August 16, 2018

"While I had deep insight into Russian activities during the 2016 election, I now am aware — thanks to the reporting of an open and free press..."

"... of many more of the highly suspicious dalliances of some American citizens with people affiliated with the Russian intelligence services. Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion are, in a word, hogwash. The only questions that remain are whether the collusion that took place constituted criminally liable conspiracy, whether obstruction of justice occurred to cover up any collusion or conspiracy, and how many members of 'Trump Incorporated' attempted to defraud the government by laundering and concealing the movement of money into their pockets.... Mr. Trump clearly has become more desperate to protect himself and those close to him, which is why he made the politically motivated decision to revoke my security clearance in an attempt to scare into silence others who might dare to challenge him."

Deep insight from the former CIA director John Brennan in "John Brennan: President Trump’s Claims of No Collusion Are Hogwash/That’s why the president revoked my security clearance: to try to silence anyone who would dare challenge him." (NYT).

We were amused by the repeated use of the word "hogwash." Presumably, he's just backing off from the less fit to print "bullshit."

You may be interested to know that the first recorded use of "hogwash" in the figurative sense (as opposed to the literal stuff fed to hogs) was from Mark Twain:
1870 ‘M. Twain’ in Galaxy June 862/2 I will remark, in the way of general information, that in California, that land of felicitous nomenclature, the literary name of this sort of stuff is ‘hogwash’.
Twain wasn't inventing the usage but reporting on it. Apparently, it came from California.

It's just a way to say "nonsense." The use of the word "bullshit" for nonsense only goes back to 1915, from Wyndom Lewis (writing to Ezra Pound). Apparently, "Bullshit" was a T.S. Eliot poem that never got published though it was an excellent bits of scholarly ribaldry (click image to enlarge and read and gain deep insight):
ADDED: Or did Eliot publish "Bullshit"? I'm seeing "The Triumph of Bullshit" and especially enjoyed the second verse:
Ladies, who find my intentions ridiculous
Awkward, insipid and horribly gauche
Pompous, pretentious, ineptly meticulous
Dull as the heart of an unbaked brioche
Floundering versicles freely versiculous
Often attenuate, frequently crass
Attempts at emotion that turn isiculous,
For Christ's sake stick it up your ass.
Nice rhymes — horribly gauche with unbaked brioche and that whole ridiculous meticulous versiculous isiculous string.

IN THE COMMENTS: Meade quotes the NYT byline for Brennan — "Mr. Brennan was director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2013 to 2017" — and says:
Coincidentally, immediately after his boss, Mr. Obama, gained more... "flexibility".

325 comments:

1 – 200 of 325   Newer›   Newest»
rehajm said...

A determination to have no words ending in -Uck -Unt and -Ugger? Fuck that!

Lewis Wetzel said...

Trump's next move should be to take away Brennan's binky.

The Bergall said...

Show us the evidence then..............

Temujin said...

Clearly he's being silenced. On all networks. Prime time appearances. Op-eds in major papers. Radio interviews. Speeches. Why he can barely keep up with all the silencing.

I can see why the CIA was so f'd up under this guy. He's not just a liar. He's nuts.

Meade said...

Deep [State] Insight
by John O. Brennan

Darrell said...

John Brennan should have never passed the vetting for a government job. I'm not surprised Obama saw great things in him. Or maybe it was the caked brown fecal matter on his nose when he walked into the room.

Darrell said...

The Podesta brothers worked for the same people as Manafort, yet he has no concerns with them. I smell a rat. John Brennan. So did Christopher Steele, btw.

Matt Sablan said...

"The only questions that remain are whether the collusion that took place constituted criminally liable conspiracy, whether obstruction of justice occurred to cover up any collusion or conspiracy, and how many members of 'Trump Incorporated' attempted to defraud the government by laundering and concealing the movement of money into their pockets."

-- I... I wonder if Brennan is asking the same things about Fusion and Clinton's long time law firm Perkins Coie. Hah, who am I kidding? Of course he doesn't care about people who actually paid and received money from foreign governments when there's a Republican to blame.

Meade said...

"Mr. Brennan was director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2013 to 2017."

Coincidentally, immediately after his boss, Mr. Obama, gained more... "flexibility".

Matt Sablan said...

I actually think, by the way, that as a rule, people who leave government service and no longer have a need to know, SHOULD have their clearances removed. Especially now that we've seen, during both the Bush and Trump administrations, how willing people are to leak to harm the government when there's a president they don't like in office. It's an unnecessary security risk.

Lewis Wetzel said...

If you believe the rumors on the less reputable conservative blogs, Brennan's "evidence" is the Steele dossier. He believes every frikkin' word.
I'm not sure where Brennan's reputation as an astute analyst comes from. He seems to be an exemplar of the notion that the more incompetent you are, the higher you rise in government service.

The Crack Emcee said...

When only one (1) journalist saw Theranos was a scam, after almost the entire Press Corp, as well as almost our entire political and financial elite went through their door (Bill "Higher Consciousness" Clinton pointed at Elizabeth Holmes and said "The future's in great hands") that showed me A) the importance of having a free press, and B) just how lame ours currently is.

I have almost no faith in them now whatsoever.

Matt Sablan said...

Also, Trump was very, very slow to take this simple strike at his enemies. Look how long it took to actually harm Stzork or McCabe! Trump, in uncharacteristic fashion, has given his enemies a lot of leeway before taking action. Sure, he's been a Twitter dick to them, but he never, say, fired an IG and implied the IG was senile to ensure he could never work again after the IG dared investigate his campaign.

Michael The Magnificent said...

Show us the evidence then..............

Which would have been leaked to the NYT and WP by now, if they had any.

Matt Sablan said...

Crack: Legitimate philosophical question.

Do we really have a free press that peddles on access to the rich and powerful instead of doing investigative journalism? Most of the big networks are a revolving door of influencers or second-step influencers from people in power; we have a press that is free, in that the government doesn't own it, but the rich and powerful have very much influence over it due to legacy journalism being anchored so heavily in having access.

I think the rise of the pajama media corps is probably the biggest step towards a free press since, well, the printing press.

Jess said...

It's said a spook is always a spook. Since Brennan lost his security clearance, is now completely out of the loop, is making a substantial amount of public appearances, and quick to say what's on his mind, I wonder how long it will be before the intelligence community starts wondering if Brennan is a loose end?

Freder Frederson said...

I actually think, by the way, that as a rule, people who leave government service and no longer have a need to know, SHOULD have their clearances removed. Especially now that we've seen, during both the Bush and Trump administrations, how willing people are to leak to harm the government when there's a president they don't like in office. It's an unnecessary security risk.

The reason clearances are not immediately removed is to ease the transition to the new administration. And where is the evidence of leaking of classified material by former officials. There is no claim (except rather vaguely and probably just more bullshit) that Brennan did anything other than criticize Trump.

Makes your claim that you all are the noble defenders of free speech look rather weak.

Birkel said...

John Brennan was the prime mover to creat the Steele dossier.
He activated Halper, et al, to do more CIA work.

It was an op against the duly elected President of the United States.

Rigelsen said...

If Brennan has all this incontrovertible evidence, I wish he would share it with the rest of us, instead of just asserting its existence. The “evidence” we’ve seen has been thinly sourced, unverifiable “hogwash” at best.

It is really an indictment of our intelligence services that such a man, who apparently believes people should be railroaded just based on his own whims, was able to rise to the top of the CIA.

Shouting Thomas said...

Makes your claim that you all are the noble defenders of free speech look rather weak.

Taking away security clearance is in what way a free speech issue?

I'll answer: Obviously, it isn't.

If you tried to be more patently irrelevant, Freder, you'd be hard pressed to do better.

Barry Dauphin said...

He was director of the CIA in 2016, but now he knows a lot more than when he was director because of... Andrea Mitchell? Silence him? I think the administration is begging him to keep talking. He sounds like a nincompoop.

Matt Sablan said...

"The reason clearances are not immediately removed is to ease the transition to the new administration. And where is the evidence of leaking of classified material by former officials. There is no claim (except rather vaguely and probably just more bullshit) that Brennan did anything other than criticize Trump."

-- If Trump wanted Brennan's advice, he could keep him on the staff or give him need to know, or provide him a clearance.

We know members of Obama's team leaked gloriously; we know members of the FBI leaked to the press. Can we ever prove Brennan leaked? We know he's lied to Congress; we likewise know Comey leaked and no one did anything to him either, even after he admitted to it.

So, there's no valid reason for Brennan to keep his clearance; and all sorts of upsides for taking it away.

Bob Boyd said...

Brennan can spout off until the hogs come home to take their baths. What he can't do is leak as much insider stuff as before because people still in the government can't tell him as much. He'd monetized those connections, that access, through the media. Now he's not as valuable. Trump has actually hit the old commie right in the wallet.

iowan2 said...

Jared Kushner is busy networking as we speak, developing connections deep in the intel community. He has lifetime security clearance. I'm betting the leftist crying crocodile tears, today(and it just today) will have a different opinion when its the outgoing administration of President Donald J Trump

Freder Frederson said...

Taking away security clearance is in what way a free speech issue?

It is an attempt by the President to use the power of the state to silence his critics. That is indeed a free speech (and first amendment) issue.



Matt Sablan said...

People like Kushner, by the way, are another reason I'm in favor of removing clearances when we change administrations. Because there are a lot of people who get them who, let's say, may not have gotten them if they were trying to get an entry level job in the DoD.

