Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Thread by @drawandstrike: "Payback is a bitch you ain't the only one who can get a FISA, Other people can get FISA's too and I'll bet they they got one on YOU Turnabou […]"
🎶Payback is a bitch
you ain't the only one who can get a FISA,
Other people can get FISA's too
and I'll bet they they got one on YOU
Turnabout is fair play
and right now at the end of the day
you've been talking for a year and
people have been listening to everything you say!🎶
#TrumpKnowsEverything #BeCarefulWhatYouFishFor #ItIsADoublePleasureToDeceiveT heDeceiver #EveryLeakWasHeard #YouAreSoSoVeryCaught
@SallyQYates @JohnBrennan @Comey @petestrzok
Brennan: Moriarty
@GenFlynn: Holmes
You never really had a chance, John.
When a guy who never was in the field planning a single intelligence op & only rose because of what a great suck up he was to politicians matches wits with a 30 year military spook, it's cruel to even call that a contest.
Trump was also thoroughly prepared BEFORE HE EVEN ENTERED OFFICE to launch a COUNT-counter intelligence sting against the people who were trying to entrap him. @GenFlynn, Adm. Mike Rogers, and others with extensive intelligence chops likely helped devise it.
So for the past year and a half, these idiots were *allowed* to think they were getting somewhere in this plot to take Trump down, or at least severely cripple his ability to govern, and towards the end, that they could at least cover their tracks & make a getaway.
And the entire last year and half, the Trump team they thought they were spying on was spying right back on THEM.
So not only were these dumbasses allowed to go on the record repeatedly lying about what they did, they were being spied on, evidence collected, recorded, etc.
The year Mike Pompeo spent at the CIA, he wasn't just cleaning house & setting up secret visits to places like North Korea that never leaked.
He was involved in leak hunts and setting up a counter-counterintelligence operation in response to "Crossfire Hurricane".
There was no hurry. The statute of limitations won't run out for another 4-5 years on a lot of the crimes these plotters committed. That's why Trump/Sessions & Pompeo & Horowitz and many others have taken their sweet, sweet time building these cases & collecting all this evidence
Now we'll spend the next 2 months watching the nukes drop from orbit, as a very, very public example begins to be made out of these people.
The trials will take years, but it's already over.
Statement from Senate Intel Chairman Richard Burr on Comments by Former CIA Director John Brennan
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement on comments made in The New York Times by former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Brennan:
“Director Brennan’s recent statements purport to know as fact that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign power. If Director Brennan’s statement is based on intelligence he received while still leading the CIA, why didn’t he include it in the Intelligence Community Assessment released in 2017? If his statement is based on intelligence he has seen since leaving office, it constitutes an intelligence breach. If he has some other personal knowledge of or evidence of collusion, it should be disclosed to the Special Counsel, not The New York Times.
“If, however, Director Brennan’s statement is purely political and based on conjecture, the president has full authority to revoke his security clearance as head of the Executive Branch.”
Senator Burr makes it pretty clear there is no wiggle room for Brennan and his leftist supporters: they're equivocating liars.
Brennan has demonstrated that he does not deserve the extended privilege of possessing a national security clearance.
And any pundit that suggests that Brennan's security clearance is necessary should Team Trump call upon Brennan for advice is a bald-faced liar.
First of all, the likelihood that Team Trump would ask Brennan for any advice is nil. Secondly, Brennan doesn't need a security clearance to tell someone with the proper security clearance about classified intel that came across his desk while he was director. The person listening needs the security clearance.
Quote:
Statement from Senate Intel Chairman Richard Burr on Comments by Former CIA Director John Brennan
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement on comments made in The New York Times by former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Brennan:
“Director Brennan’s recent statements purport to know as fact that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign power. If Director Brennan’s statement is based on intelligence he received while still leading the CIA, why didn’t he include it in the Intelligence Community Assessment released in 2017? If his statement is based on intelligence he has seen since leaving office, it constitutes an intelligence breach. If he has some other personal knowledge of or evidence of collusion, it should be disclosed to the Special Counsel, not The New York Times.
“If, however, Director Brennan’s statement is purely political and based on conjecture, the president has full authority to revoke his security clearance as head of the Executive Branch.”
However, there's a reason why former intelligence community leaders continue to have clearance. Just maybe it has something to do with keeping their secrets secret. Or maybe something to do with protecting us against those who would revise intel for political reason.
You are completely off the rails. There are strict laws against leaking classified intelligence. Those laws apply to former officials as well as current ones. If a former official can't be trusted to keep secrets secret, why would anyone give him/her access to more secrets?
Your second "reason" is even more retarded. If anyone doctors the intelligence reports or findings, it's not the job of former officials to blow the whistle. It's the job of the current intel people who put the reports or findings together.
You obviously know nothing about how these things work.
As I said in my OP, the only plausible reason is to let former officials assist current officials, IF ASKED. Sometimes the former officials know where the skeletons are buried. John Brennan is a partisan hack. He burned his bridges in Jan. 2017. Nobody on Team Trump wants his input on anything. He belongs in a stockade in the lobby of the CIA headquarters in Langley.
You are completely off the rails. There are strict laws against leaking classified intelligence. Those laws apply to former officials as well as current ones. If a former official can't be trusted to keep secrets secret, why would anyone give him/her access to more secrets?
Your second "reason" is even more retarded. If anyone doctors the intelligence reports or findings, it's not the job of former officials to blow the whistle. It's the job of the current intel people who put the reports or findings together.
You obviously know nothing about how these things work.
As I said in my OP, the only plausible reason is to let former officials assist current officials, IF ASKED. Sometimes the former officials know where the skeletons are buried. John Brennan is a partisan hack. He burned his bridges in Jan. 2017. Nobody on Team Trump wants his input on anything. He belongs in a stockade in the lobby of the CIA headquarters in Langley.
How on earth did you read THAT into my post, LLad?
I was agreeing with you for the most part.
I also was suggesting that there's the possibility that a "new" administration made up of "new" operatives may have a reason to keep former intel operatives quiet, enabling certain revisions --- after all, we can't trust the intel community, can we?
How on earth did you read THAT into my post, LLad?
I was agreeing with you for the most part.
I also was suggesting that there's the possibility that a "new" administration made up of "new" operatives may have a reason to keep former intel operatives quiet, enabling certain revisions --- after all, we can't trust the intel community, can we?
you know all this because you were a CIA agent right
You are completely off the rails. There are strict laws against leaking classified intelligence. Those laws apply to former officials as well as current ones. If a former official can't be trusted to keep secrets secret, why would anyone give him/her access to more secrets?
Your second "reason" is even more retarded. If anyone doctors the intelligence reports or findings, it's not the job of former officials to blow the whistle. It's the job of the current intel people who put the reports or findings together.
You obviously know nothing about how these things work.
As I said in my OP, the only plausible reason is to let former officials assist current officials, IF ASKED. Sometimes the former officials know where the skeletons are buried. John Brennan is a partisan hack. He burned his bridges in Jan. 2017. Nobody on Team Trump wants his input on anything. He belongs in a stockade in the lobby of the CIA headquarters in Langley.
Add to that, if say a member of the intel community needs to be 'contacted' by his successor, and as such he needs to keep his clearance, WHY DOESN'T the same apply to members of the military?? after i retired, i got 3-4 emails a day for the first two or so months after getting out, asking about this and that related to what i did...
you rant too much.
