Donald Trump in lock step conflict with intel community ~ why?

David Ignatius: Another step closer to the abyss (and an Ignatius perspective on why Trump is determined to protect himself, rather than the Constitution he swore to uphold and protect.)  Trump's war with the inteligence community probably has an alternate motive.

(In Maine Writer lingo ~ what has happened to America?)

An echo opinion published in the Winston-Salem Journal in North Carolina.

Donald Trump will violate laws and ignore the Constitution for the purpose of saving himself from accountability. In so doing, his failed leadership is taking all Americans into a political abyss from which we may need decades to recover.

Wrote David Ignatius: What Donald Trump did Wednesday to John Brennan isn’t supposed to happen in a democracy. A president who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution carried out a personal political vendetta against a career intelligence officer.

In revoking the security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan, Trump took another step toward the abyss. He cited the “risk posed by [Brennan’s] erratic conduct and behavior,” a ludicrous charge coming from our unguided missile of a chief executive.

Brennan’s real crime is that he has been in Trump’s face nearly every day, trading insults on Twitter and cable television* (!). Brennan has taken to using words such as “high crimes and misdemeanors” and “nothing short of treasonous” to describe Trump’s behavior, and likened him to convicted fraudster Bernie Madoff. Stripping Brennan’s clearance was presidential payback, dressed up in national security language.

I wrote back in January that I wished Brennan and other former intelligence chiefs would resist slugging it out with Trump — not because their criticisms are wrong but because they risked tarnishing the credibility and professionalism of their agencies. As I argued, Trump supporters would “fume that the spy chiefs are ganging up on the populist president. Conspiracy theories about an imaginary ‘deep state’ will gain more traction, and the cycle of national mistrust will get worse.”

But let’s be honest: Brennan isn’t a guy who was going to back down in a bar fight, any more than Trump. He’s tough and stubborn, with a chip on his shoulder. He’s a guy who, if you write five positive things about him and one negative, remembers only the negative. Once Trump insulted Brennan’s integrity, as he did after he won the presidency, these two were going to end up in a cockfight.

The prevailing media explanation of the Brennan move was that Trump was trying to distract public attention from Omarosa Manigault Newman, a disaffected former staffer who just published a tell-all book about the president titled “Unhinged.” But I wonder if that was the real Brennan trigger.

Trump himself offered a clearer (and more damning) explanation in an interview Wednesday with the Wall Street Journal, suggesting that he punished Brennan because he was one of the original instigators of the investigation led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. “I call it the rigged witch hunt, [it] is a sham. And these people led it! So I think it’s something that had to be done.”

With Trump, you always have to question what’s rubbing him so raw and driving him toward possibly illegal and unconstitutional actions. As prosecutors like to say: “We may not know what he’s done wrong, but he does.” Does a warped protective impulse drive Trump into these furies of defensive action?

With James B. Comey, ground zero may have been the briefing given by the then-FBI director to the president-elect in January, detailing the salacious sexual allegations contained in a now-famous (but unconfirmed) dossier compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and funded partly by lawyers representing the Hillary Clinton campaign. Trump brought up this sleazy evidence repeatedly afterward and reportedly pressed Comey for a pledge of personal loyalty. When Trump didn’t get it, he fired his FBI director and, in a television interview, blamed it on Comey’s pursuit of the Russia investigation.

Brennan poses a similar challenge for Trump. It’s not that Brennan embodies the “deep state.” In truth, he disliked a CIA operations culture that he felt had rejected him as a young officer; while his modernization efforts at the CIA had supporters, I’d bet that many at the agency were relieved to see him go.

What was so threatening about the former CIA chief? Beyond Brennan’s sheer cussedness, I’d guess that Trump was frightened — and remains so to this day — about just how much Brennan knows about his secrets. And by that, I don’t just mean his dealings with Russian oligarchs and presidents, but the way he moved through a world of fixers, flatterers and money launderers.

Brennan, like Comey, was there at the beginning of this investigation. Trump must have asked himself: What does Brennan know? What did he learn from the CIA’s deep assets in Moscow, and from liaison partners such as Britain, Israel, Germany and the Netherlands? Does Trump think Brennan will be a less credible witness without a security clearance?

The Brennan episode is just one more warning of what may be ahead. Trump appears ready to take our country over the waterfall to save himself. Before it’s too late, Trump should realize: Even in his rage, he can’t fire everybody.

*MaineWriter opinion- I can't imagine John Brennan taking on such aggressive behavior without having a deep understanding about how Donald Trump is in collusion with Russia.

Stop Donald Trump and block his lock step Trumpists

Republicans must confront dangerous Donald Trumpism.  

Reputable people are verbalizing the danger of Trumpism but Republicans are irresponsibly choosing to ignore their warnings.

It's scary.

Brennan: Nunes memo 'exceptionally partisan'

Former CIA Director John Brennan on Sunday accused Rep. Devin Nunes of abusing his House Intelligence Committee chairmanship after he orchestrated a memo that (wrongly) alleges FBI misconduct.

"We don't have access to the underlying information of the Nunes memo, which clearly indicates that he was being exceptionally partisan in this," Brennan said on NBC's Meet the Press. "I've had fights with the Dems over the years when I was in the Obama administration ... but I never saw the Democrats do something like this that was so partisan, so reckless."

Brennan asserted that Nunes (R-Calif.) was trying to protect President Donald Trump with the memo.

Nunes' memo, which was released Friday with Trump's support, claims the FBI obtained and renewed surveillance warrants against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page by relying heavily on a dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.
Democrats have argued that the memo aims to undermine special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into whether Russia colluded with Trump's presidential campaign.