Freder Frederson said...

He has lifetime security clearance.

Simply not true.

Matt Sablan said...

Taking away someone's security clearance in no way silences people.

mccullough said...

“Deep insight” Brennan. No insight into Trump.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

How long can John "Chicken Little" Brennan continue to squawk that the sky is falling before the DNC-Media tire of his failure to cite to any evidence?. Any at all?

Rob said...

Brennan is so clearly unhinged, such a partisan hack, it would be malfeasance to give him access to government secrets. And the same goes for that paragon of ethical leadership, James Comey.

Shouting Thomas said...

It is an attempt by the President to use the power of the state to silence his critics.

Brennan just published a front of the website denunciation of the president in The NY Times.

Do you have anything to say that isn't obviously silly?

Ralph L said...

"While I had deep insight"

Yet you did nothing about stopping the Russians or reporting it, and what we now know about the Russian interference is tiny beer.

Matt Sablan said...

Brennan's ability to speak is in no way hindered by losing his clearance. Trump did not strip broadcast rights from people who publish him; he did not raid Brennan's office on some pretext or unleash the IRS or FBI on him for daring to be part of an antagonistic party. He removed a perk that Brennan is not entitled to have.

The Crack Emcee said...

"The president revoked my security clearance: to try to silence anyone who would dare challenge him."

Somehow, I don't really think Americans find that so terrible, since they allow it to happen all-the-time, in other contexts:

“A life connected to some of our biggest Scientology stories ends in a terrible way”

As a matter of fact, as a former CIA Director, YOU let it happen to other Scientologists as well, so - HA! - JOIN THE CLUB!!!

Siilencing anyone who challenges...that's hilarious.

Dave Begley said...

What are this guy's actual facts in support of his speculation?

Brennan is totally full of shit and he's trying to politically destroy a President of the other party. What a fucking prick. Traitor too.

Print that NYT!

rehajm said...

I concur with Crack On Holmes, Clinton and the press. A Clinton endorsement is an excellent indicator of theft, fraud graft and/or corruption.

Shouting Thomas said...

Note Freder's tactic. This has become to go to tactic for the Deep State coup attempt against Trump.

Freder is arguing that President Trump has no right to defend himself by excluding known political enemies from his inner circle.

President Trump, in other words, has an obligation to invite his enemies into his home. Anything short of that is "Russia collusion."

Henry said...

Funny how the answers to all of Mr. Brennan's questions have a range that includes nil.

Drago said...

I did not think Freder could outdo his moronic performance from yesterday, but in his very first posting on this thread he has done so.

Amazing.

The First Amendment Freedoms:
- Religion
- Speech
- press
- Assembly
- petition the Govt

- (Brand New!) Lifetime unrevokable Security Clearances!

The idiotic lefties and their captive LLR pets have one-upped their claims that the DOJ/FBI are independent of the executive branch!

I watched a clip yesterday of LLR Chucks Stolen Valor Hack lying dem Senator hero Richard Blumenthal assert, literally (as Freder just parroted like a voice-actuated drone) that very idea: a security clearances is necessary to maintain Brennans first amendment rights!

LOL

The lefties/LLR pivoted quickly to their brand new and shiny "Worst Thing That Has Ever Hapoened Ever!" after the quick collapse of LLR Chucks Omarosa fever dream wishcastibg!

rehajm said...

Brennan is totally full of shit and he's trying to politically destroy a President of the other party. What a fucking prick. Traitor too.

Has OED accepted the verb form of watergate yet?

Matt Sablan said...

I'd be a lot more sympathetic to the argument "Brennan is being silenced," if it didn't come from Democrats that used the IRS to silence Tea Party activists and wants to overturn Citizen United.

Like, I get that some people think, "By taking Brennan's clearance away, other people who might want to speak out against Trump might be intimidated into silence." The chilling effect is a real concern.

Then they throw rocks at Milo because Milo can be a dick and riot so that Milo, who can sometimes be a dick, won't talk, and to ensure other people to the right of Clinton are deplatformed, so, I think, maybe it isn't really their fear of chilling free speech that's the issue.

Bob Boyd said...

"It is an attempt by the President to use the power of the state to silence his critics."

How is Brennan silenced? He has no first amendment right to access classified information or to "speak" it.
Brennan is part of the news media now. If he wants to know things he'll have to dig. That's what journalists do.

iowan2 said...


Blogger Freder Frederson said...
He has lifetime security clearance.

Simply not true.


Do tell. When does a security clearance expire? No one has quoted that part of the law, that I have seen

TRISTRAM said...

The Crack Emcee said...
When only one (1) journalist saw Theranos was a scam, after almost the entire Press Corp, as well as almost our entire political and financial elite went through their door (Bill "Higher Consciousness" Clinton pointed at Elizabeth Holmes and said "The future's in great hands") that showed me A) the importance of having a free press, and B) just how lame ours currently is.

I have almost no faith in them now whatsoever.


Isn't Collusion Support equivalent to Theranos Support? I mean, the vast, vast majority of media is propping up / vested in it being true?

Freder Frederson said...

Taking away someone's security clearance in no way silences people.

In Brennan's case no. But if Trump decides to use, or even threaten to use, this power to strip active government employees or contractors whose job depends on retaining their clearance, it most certainly will chill speech.

rehajm said...

How long can John "Chicken Little" Brennan continue to squawk that the sky is falling before the DNC-Media tire of his failure to cite to any evidence

They’re waiting to see how the midterms go.

Shouting Thomas said...

On another front, The NY Times is leading the charge by organizing more than 100 papers to publish editorials attacking President Trump for threatening freedom of the press.

So, far not a single act of a priori censorship by the Trump administration.

Remember that guy who made the Mohammed video while Obama/Clinton were in office? He spent a year in jail.

exhelodrvr1 said...

"Or maybe it was the caked brown fecal matter on his nose when he walked into the room."

The difference between ass-kissing and brown-nosing is depth perception.

On a different note, having a security clearance does not bring automatic access to classified information. There has to be a "need to know." As an example, a Dept of State official with Top Secret clearance would not be able to see classified information related to submarines. It would be very surprising if Brennan has continued to receive classified briefings, once the transition period was over.

Drago said...

What is now very clear is that Brennan's actual role in this entire hoax used to attack a domestic political opponent and weaponize the intelligence agaency to smear and frame a duly elected President is now being exposed.

Smear and frame Trump!
That sounds like something a self-described LLR who also is a self-described smear merchant might do.....

.....(and in fact, did......)

Freder Frederson said...

Do tell. When does a security clearance expire?

Do the research your own damn self. You made the original assertion without knowing if it was true or not.

Shouting Thomas said...

But if Trump decides to use...

Ah, so now, we've backed off completely.

That was a good idea.

Ralph L said...

My boss in the late 80's had his clearance revoked and left the company he'd founded and largely owned. He'd made a catalog of classified material and left it at the security desk of our DoD customer. He had his beepers (US and international) and phones listed with his name and "ME."

Matt Sablan said...

"But if Trump decides to use, or even threaten to use, this power to strip active government employees or contractors whose job depends on retaining their clearance, it most certainly will chill speech."

-- Then come back when that happens, because right now, all that happened is a guy without need to know lost his clearance -- and one of the requirements to view classified information is need to know (no matter what level of clearance you have!) -- so, he's actually lost *nothing*.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Freder Frederson said...

. . .

In Brennan's case no. But if Trump decides to use, or even threaten to use, this power to strip active government employees or contractors whose job depends on retaining their clearance, it most certainly will chill speech.


Except Trump is not doing that. In fact, that is about as far as can be from yanking the security clearance of a retired civil servant who is implicated in illegal leaks.
Remember when Obama was prosecuting journalists, Frederson?

Ralph L said...

In my time, clearances were reviewed and renewed every 5 years, but his was much higher level.

Bill Peschel said...

While Althouse looks into hogwash, I was more intrigued by "dalliance."

How can you have a casual involvement in this situation? Or did he mean a fling?

rhhardin said...

He means hogwash. Bullshit is something else.

Hogwash is something you can sell for advantage, as opposed to twaddle, which is just an amusement.

Big Mike said...

Seems very strange to me that the Russians in general, and Vlad Putin in particular, would back a candidate clandestinely who, if he fulfilled his campaign promises — as he has— would cost Russia billions of dollars in lost revenue and economic sanctions, and would literally cost Mr. Putin millions of dollars out of his own pocket. Consider the impact of the Keystone Pipeline alone on international oil prices. People caught up in the Russia! Russia! Russia! lunacy solemnly assure me that Mr. Putin “despised” Hillary Clinton. Comes under the heading of “interesting but so what?” I’m sure there are wealthy people out there who would spend millions of dollars of their own money to block someone they don’t like, but they do not rise to be head of state for a major country.

Hagar said...

It has been pointed out that removing these people's security clearances does not mean much as they would not be given access to current secret information anyway and, of course, nothing prevents calling on them for any information they might have about secrets they might know about from their former positions in the government.

This is not quite correct as in more normal times it was considered quite appropriate to talk to f. ex. Kissinger if he called about something without checking with the current White House first.

However, these are not normal times and these people have behaved in ways that I believe are unheard of in U.S. history for former government officials to behave - perhaps with the exception of U.S. officials who joined the Confederacy after the election of Abraham Lincoln.
These people are enemies of he current administration- not just "critics" - and Trump is justified in sending a signal to all concerned that they are not to be offered the usual courtesies enjoyed by the high officials of former administrations.

