We’ve heard it, as though it were set in stone as a fact, that Russia wanted to have Donald Trump win the 2016 election. From that alleged fact have sprung all manner of idiotic conspiracy theories from the left, in addition to the Russia collusion hoax.
But former CIA officer and National Security Council Chief of Staff Fred Fleitz said that, in fact, former CIA head John Brennan ignored intelligence that Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, wanted Hillary Clinton to win.
Oops. But that didn’t help the narrative Democrats were trying to sell to undermine Trump.
Fleitz pointed out this information as part of questioning the recently released Senate intel report which continues to support the claim that Russia interfered to help Trump. Fleitz pointed out the new report is contradicted by some of the conclusions that the House found in their investigation in 2018. He also called Brennan “the most politicized intelligence chief in American history” in a Fox News op-ed.
From Daily Caller:
“The Senate Intelligence Committee report falsely claims that ‘all analytical lines are supported with all-source intelligence’ and that analysts who wrote the intelligence community assessment consistently said they ‘were under no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions.’”
Fleitz says House Intelligence Committee staff members discovered exactly the opposite and told him that there is ample evidence that Russia may have interfered in the 2016 election, but not necessarily on behalf of Trump.
“More gravely, they said that [then-] CIA Director John Brennan suppressed facts or analysis that showed why it was not in Russia’s interests to support Trump and why Putin stood to benefit from Hillary Clinton’s election. They also told me that Brennan suppressed that intelligence over the objections of CIA analysts.”
Wait, what? Let’s hear that again.
Fleitz said that “Brennan suppressed high-quality intelligence suggesting that Putin actually wanted the more predictable and malleable Clinton to win the 2016 election.”
He said that, on the other hand, “low-quality intelligence that failed to meet intelligence community standards to support the political claim that Russian officials wanted Trump to win … ”
So you mean the evidence was more suggestive that Hillary Clinton, whose team was paying for information that may have been Russian disinformation in the dossier to undermine Trump, may really have been the person the Russians wanted to win? You mean they really didn’t want the person who had Russian disinformation spread against him to win? And that Brennan allegedly suppressed that intelligence to fit the political narrative Democrats were trying to pitch?
Seems like that’s fairly important information to correct the record with. Not to mention that raises even more questions that need answers.
Author: Nick Arama