whatever type of investigation she thought might benefit her campaign.
And we know that an FBI investigation, into whether Russia was trying to coordinate with Trump, started around this time, probably a little bit prior actually.
The operative questions are, did the FBI start the investigation because of their own reasonable suspicion based on the evidence they had at the time, or did they start it because Hillary wanted it started?
We haven't seen anything that answers that question.
Part of me always wonders if you actually believe the bs you type or are you just a troll typing out words to stir the pot? Regardless, please don’t stop, you are entertaining either way.
I make trolling personal.
This isn't trolling.
You can't process that, in July 2016, it was reasonable to suspect Trump of ties to Russia's government, and multiple different people came to suspect that independently of each other.
No. For you it was just a conspiracy. That's OK. Some people still doubt the moon landings, 50 years later.
(10-07-2020, 05:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (10-06-2020, 05:47 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]This is a "smoking gun" that will be ignored by the DNC media. It's in black-and-white, yet they will ignore it.
A smoking gun indicating, what?
I read the article. It said Brennan told Obama that Hillary intended to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract from the email server issue. That seems like politics as usual to me. What am I missing?
The evidence coming out pretty much implicates that the CIA, FBI, the Hillary campaign (including Hillary herself) as well as the former administration (up to President Obama) were involved in not only unethical, but in some cases illegal activities tied to an election.
The information coming out should disturb everyone, yet crickets when it comes to the MSM.
(10-07-2020, 06:12 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (10-07-2020, 05:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]A smoking gun indicating, what?
I read the article. It said Brennan told Obama that Hillary intended to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract from the email server issue. That seems like politics as usual to me. What am I missing?
The evidence coming out pretty much implicates that the CIA, FBI, the Hillary campaign (including Hillary herself) as well as the former administration (up to President Obama) were involved in not only unethical, but in some cases illegal activities tied to an election.
The information coming out should disturb everyone, yet crickets when it comes to the MSM.
It's a redacted document.
The best you can say about is that it doesn't contradict your version of events.
But it doesn't contradict mine either.
I'm willing to be convinced of anything by documentary evidence, but I don't think you are. you were already sure about what happened even though we don't have much documentary evidence.
(10-07-2020, 06:02 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-07-2020, 05:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]A smoking gun indicating, what?
I read the article. It said Brennan told Obama that Hillary intended to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract from the email server issue. That seems like politics as usual to me. What am I missing?
Who is john brennan?
You're saying that the head of the CIA is not allowed to have any insight or information about what themes Hillary Clinton might bring up on the campaign trail?
I mean normally I would agree with that, but this particular theme crossed into the subject of international spying, which is totally the CIA's job.
This is about as much of a bombshell as if you told me that Obama's Secretary of the Treasury gave Obama a brief report about the tax plan that Donald Trump intended to campaign on.
(10-08-2020, 07:21 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (10-07-2020, 06:12 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]The evidence coming out pretty much implicates that the CIA, FBI, the Hillary campaign (including Hillary herself) as well as the former administration (up to President Obama) were involved in not only unethical, but in some cases illegal activities tied to an election.
The information coming out should disturb everyone, yet crickets when it comes to the MSM.
Sorry, I re-read the Fox News article cited above, and I still don't see anything noteworthy. It said that Brennan told Obama that Hillary Clinton intended to "tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election..."
That sounds like typical politics to me.
You have officially morphed into mikesez. Congratulations.
(10-07-2020, 05:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (10-06-2020, 05:47 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]This is a "smoking gun" that will be ignored by the DNC media. It's in black-and-white, yet they will ignore it.
A smoking gun indicating, what?
I read the article. It said Brennan told Obama that Hillary intended to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract from the email server issue. That seems like politics as usual to me. What am I missing?
What you are missing is that it was referred to the FBI and they didn't investigate her they worked with her to open up an investigation on the President.
(10-08-2020, 09:31 PM)jagman Wrote: [ -> ] (10-07-2020, 05:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]A smoking gun indicating, what?
I read the article. It said Brennan told Obama that Hillary intended to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract from the email server issue. That seems like politics as usual to me. What am I missing?
What you are missing is that it was referred to the FBI and they didn't investigate her they worked with her to open up an investigation on the President.
Something was referred to the FBI, yes. The CIA and the FBI overlap in some places, and they frequently refer things to each other.
You're assuming that the referral was for Hillary Clinton to be investigated. But it was not illegal for her campaign to say that Trump was tied to Russia. What do you think the referral was saying Clinton should be investigated for?
The only reason we're talking about this is because Trump alleges that this was all a scheme to "spy on" his campaign. But we don't see any evidence of that either. We don't see any evidence that the progress of any FBI or CIA investigation was shared with either campaign.
It is illegal to provide false information to the FBI or mislead an investigation. Hillary knew damn well that information was fake.
When you knowingly use fraudulent information to obtain surveillance warrants, you’re absolutely spying on Trump’s campaign. Trump isn’t alleging it. It happened. We also know the FBI did speak with the Clinton campaign about Russian interference while withholding this information for Trumps campaign.
We’ve already proven they lied about when it started, how it started, who was involved, and the reliability of the information. If you’re naive enough to believe that the Obama’s FBI didn’t speak with, or update, Clinton (Obama’s Secretary of State) then you’re just being difficult. The FBI has lied at every level here.