DanTheMan said...

The issue is not revoking Brennan's clearance.
The issues are:
How did a communist get a clearance in the first place?
How on earth did a communist get ANY job in the CIA, much less Director?

Try to imagine Putin putting a conservative, patriotic American in charge of his state security services...




Chuck said...

Did anybody on this blog ever vote for Obama? If so, have any of those Obama voters publicly regretted it?

Ralph L said...

so, he's actually lost *nothing*

He'll have a hard time finding a high-level job with an Intelligence contractor.

rhhardin said...

Revoking the clearance just means he can say stuff he's not allowed to hear.

Tommy Duncan said...

Blogger Freder Frederson said...

"Taking away security clearance is in what way a free speech issue?"

"It is an attempt by the President to use the power of the state to silence his critics. That is indeed a free speech (and first amendment) issue."

How has Brennan been silenced? Seriously? Please explain?

Please explain why Brennan needs a security clearance now that he has left government?

Bob Boyd said...

All Presidents have had the power to strip security clearances from active government employees and contractors. Presidents can also fire those people. Do you think those people don't know that?
Perhaps it will effect how former government people, who retain a clearance, will behave. Perhaps it should.
A clearance is a privilege, not a right. If you abuse a privilege, you risk losing it.

Are former government people allowed to retain their clearances so they can be politically active? No. They are kept in the loop so they can be of service to the current administration.
Brennan is doing the opposite. He should have seen this coming.

Drago said...

Field Marshall Freder: "In Brennan's case no. But if Trump decides to use, or even threaten to use, this power to strip active government employees or contractors whose job depends on retaining their
clearance, it most certainly will chill speech."

LOL

Hopelessly stupid.

Btw, did you happen to catch the story yesterday of the Govt Internal watchdog who, during the late obama caught wind and found evidence of odd payments from the govt to folks like Stephan Halper (the active source/agent provacateur Brennan ran against the Trump campaign) as well as large payments to one of Chelsea Clintons best pals?

He dared to do his job and was punished by the lefties/LLR's.

His security clearance was revoked and he got the boot.

Hey Freder, maybe his name was Bundy too!

Bay Area Guy said...

In 1976, as a young man, Brennan voted for Communist Party leader, Gus Hall for President.

I guess Jimmy Carter was too reactionary for him.

How this leftist asshole ever got to become CIA Director boggles the mind.

rhhardin said...

Brennan's gone round the bend.

rhhardin said...

I've talked to three Russians but it was in 2017, too late to affect the election.

Sebastian said...

"highly suspicious dalliances of some American citizens with people affiliated with the Russian intelligence services"

Correct. Dalliances by Hill and Simpson, with Russian operatives, via Steele, for good money.

Of course, Brennan also helped to arrange other foreign interference, e.g. via Downer.

I always thought the point was to fabricate something to pin on Trump, in order to defeat him.

Reluctantly, I now think that Brennan believed his own BS, that it wasn't just a rogue Dem oppo operation. The former Gus Hall voter is an insane conspiracy theorist.

The Crack Emcee said...

Matthew Sablan said...

“Do we really have a free press that peddles on access to the rich and powerful instead of doing investigative journalism?”

Yes. All the big journalists announced in the ‘90s, as the period of media consolidation approached, journalism was going to suck - investigative journalism would end, foreign bureaus would close, etc. - long before the internet. They were right. Then they started lying. When the internet hit, they blamed it as a diversion from their own terrible decisions - proven byTrump getting in and their business now souring.

“Most of the big networks are a revolving door of influencers or second-step influencers from people in power; we have a press that is free, in that the government doesn't own it, but the rich and powerful have very much influence over it due to legacy journalism being anchored so heavily in having access.”

I listen to the television with the sound down. It helps me understand events better.

“I think the rise of the pajama media corps is probably the biggest step towards a free press since, well, the printing press.”

I have my problems with those guys (Glenn Reynolds still pushes supplements like a deranged carnival barker, and others, over there, have similar oversights and ideological issues they hate me for addressing) but I’ll take all the reporting I can find.

Everybody’s looking in the wrong places, if you ask me. Do you trust Mitt Romney? Then explain that trust in the face of repeated cases like this.

That’s the reporting I want to see.

Fernandinande said...

Someone needs to weaponize the collusion angle for improved targeting of vulnerable populations - so I stepped up:

"Got Collusion?"

"Look, Ma, no Collusion!"

"Say It With Collusion"

"A little collusion’ll do ya"

"Bet you can't collude just once!"

"This is your brain on Collusion."

"I’ve colluded and I can’t get up."

Ralph L said...

He claimed his vote for Gus Hall was a protest vote, but he's claimed a lot of things.
He must have bragged about it at the time and it came up in the investigation for his first clearance.

Levi Starks said...

I suppose we can take it as a fact the Obama was relying on Brennan’s deep insight when on the eve of the election he assured us that it was hogwash that the Russians could in any substaninant way affect the election of an American president.

JML said...

I just figured it all out: Obama, Trump and Putin are in it together! Obama, after his reelection engineered the Trump victory by colluding with Putin to knock Hillary out of the race by Comey so Trump could continue Obama's legacy of liberal tolerance and the takeover by big Government. Trump is obfuscating all of this by doing the exact opposite of what Obama has done so as to keep the public in the dark. Grant it, there are still a few details for me to figure out, but I think that sums up the big picture. And before you call me crazy, it is just as sane an explanation as anything the media claims about Trump....oh, wait....

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

My God these people are stupid.

Trump: I'm taking away your security clearance because you leak secrets for political reasons.

Brennan: you took away my ability to get secrets. No I can't talk to the press anymore.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

exhelodrvr1 said...

...having a security clearance does not bring automatic access to classified information. There has to be a "need to know." ... It would be very surprising if Brennan has continued to receive classified briefings, once the transition period was over.

I assume he is not receiving official briefings. But as long as he has the clearance, an anti-Trump person in the FBI/CIA would have the option of consulting him on some topic, part of which would involve bringing him up to speed on any related classified information that he needed to know as part of that consulting.

stevew said...

Brennan is not credible, not least of which because he is a, former, spook.

-sw

walter said...

He's right about this:
"The only questions that remain are whether the collusion that took place constituted criminally liable conspiracy, whether obstruction of justice occurred to cover up any collusion or conspiracy"
But he knows who that's really about..during those difficult moments while shaving in front of the mirror.

Drago said...

Bay Area Guy: "How this leftist asshole ever got to become CIA Director boggles the mind."

Imagine a govt chock full of LLR Chuck's and Freders and the rest of the lefty crew and its impossible to see any outcome other than a Gus Hall voter making it to CIA director.

Its a shame I suppose that we didnt elect a "real conservative" like John Kasich to save obamacare, raise taxes, keep ooen borders and.....bring the deep state to heel....

LOL

Right Chuck?

The Crack Emcee said...

Kristian Holvoet said...

"Isn't Collusion Support equivalent to Theranos Support? I mean, the vast, vast majority of media is propping up / vested in it being true?"

Pretty damned close.

daskol said...

Brennan is the Derp State. The more he speaks the less credibility he and his cadre have, the more confounding it is he ran the CIA.

Seeing Red said...

Via Rantburg from the Wash Times:

...Mr. Bigley filed a complaint July 18 with the Pentagon’s senior ethics official, charging that Mr. Lovinger’s superiors misused the security clearance process to punish him. He said his client complained about excessive “sweetheart” deals for Mr. Halper and for a “best friend” of Chelsea Clinton.

“As it turns out, one of the two contractors Mr. Lovinger explicitly warned his ONA superiors about misusing in 2016 was none other than Mr. Halper,” Mr. Bigley wrote in his ethics complaint, which called the contracts “cronyism and corruption....”

Ralph L said...

I always thought the point was to fabricate something to pin on Trump, in order to defeat him.

I'm thinking it was to find something to use as MAD blackmail to keep Trump from exposing their other wrongdoings if he became President (the Insurance Policy). They'd have had a hard time covering their tracks if the material was actually made public, as we've seen.

Darrell said...

Please explain why Brennan needs a security clearance now that he has left government?

He needs it to access his papers and notes to prepare his defense in his upcoming trial for treason and insurrection before he is hung by the neck until dead. May God have mercy on his Soul.

tcrosse said...

If they revoked Anthony Weiner's clearance, would he then lose access to his own laptop?

Mike Sylwester said...

Questions for John Brennan, former CIA Director:

* Who told Joseph Mifsud to meet with George Papadopoulos?

* Who told Alexander Downer to meet with Papadopoulos?

* Who told Stefan Halper to meet with Carter Page?

Lucien said...

Hey Chuck: I voted for Obama in 2008 and regret it (although the alternative was McCain). He was, like me, a phlegmatic “no drama “ lawyer type, and I was hoping that some elements of our electorate would stop whining about how we were not “ready” to elect a black man.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

It is an attempt by the President to use the power of the state to silence his critics.

This is why your opinion is discounted here, Freder. Brennas has been ALL OVER the media in the last day talking about Trump. He is not silenced in any way, by any means nor through any known media. So WTF are you talking about "silence" for? Do you dishonest lefties even know how to define speech?

DanTheMan said...

>>Someone needs to weaponize the collusion angle for improved targeting of vulnerable populations - so I stepped up:

"Got Collusion?"

How about: "I can't believe it's not collusion!"

Big Mike said...

Over on another post Althouse brings up the concepts of thought experiments. Here’s one. If the Russians were, post election, paying Brennan, Comey, Mueller, and key people in the media to attempt to hamstring the Trump administration, what precisely would they do differently from what they are doing right now?

jaydub said...

"Do tell. When does a security clearance expire? No one has quoted that part of the law, that I have seen." Glad you asked:

A top secret clearance must be re-investigated and renewed every 5 years, a secret clearance every 10 years. However, having a clearance is not enough to get access to classified information. You also have to have a "need to know." BTW, I had a top secret, compartmented information, code word clearance that terminated the day I retired from the service. I lost access to that information a month earlier when I was relieved and in anticipation of my retirement.

Now a question for you: what specific classified information does Brennan need to have access to in his role as a media personality and who is the one who should grant him access?

virgil xenophon said...

They said that Racoon shit was blue,

Horseshit I said

Bullshit you've been fed,

Racoon shit is red!

Bob Boyd said...

If anything, this frees Brennan to ratchet up his attacks on the President. He has less to lose. It also motivates him.

Drago said...

daskol: "The more he speaks the less credibility he and his cadre have...."

There's a lesson in there for you LLR Chuck.....

iowan2 said...

Its a shame I suppose that we didnt elect a "real conservative" like John Kasich to save obamacare, raise taxes, keep ooen borders and.....bring the deep state to heel....

That sounds like sarcasm, but, the reality is, if Kasich was elected, he would be the racist, Russia loving, incompetent ass. The name is irrelevant, it's the R behind the name that matters. Remember what the left did to men like McCain, and Romney. Fine men. Some would say great, but that letter R...

tcrosse said...

Love those Eliot dactyls.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

Darrell said...

Please explain why Brennan needs a security clearance now that he has left government?

He needs it to access his papers and notes to prepare his defense in his upcoming trial for treason and insurrection before he is hung by the neck until dead. May God have mercy on his Soul.

8/16/18, 8:15 AM

You wish. I doubt that any of these criminals will even do time in Club Fed. Powerful Democrats get to operate outside the law.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I'm just gobsmacked that someone who was a communist was appointed to be head of the CIA. Especially since that requires Senate approval. You would think that somebody would have kicked up a fuss on the GOP side.

Matt Sablan said...

"many more of the highly suspicious dalliances of some American citizens with people affiliated with the Russian intelligence services."

-- Do you think he means paying a British spy to make contact with Russian intelligence agents to dig up dirt on a political opponent?

Narayanan said...

Brennan at CIA could have been Obama being flexible with Putin??

Matt Sablan said...

"Remember what the left did to men like McCain, and Romney. Fine men."

-- I remember when Romney killed women with cancer.

Drago said...

Narayanan Subramanian: "Brennan at CIA could have been Obama being flexible with Putin??"

Brennan at CIA was a critical node for increased flexibility with both Putin and giving the islamists everywhere everything they want.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I actually think, by the way, that as a rule, people who leave government service and no longer have a need to know, SHOULD have their clearances removed.

That's security 101 by the way. When you leave a job do you get to keep your access badge and computer access? My theory is that the CIA is ran so sloppily because the higher ups want info leaked.

Kevin said...

Brennan: you took away my ability to get secrets. No I can't talk to the press anymore.

Shorter Brennan: Why are they going to put me on TV now that I can’t leak secrets to journalists?

Chuck said...

Lucien said...
Hey Chuck: I voted for Obama in 2008 and regret it (although the alternative was McCain). He was, like me, a phlegmatic “no drama “ lawyer type, and I was hoping that some elements of our electorate would stop whining about how we were not “ready” to elect a black man.



I never once felt a need to vote for Obama to somehow prove that I was not a racist. I never felt a need to vote for Obama to prove much of anything at all. His Republican opponents -- McCain in '08 and Romney in '12 -- were so clearly superior to the choice that Obama's doctrinaire Democrat special interest coalition represented.


But in fairness, you have a right to believe in those things if that is who and what you are. All that I am curious about (and this may not be you, I don't know!) is a voter who voted for Obama in '08 and/or '12, and who then voted for Trump.


Trump seems to hate everything single thing Obama ever stood for. I have little doubt that Obama personally loathes Trump as I do. How could anyone support Obama, and then support Trump? What is the meaning of that? Where is the principle in any of that? What does such a voter want? A federal judiciary of Sotomayors, or of Kavanaughs? Massive new federal regulations? Or massive deregulation? Obamacare? Or such a revulsion to Obamacare that a kind of health care anarchy is better? Strict Title IX enforcement? Or a big step away from the exertion of federal Title IX power? TPP? Or no TPP? Iran nuclear deal? Or no deal?

Can you explain an Obama-then-Trump voter?

Matt Sablan said...

"If they revoked Anthony Weiner's clearance, would he then lose access to his own laptop?"

-- Does he have a clearance? I can't imagine he does.

iowan2 said...

Jaydub.
Thanks for real info. Listening the the fake outrage machines making all the noise, the real case scenario is those cabinet level folks keep the clearance for life, a perk, if you will. The need to know qualifier? Again, a gentleman's agreement. It's a select private club, and today's CIA director allows the Ex's the same access he wants for him/her self in the future.It is self policing, which to me means not policed at all.

Drago said...

Sean Davis sums it up nicely:

John Brennan was CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia when the Khobar Towers were bombed.
He was deputy exec. director of the agency on 9/11.
He was CIA chief of staff during the Iraq WMD debacle.
And he ran the CIA when it spied on Congress (which he lied about under oath).

My God, how can we afford to lose this guy?!!......

walter said...

"It is an attempt by the President to use the power of the state to silence his critics."
--
If only that were possible.
Nails on a pompous ass chalkboard.

Mike Sylwester said...

Yesterday the American Thinker website published an article titled Brennan, the Spooks, and Russian Collusion. The article's author identifies himself as "Ishmeal Jones", the pen name of a former CIA case officer.

The article includes the following passages:
----------

.... American spy operations targeted the Trump campaign by luring Trump associates such as George Papadopoulos to meetings in Britain. There are two key factors at work here.

The first factor is the location. The CIA is in charge of American government spy ops that occur in foreign countries .... An American FBI agent can do nothing in Britain without intricate CIA approvals and supervision. If the CIA were not involved, they’d be raising hell with the FBI for doing business on their turf. .... CIA involvement is certain.

.... These ops bear the distinctive signature of being run by bureaucrats at CIA Headquarters, not by professionals in CIA field stations.

.... in the Washington D.C. area, there’s a natural tendency to recruit American citizens to help spy on Americans. Such operations provide employees with opportunities to look busy and get promoted while living in the comfort of Washington.

Recruitments of sources are important to the CIA, but if you try to recruit a terrorist in Syria, you might get a bullet in the head. ... Why not recruit an American college professor instead? Assign him a secret code name and he comes to look like a real spy. Most Americans are happy to help out, so there’s no fear of embarrassing rejection.

There’s only one thing easier for Headquarters employees than recruiting an American college professor, and that is recruiting an American college professor who has already been recruited by other U.S. spy agencies. This appears to have been the case in these operations. ....

The question is: If these Headquarters-run operations are so lightweight, why did John Brennan’s CIA choose this kind of operation to target Trump?

The answer is that they already knew there was no collusion, so they didn’t need a surgical, focused, silent CIA field operation.

They wanted the noise and the hum of activity, the smoke, rumors, leaks, and innuendo of a Headquarters-run operation. And they were right. Their plan worked. All this noise, combined with the fraudulent Steele Dossier, led to relentless media attacks on Trump, an unlimited budget for Mueller and his team, and even to ongoing demands that Trump kowtow to the intel agencies. ....

Big meetings about these operations meant people like Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe from the FBI piled into cars to head over to the CIA. Once there, they sat around the Nirvana of bureaucracy, a big conference room table. ... Each agency and office would have been at the table. Each senior person brings along a herd of minions. The senior people talk while the minions sit there like potted plants. These potted plants will be willing to talk to investigators.

CIA employees document their activity exhaustively in records that are sent to lots of other offices to keep everyone informed. These documents are cross-referenced, so if a deep stater tries to delete them, it will be obvious. A Horowitz-style investigation will find a treasure trove of information plus a trail of accountings that will show wasteful spending and possibly fraud. Headquarters-run ops are expensive extravaganzas.

Democrats seem to understand that these ops are easy to unravel. Their only defense is to scream that details must be kept secret to protect national security. Yet they are the ones who did the leaking of identities of people involved ....

Drago said...

LLR and #RichardBlumenthal cuckholster Chuck: "Trump seems to hate everything single thing Obama ever stood for."

Trump has delivered the most conservative governance in the last 100 years.

Your talking point Chuck is straight out of the lefty playbook and is used by the most lunatic of left wingers.

Once again, your PERFECT talking point/narrative alignment with the far left is duly noted.

Drago said...

LLR and #StrongDemDefender: "Can you explain an Obama-then-Trump voter?"

This has all been explained a million times and only the far left doesn't get it.....(hmmmmmm...and neither do you.......LOL)

Move on "Lefty Talking Point" Boy. Move on...

The Drill SGT said...

what jaydub said...

1. Brennan supported Communists who were funded by the Soviets in Federal elections. collusion

2. He headed the CIA during Obama's "Flexible" Russian period. He allowed the CIA to promote lies about the Iran nuclear program to get Congress to sign off. collusion

3. He admitted to hacking Senate Intel Committee (run by Feinstein) computers

4. He lied to Congress about the Steele report. The Steele report was fed from Putin sources, designed to influence the election. collusion

5. He has absolutely no need to know, thus no need for a clearance. Killing his clearance fortunately increases the penalties for any Fed leaking to him.


Mike Sylwester said...

Matthew Sablan at 8:37 AM
Does he [Anthony Wiener] have a clearance? I can't imagine he does.

The joke was that his laptop contained so many secret documents that he would need a security clearance to read his own laptop.

Darkisland said...

In one of his books, perhaps "Wartime" discusses the differences between bullshit, chickenshit and horseshit.

Fussell fought across Europe in WWII and was a longtime professor of literature (English?) so he comes at it from an educated perspective.

He wrote several books on war, soldiering and cultural aspects thereof. A very good author.

In memory of the Hiroshima and Nagasaka which we celebrated last week, read his "Thank God for the Atom Bomb" It's a book (available via the portal) but the main, title, essay is available here

https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/hf/iakh/HIS1300MET/v12/undervisningsmateriale/Fussel%20-%20thank%20god%20for%20the%20atom%20bomb.pdf

John Henry

Drago said...

Mike Sylvester: "The answer is that they already knew there was no collusion, so they didn’t need a surgical, focused, silent CIA field operation."

Correct.

It was Brennan and his little cross-agency team's job to "create" the "collusion"...so they reached out to all their old pals and Hillary amigos and LLR's and made it happen.

And now we have some very interesting timing question related to Glen Simpson of FusionGPS and Bill Kristol himself at the Weekly Standard.

It's all making alot more sense now...

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Brennan should work for CNN.

His bullshit without proof fits right in there.

Matt Sablan said...

The sad part is that I considered it perfectly plausible he still had a clearance from his time in politics/Congress.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ron Winkleheimer said...

As a matter of fact, I used to have a security clearance. Once I left the military, and since I didn't take a job that needed one, it expired. I'm surprised that high level people aren't treated the same. Once again, security 101, least privilege.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

After all this time, where is the proof? All we get are lies and innuendo from the MSM and the loyal corruptocrats butthurt about Hillary losing.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I'd like to know more, from the pro-Democrat hack press, about Hillary's Russian Uranium deals.

Wince said...

Did Brennan just say Mueller and his team are a band of incompetents?

I think he did.

Seeing Red said...

This is funny. Freder is actually arguing that ex employees should be allowed to roam their former places of work? That’s why they take your employee ID Freder. You don’t have a right to be on the premises.

Buck Narked said...

Certainly Brennan was not receiving briefings, but I think the biggest effect is that now, it is a crime to discuss classified information with Brennan. Any sources he had who might have been feeding him information will need to be much more careful about what they share with him.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The pro-Democrat Jimmy Kimmel-Stephen Colbert press are going to prove they are not pro-Democrat hacks by marching together, in hivemind, against the president.

May 100 flowers bloom.

M Jordan said...

Much as I hate the reversal game of “What if this happened to Obama?”, I can’t help but go there from time to time and marvel. Imagine any of this collusion B.S. and the media onslaught against Obama. It’s unimagineable, really. An intel chief running from door to door in Congress passing out a trumped-up dossier (pun intended) the day the new president was being inaugurated ... it’s just completely unimaginable. An FBI agent texting message after message of anti-President bias ... unbelievable. A huge portion of Congress boycotting the inauguration .... shocking. Joe Wilson mouthed “You lie” and he was convicted of treason in our media.

This Cat 5 anti-Trump Hurricane would have destroyed any other human being. But Trump is a Cat 6 anti-hurricane, He has, and will, survive. And that fact is destroying the left. The dogs.

hawkeyedjb said...

If you want to lose your faith in the press, all you need to do is read one article in a newspaper about a subject you know deeply. I gave up my subscription to the local because most of it is written for teenagers. Perhaps by teenagers.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

"A government security clearance requires a periodic reinvestigation every 15 years for a “confidential” clearance, every 10 years for “secret,” and every 5 years for “top secret.” When a clearance is inactivated (because of switching jobs or leaving the military), it can be fairly easy to reinstate within the first 24 months, as long as that falls within the periodic reinvestigation window. After that, it becomes significantly more difficult. In other words, if your clearance is going to lapse, it is important for you to consider some options to reactivate it within the first two years."

https://www.military.com/veteran-jobs/security-clearance-jobs/avoid-having-security-clearance-expire.html

Brennan is not filling a government position, therefore he has no need for a security clearance.

Will said...

All this led me to reading an article dated July 31, 2014, in the NYT's of all places, about the CIA being caught spying on Congress, and the reactions of the Democrats, Feinstein, et al. If anyone is interested the comments are most entertaining. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/world/senate-intelligence-commitee-cia-interrogation-report.html

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Brennan is captain Deep State.

Mike Sylwester said...

Yesterday the American Greatness website published an article titled The Weekly Standard’s Ties to Fusion GPS, written by Julie Kelly. The article includes the following passages:

-----

.... [Peter] Strzok is following only 32 people on his newly-verified Twitter account. Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of the Standard, is one of them. ....

On July 24, 2016, just days before Strzok helped launch a counterintelligence probe into the Trump campaign, Kristol gave Strzok and the Obama Justice Department a big assist from the anti-Trump Right by posting a flawed and questionably-sourced article. “Putin’s Party” is compelling evidence that Kristol and the Standard were far from mere sideline observers as the Trump-Russia collusion scam took shape in the summer of 2016.

.... the article’s content also serves to raise alarming questions about the claims by many Republicans that “conservatives” had no knowledge of or involvement with the Christopher Steele dossier.

.... On the morning that Kristol’s piece posted, the Trump-Russian election collusion story was in its embryonic stage —- nearly all American voters that summer remained blissfully unaware of the details in this preposterous story —- but secretly it was being peddled to the media by Fusion GPS ....

Kristol’s article hits on every single one of the Simpson-Steele talking points:

* Trump forced the GOP to water-down language on the Ukraine in the party’s platform ...

* the Russians were behind Wikileaks’ release of the DNC’s hacked emails ...

* Trump encouraged foreign powers to interfere in the election ...

* Trump would not honor U.S. commitments to NATO ...

He listed a handful of unknown Trump campaign associates who would soon become household names, including campaign manager Paul Manafort; national security advisor, Lt. General Michael Flynn; and foreign policy aide Carter Page. ....

Kristol took his advocacy a step further:

[quote]

These indications provide sufficient grounds for Trump’s links to Putin to be further investigated. Politicians who are currently supporting Trump should withdraw their unconditional support.

We don’t know how direct and close a financial relationship Trump and Manafort have with the Putin regime. If Trump and Manafort don’t act to allay these concerns by releasing their tax returns (or in other ways), wouldn’t it be advisable for a Republican member of Congress to lead an urgent investigation into whether Putin is interfering in the current American election?

Trump and Manafort may be Putin’s chumps. Will other Republicans sit by as the whole Republican party becomes Putin’s party?

[end quote]

A few hours after the Standard piece went online, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook reinforced Kristol’s message in an interview on CNN. ...

The next day, Carter Page received his first text from a reporter and former Wall Street Journal colleague of Simpson’s, asking him about his ties to Russia and mentioning dossier-sourced specifics. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest fielded his first (planted) question during the daily press briefing by an AP reporter, who oddly asked whether the DNC hack was an attempt to influence the election in favor of Donald Trump.

Coincidence? Not a chance.

Kristol would take to Twitter dozens of times before the election to promote the Trump-Russia collusion fantasy, even referring to the GOP as “the Putin Party.” Kristol’s handpicked candidate to challenge Trump, Evan McMullin, also pushed the Trump-Russia narrative. ...

[Continued in my following comment]

Howard said...

happy horseshit=civility bullshit

Darkisland said...

Blogger The Crack Emcee said...

When only one (1) journalist saw Theranos was a scam

Amen, Crack, Amen.

I recently read "Bad Blood" by John Carryou about Theranos.

How in the HELL!!! did the press miss this?

When they ALL miss something so blatant and obvious, how can we trust them with anything else?

This is not new. 100+ Years ago Mark Twain said "If I don't read the papers, I am uninformed. If I do read the papers, I am misinformed.

Anyone here ever read a news story where you were directly involved in what was being reported? How many material facts did they get wrong?

Why should we trust them?

See Wikipedia for Gell-Mann Effect.

President Trump is absolutely right when he says "Fake news is the enemy of the people"

John Henry

Chuck said...

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
Brennan should work for CNN.



Actually, Brennan works for MSNBC. I'm not kidding. He's getting a paycheck, as a consultant, from MSNBC. Perhaps you knew that, I don't know.

steve uhr said...

Not one comment addresses the substance of the editorial. whether or not intended it is self-evident It will deter others from speaking out against the president. Many former govrnmnt employee need their clearance for their income--they work for govrnmnt contractor on top secret program They are gong to speak in public against trump ad put their livelihood at risk? Unlikely.

Trump didn't consult the cia and dod before his decision. Outrageous.

Wince said...

While I had deep insight into Russian activities during the 2016 election, I now am aware — thanks to the reporting of an open and free press...

Brennan reminds me of...

Dr. Chilton: "Only through my unique insight into Trump's mind was this breakthrough possible..."

Trump: "I'm having an old friend for dinner."

Mike Sylwester said...

Continued from my comment at 8:58 AM
--------

The Washington Free Beacon admitted last year that they retained Fusion from late 2015 until April 2016 to gather opposition research on Republican primary candidates. The website is run by Kristol’s son-in-law, Matthew Continetti. The Beacon posted numerous negative stories about the Trump campaign in 2016, including hit pieces on Carter Page in March and July.

.... At first, Continetti admitted that the Beacon “retained Fusion GPS to provide research on multiple candidates in the Republican presidential primary.” Days later, Continetti explained why his website failed to mention its relationship with Fusion in several related articles prior to October 2017. ....

And they did. A few days after that, the Beacon posted an article with this disclaimer: “The Washington Free Beacon was once a client of Fusion GPS. That relationship ended in January 2017.” ...

We are expected to believe that Bill Kristol’s son-in-law paid Fusion throughout the 2016 presidential campaign cycle but Simpson doesn’t pitch one dossier-related story to either one? Kristol just comes up with the very same flimsy talking points that Simpson and Steele are peddling -— at the exact same time -— and it’s pure coincidence? Kristol just happens to call for an investigation one week before the FBI takes the outrageous and unprecedented step of probing private citizens working on an opposing presidential campaign? Kristol and Robby Mook just strangely regurgitate the identical Trump-Russia plotline —- on the same morning?

Since the election, Kristol and the Standard have ignored major developments in Spygate while shamefully working with Democratic operatives to smear lawmakers such as Rep. Devin Nunes ... who are trying to get to the bottom of the scandal. Kristol has been in the forefront of keeping Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation working in perpetuity. ...

It’s important that the public fully understands what role Kristol and his publication played -— and continue to play —- in fueling the biggest political corruption scandal in American history.

Bay Area Guy said...

Bill Kristol is Yuri!

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

I have little doubt that Obama personally loathes Trump as I do.

And this is why we laugh at you. It's personal to you. Trump personally hurt you by winning. That tickles my funny bone. He lives in your head and you don't even know it. Why expend so much emotional energy hating a man you never met and who has not really harmed you in any way? It's a mystery and an enigma! You prove yourself a fool by taking this presidency so personally and being proud of your emotional instability.

Of course you identify with Obama. Unexpectedly. Though you deny it every day. There it is. But only, as Drago says: Every. Single. Time. LOL.

Shouting Thomas said...

Anyone here ever read a news story where you were directly involved in what was being reported? How many material facts did they get wrong?

Back when I was a performing musician on a scale that merited notice, reporters invented a story for me that they thought was good PR (for me and/or for them) and coached me in how to tell them that story.

The same was true of the political biz. I was in that, too.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Chuck - I didn't know that/ But it's indeed perfect.

Brennan is a corrupt partisan.

Matt Sablan said...

"They are gong to speak in public against trump ad put their livelihood at risk? Unlikely."

-- What nonsense are you talking about? Brennan still collects a huge check, and will undoubtedly have a book deal in a few months to a year. He's not harmed in the slightest. If we're going to pretend that it is self-evident that taking Brennan's clearance is trampling on Free Speech, where were all the civil rights enthusiasts calling for an end to the Obama administration for using the IRS to silence people?

Browndog said...

This morning Andrea Mitchell informed the Morning Joe audience that stripping Brennan of his security clearance could be an impeachable offense, and Mueller will certainly be taking a hard look at it.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Questions:

1. How does revoking Brennan's security clearance silence him? He can still talk about anything that isn't classified secret, just as before. He can still bash Trump to his heart's content.

2. WHY does a private citizen, Brennan who is no longer a government employee even NEED a security clearance? If he is working for a government contractor, let him reapply like anyone else.

3. Is a security clearance some sort of permanent prize for having worked in the Government, with never any re-examination as to the status of the person or the need? If so....WTF?

steve uhr said...

He's desparate as he should be. He knows Jr is about to be indicted for perjury for lying before Congress.


Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

OT: Gay mafia coming hard after Cake Shop owner. Cake shop owner fights back.

All your private industry belongs to teh gay, or else.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

DBQ - fast thoughts.

1. It's a kick to his teeth and his ego. Agreed - it won't shut him up. Even though the hivemend left are running around screaming about free speech. Security clearance/ free speech. Leftists don't get either.

2. Good question.
3. WTF, indeed.

Drago said...

Bay Area Guy: "Bill Kristol is Yuri!"

"No Way Out" with Kevin Costner is a really fun Cold War/spy/DC Swamp flick.

"You have no idea what men of power can do!"

How appropriate is that boast from the movie in the context of today?

These LLar Chuck supported pieces of crap actually attempted tne "Full East Germany" on domestic political opponents.

And it would have worked against any other republican.

Trump winning and surviving against all those opponents and even now apparently govts us nothing short of astonishing.

Big Mike said...

Trump seems to hate everything single thing Obama ever stood for.

As do I. A person voting for “change” would have voted for Obama in 2008, especially as McCain seemed mired in the Vietnam War. That same person might have voted for Obama in 2012, specially as much of the most callous and egregious Obama initiatives did not kick in until after the election. (Wonder why that was?) With Hillary explicitly running to continue Obama’s “legacy,” the candidate of “change” was, obviously, Donald Trump.

And he has delivered. Moreover, what Obama proved is that change is easy — change in a good direction is hard. What Trump has proved is that change in a positive direction can be done, and can even be accomplished in the face of massive resistance.

If Chuck literally hates everything Trump stands for, then I conclude that he hates jobs for blacks and Hispanics. I conclude he is opposed to real wage growth among low-end wage earners. I conclude that he hates 4%!growth in the GDP. I conclude that he is in favor of “free trade” agreements that leave the US at a disadvantage with our trading partners and leaves this country with massive trade deficits.

Wince said...

While I had deep insight into Russian activities during the 2016 election, I now am aware — thanks to the reporting of an open and free press...

Isn't Brennan saying his security clearance was of less use than following the press as a source of intelligence?

Meanwhile implying Trump has not impeded the press?

No harm, no foul, Mr. Brennan?

DanTheMan said...

>>Anyone here ever read a news story where you were directly involved in what was being reported? How many material facts did they get wrong?

This used to happen to me all the time. I'd file my reports for the night, and the next day I'd read the "Police Beat" section of the local paper.

I'd read a story, and think "that sounds a bit like one my reports", and then I'd realize it *was* one of mine, but hopelessly mangled. Almost always, they would get major facts completely wrong, like mixing up the names of the victims and suspects, or reporting it as some other type of crime, or mixing the addresses from two different reports.

At least way back when, the police beat was given to the new reporters, as all they had to do was go to the station, read the reports, and summarize all the details. How hard is that to get right? Harder than it looks, apparently.

narciso said...

No but ben Rhodes is that type of skulking weasel that Scott Pritchard was, they based much of this on the 1948 film the big clock,
Except for that twist. And ned price was rhod es assistant.

Michael K said...

Many former govrnmnt employee need their clearance for their income--they work for govrnmnt contractor on top secret program

Steve is obviously opposed to the "Revolving Door Tax" advocated by Instapundit and which I support.

The Deep State consists of hundreds of thousands of these people who sell what they learned as government employees to private interests. If you spent 20 years as a fighter pilot, McDonnell Douglas might be very interested in your ideas for better performance.

If you spent years with top secret clearances, the Russians or Chinese might be very interested. The New York Times is also interested and has a history of publishing top secret matters regardless of the effect on US security. Remember the SWIFT program?

But a judge in California rejected the argument because the program had been discussed so widely. The government challenge is pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where judges at a hearing two weeks ago expressed skepticism on the secrecy argument.

That was the Times excuse for publishing a top secret program. "Everybody already knew about it."

Shortly after, terrorism financing changed methods, suggesting they, at least , didn't know.

Amadeus 48 said...

So Brennan is a guy that couldn't stomach Gerry Ford or Jimmy Carter in 1976 and voted for Gus Hall, then bragged about it after he became CIA director. His poor judgment goes way back, as does his smart-alec grandstanding. What a tedious man! What a fool!

This is the type that got promoted inside the CIA and picked by BHO to head it up. The CIA, of course, did not anticipate the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Blow it up and start over.

Bob Boyd said...

This would be a good time for Brennan to re-read 'Who Moved My Cheese'

Michael K said...


Blogger steve uhr said...
He's desparate as he should be. He knows Jr is about to be indicted for perjury for lying before Congress.


Steve, when did you get this hysterical ? Just today ?

I guess I missed the transition from sensible leftist to screaming at the moon.

hawkeyedjb said...

"I conclude he is opposed to real wage growth among low-end wage earners. I conclude that he hates 4%!growth in the GDP. I conclude that he is in favor of “free trade” agreements that leave the US at a disadvantage with our trading partners and leaves this country with massive trade deficits."

Pretty good summary of the Democratic platform. Get too many people off welfare and there goes your base...

iowan2 said...

"Anyone here ever read a news story where you were directly involved in what was being reported? How many material facts did they get wrong?"

Yes, almost everytime I delve into media reports about Agriculture, The Mid-West, smalltown culture, production agriculture specifically.

Its a real thing. The Gell-Mann Amnesia affect

As quoted by Micheal Crichton:Also“Briefly stated the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories.

Or Obama foreign policy expert Ben Rhodes

"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing." (emphasis added)

Big Mike said...

BTW, I did NOT vote for Obama in 2008 or 2012. It never crossed my mind that a Chicago machine politician would make a good president, and I was right. Among the 45 presidents this country has had, I rank Obama above only Buchanan, whose position on secession was that it was illegal but his administration lacked the legal authority to do anything about it (Buchanan’d administration also sent cannons, rifles, and gunpowder to southern armories ahead of secession).

Bad Lieutenant said...

Everybody’s looking in the wrong places, if you ask me. Do you trust Mitt Romney? Then explain that trust in the face of repeated cases like this.


Crack - I see Romney named nowhere in the article. Is this like blaming you for the Channon-Newsom atrocities, or me for the death of Christ?

James K said...

Freder: But if Trump decides to use, or even threaten to use, this power to strip active government employees or contractors whose job depends on retaining their clearance, it most certainly will chill speech.

Obama did exactly that.

But Freder is only concerned about something that Trump, in his fevered imagination, could possibly do.

Michael K said...

Anyone here ever read a news story where you were directly involved in what was being reported? How many material facts did they get wrong?

It wasn't a "news story." It was "60 Minutes."

A famous professor of surgery in upstate New York was approached by a producer for "60 Minutes" who told him they wanted to do a story about the training of surgeons.

The professor gave full cooperation and the run of the teaching hospital. When the story aired it was about "Ghost Surgery" and said that patients who thought they were being operated on by the professor were actually having their surgery done by residents in training.

Anybody who knows anything about surgery training knows this is ALWAYS how things are done. The professor is always there and does those critical parts of the procedure, or if the resident is very experienced, observes to be sure they are done correctly.

The "60 Minutes" "Informant" was a hospital employee who surely knew he was lying about patient's knowledge.

I had a 14 hour back surgery in 1993 at UCSF and was well aware that most of it was probably done by Fellows under the Chief's supervision.

I ran into the chief resident at the time who told me the story, He was also smeared by the story and he was black, which would now be a get out of jail free card these days.

Another friend, whose divorce case went to the Supreme Court, was interviewed by "60 Minutes" and when they showed up to tape the interview, had his own video camera and operator there. He had gotten good advice.

DanTheMan said...

>>He's desparate as he should be. He knows Jr is about to be indicted for perjury for lying before Congress.

Steve, when did you get this hysterical ? Just today ?

Dr. Mike, I'd suggest that Steve may well be correct. You are assuming there will be no indictments in the absence of a crime.
My ham sandwich disagrees...

Nonapod said...

In the dictionary under "gall" their should be a picture of Brennan's snearing mug. Brennan seems like the kind of guy who would openly stab a person right out in public, steal their wallet, and then sue the victim for inconveniencing him for not just giving him the wallet without resisting.

ga6 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Sylwester said...

Today the American Thinker website published an article titled Just How Reliable Was Christopher Steele?, written by Mark Wauch, a retired FBI agent.

The article includes the following passages:
------

.... In the Carter Page FISA application, the FBI presents material from the "dossier" ... as reporting provided by Christopher Steele as "Source #1." ....

[quote]

[footnote 8] Source #1's reporting has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings and the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable.

[end quote]

.... We see nothing here about how Steele's "reporting" was "corroborated" –- was it corroborated by other sources, by subsequent investigation by the FBI? .... Nor are we told just how important the "reporting" was to the criminal proceedings or even what the criminal proceedings involved. Was it central to the proceedings, was it important in gaining convictions or guilty pleas –- or was it peripheral? ....

.... We know that the "criminal proceedings" the FBI was referring to had to do with the FIFA corruption case. Here's the Wikipedia account of Steele's involvement ...

[quote]

In 2010, The Football Association (FA) ... hired Steele's company to investigate FIFA (International Federation of Association Football). .... Steele's research indicated that Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin had rigged the bidding of the 2018 World Cups by employing bribery.

[end quote]

.... Steele, the Great Russia Expert from MI6 who hadn't been in Russia since 1993, may have concocted his findings by checking standard internet sources.

.... Note, too, in this regard that Steele's "research ... indicated" that Sechin engaged in bribery. We see here the same vagueness we found in the FBI's presentation in the FISA application itself regarding "corroboration" of Steele's "reporting."

Do we have any indications of what "indications" Steele drew upon to reach his conclusion? .... Jane Mayer's lengthy New Yorker article (3/12/18), "Christopher Steele: The Man Behind The Trump Dossier." Mayer offers what detail is available in that regard, having seemingly spoken with only Steele supporters:

[quote]

England lost out in its bid to Russia, and Steele determined that the Kremlin had rigged the process with bribes. According to Ken Bensinger's [book] Red Card ... "one of Steele's best sources" informed him that the Deputy Prime Minister, Igor Sechin -– now the CEO. of the Russian state-controlled oil giant Rosneft -– is suspected of having travelled to Qatar "to swap World Cup votes." ....

[quote from the Wikipedia article]

In 2015, the Justice Department indicted fourteen people .... One of them was Chuck Blazer, a top FIFA official who had embezzled a fortune from the organization and became an informant for the FBI.

[end quote]

How many of those indicted people were Russians? None. And yet wasn't Russia supposed to be at the center of this conspiracy to bring the World Cup to Russia?

Didn't the corrupt Chuck Blazer, whose corruption went back decades and who became an informant for the FBI, spill the beans on Igor Sechin? Apparently not ...

Birkel said...

Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire,

Your description of Title IX under Obama is counterfactual.
Obama denied individuals - almost all males - their rights to due process.

You’re fucking pathetic.

John Pickering said...

Ann shows here how a close reading of Powerline and the Daily Mail allows her and her readers to mock the idea that John Brennan may have any insights into Russian interference in our election. Ann and her readers are satisfied that the evidence is overwhelming that Trump, Manafort, Flynn, Roger Stone, Carter Page and that crew are honest men and patriotic Americans. Some are still waiting for the Manafort judge to come to his senses and toss that case. Hey, when are they going to pardon Michael Flynn?

By the way, it's Wyndham Lewis, not Windom Lewis. In the op-ed, Brennan repeats the word hogwash once, I guess that's what Ann found so amusing.

Char Char Binks, Esq. said...

"I am now aware -- thanks to an open and free press that is unconstrained in investigating US citizens, unlike the CIA (wink)..."

Michael K said...

Dr. Mike, I'd suggest that Steve may well be correct. You are assuming there will be no indictments in the absence of a crime.
My ham sandwich disagrees...


You have a point.

I notice that Steve has not complained about this stripping of security clearance.

A Trump-supporting Pentagon analyst was stripped of his security clearance by Obama-appointed officials after he complained of questionable government contracts to Stefan Halper, the FBI informant who spied on the Trump presidential campaign.

Adam Lovinger, a 12-year strategist in the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, complained to his bosses about Halper contracts in the fall of 2016, his attorney, Sean M. Bigley, told The Washington Times.

On May 1, 2017, his superiors yanked his security clearance and relegated him to clerical chores.


It's an interesting article, not of interest to the NY Times, of course.

Or to Steve.

Birkel said...

John Pickering:
Brennan has insights, alright. He concocted the whole Russia collusion narrative from whole cloth. He put Halper, Downer and others in motion. He engineered illegal spying. He used NSA 702 spying.

The info is slow rolling into the public sphere. And you’re stupid so it will take you longer to recognize the truth.

Michael K said...

mock the idea that John Brennan may have any insights into Russian interference in our election.

I think he has many insights, Mt Pickering.

Deep insights.

Of the sort you can only get by close personal cooperation.

Pookie Number 2 said...

Ann shows here how a close reading of Powerline and the Daily Mail allows her and her readers to mock the idea that John Brennan may have any insights into Russian interference in our election.

Oh, we have no doubt that this admitted liar has “insights”. But they’re probably only useful for convincing soft-headed Democratic partisans like the fellow you see in the mirror.

walter said...

"We see nothing here about how Steele's "reporting" was "corroborated" –- was it corroborated by other sources, by subsequent investigation by the FBI?"
--
By the corroborators..who were corroborated..by the corroborators.

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire,

Your description of Title IX under Obama is counterfactual.
Obama denied individuals - almost all males - their rights to due process.

You’re fucking pathetic.


Wait a minute! That is precisely my own personal opinion; that the Obama Administration's initiative with the "Dear Colleague" letter from the Ed. Department OCR was federal pressure on colleges and universities to shortcut accuseds' civil rights.

Betsy DeVos, who I always said was one of Trump's very good cabinet picks (she and the rest of the cabinet are evermore proving me right), is scaling that way back. And I wholeheartedly approve of the effort. I opposed the whole Obama/Title IX era.

You are so pathologically reactive to anything that I write, that you are prone to making mistakes like this.

Sebastian said...

"He knows Jr is about to be indicted for perjury for lying before Congress."

Ah, lying before Congress: you mean, like, John Brennan?

"In June 2011, Brennan claimed that US counter-terrorism operations had not resulted in "a single collateral death" in the past year because of the "precision of the capabilities that we've been able to develop."[45][46] Nine months later, Brennan claimed he had said "we had no information" about any civilian, noncombatant deaths during the timeframe in question. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism disagreed with Brennan, citing their own research[48] that initially led them to believe that 45 to 56 civilians, including six children, had been killed by ten US drone strikes during the year-long period in question. Additional research led the Bureau to raise their estimate to 76 deaths, including eight children and two women. According to the Bureau, Brennan's claims "do not appear to bear scrutiny." The Atlantic has been harsher in its criticism, saying that "Brennan has been willing to lie about those drone strikes to hide ugly realities."

Of course, before he came out as an anti-Trump leftist, the left didn't like him much, because he was such a nasty liar. This from The Guardian, July 2014:

"As reports emerged Thursday that an internal investigation by the Central Intelligence Agency’s inspector general found that the CIA “improperly” spied on US Senate staffers when researching the CIA’s dark history of torture, it was hard to conclude anything but the obvious: John Brennan blatantly lied to the American public. Again.

“The facts will come out,” Brennan told NBC News in March after Senator Dianne Feinstein issued a blistering condemnation of the CIA on the Senate floor, accusing his agency of hacking into the computers used by her intelligence committee’s staffers. “Let me assure you the CIA was in no way spying on [the committee] or the Senate,” he said.

After the CIA inspector general’s report completely contradicted Brennan’s statements, it now appears Brennan was forced to privately apologize to intelligence committee chairs in a “tense” meeting earlier this week. Other Senators on Thursday pushed for Brennan to publicly apologize and called for an independent investigation. Sen. Ron Wyden said it well: . . .

But the director of the CIA – and the architect of America’s drone program, who will be all but defending torture for the next several weeks – should do more than that. Apologies aren’t enough: John Brennan should resign.

The latest row isn’t the lone CIA-spying-on-the-Senate scandal on Brennan’s watch. In a little noticed story last week, McClatchy reported that the CIA has also been spying on emails from whistleblower officials and Congress:

The CIA got hold of the legally protected email and other unspecified communications between whistleblower officials and lawmakers this spring, people familiar with the matter told McClatchy. It’s unclear how the agency obtained the material."

walter said...

Page was trusted source..until viewed more valuable as a tool for vestige-gating.

Nonapod said...

Brennan certainly isn't the most photogenic character. I keep seeing thumbnails of his hateful grimace all over today. It's almost comic. It's like he hates the world for disappointing him by allowing him to born.

Trump truly is blessed by his enemies. Charles Dickens couldn't have come up with a more colorful pack of scoundrels.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Ann and her readers are satisfied that the evidence is overwhelming that Trump, Manafort, Flynn, Roger Stone, Carter Page and that crew are honest men and patriotic Americans.

Hardly. Everyone has foibles and flaws. I have no doubt that Manafort is a truly epic sleazeball. General Flynn, I believe to be an honest and patriotic man.

However, that doesn't make Manafort or any one else automatically guilty of any and every sundry conspiracy charge that the Deep State decides dredge up and throw out there. There is no evidence of many of these "theories".

I'll wait to decide when there is evidence. Not rumours. Not hysterical caterwauling from the Left. Real hard proof.

Ralph L said...

they would get major facts completely wrong, like mixing up the names of the victims

I've been rear-ended twice, and both cops screwed up the accident report. I had to call Internal Affairs on the second, who'd switched the drivers but wouldn't fix it. That worked in about an hour. The other had written "Gary" for "Gay", the woman who'd hit me, and got further mixed up in front of the judge.
People are sloppy.

Etienne said...

"While I had deep insight into Russian activities..._________________" insert non-sourced allegations on the line provided.

Brennan's shtick and performance in public, is like stepping on a slug while barefoot.

Yancey Ward said...

Notice how Brennan never details these "dalliances". The reason he doesn't do so is becoming very obvious- he had a hand in creating all of the contacts himself- including the Mifsud meeting with Papadopoulos and the Trump Tower meeting in June of 2016. He can't come out and tell you these were the "dalliances" because he will eventually be revealed as a liar.

Ray - SoCal said...

I voted for Obama’s the first time. 2nd time Romney.

Because of Obama, you got Trump. I voted for Trump with low expectations, but Wow on what he has done. I don’t care about the soap opera stuff around him, but he is doing massive changes on stuff that is just stagnated/obsolete. Unbelievable what he is exposing on the corruption / stupidity / arrogance among the elites. Brennan is the poster boy of the elite. I wish Trump would go even faster on deregulation and legal reform, two huge drags on the economy. Bias by the tech giants is begging for action.

With Trumps successes I have mixed feelings on my vote for Obama. His actions in office were so disappointing, but he is why Ttump got elected. McCain’s actions since 2008 just show I probably made the right decision to vote for Obama. I’m still in shock over his commercial, just build the dang wall. Not to mention his lack of responsibility / honor for his senate seat responsibilities. What a spiteful person.

Birkel said...

Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire: “Strict Title IX enforcement?” under Obama.

That in no way equates with depriving mostly males of their constitutional rights.
Try again, you pusillanimous human stain.

Mike Sylwester said...

On August 10, The Markets Work website published an article titled Papadopoulos, Mifsud and Manafort Coincidences, written by Jeff Carlson.

The article suggests that the FBI decided to suspend a FISA investigation of Paul Manafort in mid-March 2016, when Manafort was being hired by Donald Trump's campaign staff. Manafort formally joined that staff on March 28 and subsequently was promoted to campaign chairman on May 19, 2016.

Carlson's article suggests that, because the had to suspend its FISA investigation of Manafort, the FBI tried to concoct a FISA investigation of George Papadopoulos an another means to obtain much of the same information about Trump.

-----

Although Manafort did not join Trump's campaign staff until mid-March 2016, he initially contacted Trump on February 29, 2016. The FBI, collecting all of Manafort's communications at that time, was well informed about the likelihood that the FISA investigation might have to be suspended if Manafort did join the campaign staff.

Therefore, the FBI began in early March 2016 to put Papadopoulos into a position that would justify a FISA investigation of Papadopoulos as an alternative to the FISA investigation of Manafort.

Papadopoulos was lured into his first meeting with Joseph Mifsud, in Italy, on March 14, 2016. This was about the same time that Manafort did join Trump's campaign staff.

It seems to me that Mifsud was the case officer assigned to handle Papadopoulos and to develop evidence justifying an FBI FISA investigation of Papadopoulos.

However, the two FISA applications targeting Papadopoulos were both rejected by a FISA judge during June-July 2016.

Therefore, the FBI was compelled to redirect its efforts toward Carter Page as the new subject of a FISA warrant.

-----

Manafort was compelled to resign from the campaign staff on August 19. Therefore the FBI eventually resumed its FISA investigation of Manafort in mid-October 2016.

Yancey Ward said...

Again, Chuck, have you decided on a method for getting your winnings on the John Conyers III bet? Again, I will not give a credit card number to some guy over the phone. I can mail a check to any address you can give me, just send such an address to twixella@aol.com.

Gospace said...

Ron Winkleheimer said...
"A government security clearance....


In addition to this- a security clearance can be suspended or revoked if any suspicion arises that that the holder shouldn't have it. These could include arrest for DUI, positive result on a random urinalysis, accusations of adultery, failure to report meetings, even accidental ones, with certain classes of people.

For examples of the last, let's say you're at a bar (anywhere in the world) and meet a beautiful Russian woman. Must be reported. It may be a totally innocent encounter. It may be she's a swallow and the meeting was innocent on your part- deliberate on hers. Not up to you to make that determination. If someone else was there taking pictures- and you didn't report it, chances of you keeping that clearance are nil.

tcrosse said...

Who needs a clearance? It's already been demonstrated that there's no penalty for compromising classified matter. No reasonable prosecutor would pursue it.

rcocean said...

Its interesting that in all of Brennan's Hogwash, he NEVER says anything specific.

Its been two years of FBI/Mueller investigation into Trump's "collusion". And still we have nothing more than vague accusations.

Time to piss or get off the pot.

rcocean said...

Every time this lying commie creep opens his mouth, it becomes more obvious he was trying to derail Trump in 2016 - by any means necessary.

His hatred of Trump is off the charts.

The Crack Emcee said...

"Anyone here ever read a news story where you were directly involved in what was being reported? How many material facts did they get wrong?"

Has anyone not have it happen?

Matt Sablan said...

"Has anyone not have it happen?"

-- They got the score and line up right of my high school soccer games the few times I bothered to check the local papers.

CWJ said...

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

"OT: Gay mafia coming hard after Cake Shop owner. Cake shop owner fights back.

All your private industry belongs to teh gay, or else."

BTW, I saw a version of this story on the MSN home page yesterday. Headline said that masterpiece cake was suing Colorado "again." WTF?

buwaya said...

I suspect Manafort was hired in 2016 precisely because he knows where a lot of bodies are buried, and was thus able to pressure a bunch of unhappy insiders to not make too much trouble about Trump's nomination.

Drago said...

Pickering is still showing his face around here after claiming the US increasing domestic energy production and becoming a leading exporter was causing increased glibal energy prices?

My gosh. Why cant Althouse blog attract a better class of lefty commenter? Instead we are left with LLR Chuck, Freder, pickering, that Uhr fellow amongst others.

I guess pickins' are a bit slim in Team Left these days, eh Chuck?

Etienne said...

tcrosse said......there's no penalty for compromising classified matter.

Only at the highest pay grades, or political appointee's.

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire: “Strict Title IX enforcement?” under Obama.

That in no way equates with depriving mostly males of their constitutional rights.
Try again, you pusillanimous human stain.


I don't even know how to address this with you; I all along joined in the notion that Title IX "tribunals" had been turned into kangaroo courts and that the Obama Administration's April 2011 initiative to go to a "preponderance of evidence" standard was being enforced with an unsubtle threat of a loss of federal funding for any university that didn't play along as ordered.

No doubt the Obama Administration, working through the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights and the Assistant Secretary of Education Russlyn Ali thought they were engaging in "strict enforcement of Title IX." You and I disagree with their course of action, but that is what they think they were engaged in.

I truly don't understand your weird obsessive attack on me on this issue. My own position on this is the hard-right Republican position. My position might actually be just to the right of Betsy DeVos on this one.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 325   Newer› Newest»