Brennan criticized Nunes and other GOP lawmakers for not allowing Democrats to release their own counter memo, which the White House has said it would consider releasing.

"The fact that Devin Nunes and Republicans denied the ability of the minority, the Democratic members of that committee, to put out its report is just appalling," Brennan said. "I think it really underscores just how partisan Mr. Nunes has been. He has abused the office of the chairmanship ... and I don't say that lightly."

The former CIA director Brennan argued that Nunes should have conducted hearings and interviewed FBI officials. Instead, Nunes "just put out publicly one side in a very selective, cherry-picked memo."

Russia could not have interfered alone

Former CIA Director John Brennan says Russian hackers had American help in rigging the election

There’s a reason why Brennan is now making a much more damning assertion...Brennan now appears to believe that it’ll all come out in the end one way or the other.

John Brennan was former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

~In my opinion, John Brennan would not make these revealing statements without having inside information.~

Russian government hackers and propagandists displayed a remarkable familiarity with the delicate intricacies of American politics and social issues during the course of the 2016 election – particularly when it came to their successful efforts to rig the swing states of Wisconsin and Michigan in Donald Trump’s favor. 

If you’ve come to believe the Russians couldn’t have pulled it off without American help, it turns out you’re in good company.

John Brennan, who was the Director of the CIA during the 2016 election, was interviewed by NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell at a public function on Wednesday. 

Mitchell asked Brennan if he thought it was possible that Russia could have pulled off such a sophisticated and knowledgeable operation in these swing states. Brennan flatly stated “I find it implausible.” He didn’t specifically say it, but he didn’t need to: the obvious implication is that the Donald Trump campaign helped Russia to hack the election.

Although Brennan is recently retired, he was running the CIA during the election – thus making him the first high ranking government official to outright assert that Americans were helping the Russians to influence the outcome of the election. 

Brennan didn’t step down until January, meaning that he saw classified evidence on the way out the door that he still can’t talk about. Someone in his position wouldn’t be making these remarks at this time, unless he’s seen the evidence confirming it, and he now believes that evidence will become public.

John Brennan has been much more cautious with his words in the past when it’s come to discussing the topic of election collusion between the Donald Trump campaign and Russia. There’s a reason why he’s now making a much more damning assertion about it. Brennan now appears to believe that it’ll all come out in the end one way or the other.

Americans must respect our national security experts - that means Trump!

It's hard to imagine any Americans voicing skepticism about our nation's national security experts. Afterall, regardless of how individuals might feel about the work of national security personnel, either the organization is too agressive or it's not, the facts are clear- we don't know what these authorities know. Therefore, our personal lack of facts removes us from the capacity to cast doubt on the work of the national security public servants. Except, Donald Trump dosn't get this concept. Unfortunately, he doesn't know everything, even if he is delusional enough to believe differently. Consequently, he doubts the national security experts even though he doesn't know what they know. #no_seriously!

In fact, Trump says he doesn't trust the experts who will provide him with his candidate's national security briefing! #no_seriously!

Hours before he was scheduled to receive his first classified intelligence briefing, Donald Trump said he does not trust information coming out of U.S. intelligence agencies and indicated he would cease relying on the bulk of the intelligence community’s massive workforce.

“Not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country,” Trump responded. “I mean, look what’s happened over the last 10 years. … It’s been catastrophic.

“Very easy to use them, but I won't use them, because they’ve made such bad decisions,” he said, pointing to apparent intelligence failures ahead of the United States's 2003 invasion of Iraq. 

(Oh paleeeeze! Trump's arrogance is "huge"! He made plenty of bad decisions in his life, but for sure he's no intelligence expert!)

At the time, George W. Bush administration officials appeared convinced that Saddam Hussein’s government was creating weapons of mass destruction, though that was not the case.

“If we would have never touched it, it would have been a lot better,” Trump said.

He may not have a choice. CIA Director John Brennan has already suggested he would resign rather than comply with Trump’s orders to employ harsh interrogation methods or torture against America's enemies, and it’s unclear whether others would join him.

Nonetheless, Trump's comments demonstrate a startling lack of confidence in the 16 federal intelligence agencies and their tens of thousands of employees.

Later Wednesday, Trump received his first briefing on intelligence matters from senior government officials as part of a routine process of bringing potential new presidents up to speed on world events.

Trump's comments follow a House Republican analysis last week confirming reports that intelligence produced through the military’s Central Command had been edited or squelched in order to provide an unrealistically positive image of the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

The conclusions seriously undermine the Obama administration’s claims about the anti-ISIS push and help explain the trouble it has had routing the extremist group from its bases in Syria and Iraq.

Trump is planning to attend the Wednesday briefing with former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who led the Defense Intelligence Agency earlier in the Obama administration.

During an interview aired on “Fox and Friends” Wednesday morning, Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, was asked whether he “trust[s] intelligence.”

"Not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country,” Trump responded. “I mean, look what’s happened over the last 10 years. … It’s been catastrophic." (OMG! What does "catastrophic" mean? If Trump means the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York City's World Trade Center, the American Airlines flight 77- Pentagon attack and the loss of United Airline Flight 93 in Pennsylvania, then he must say so!!!)

“Very easy to use them, but I won't use them, because they’ve made such bad decisions,” he said, pointing to apparent intelligence failures ahead of the United States's 2003 invasion of Iraq. 

At the time, George W. Bush administration officials appeared convinced that Saddam Hussein’s government was creating weapons of mass destruction, athough, that was (proven) to not be the case.

“If we would have never touched it, it would have been a lot better,” Trump said.

He may not have a choice. CIA Director John Brennan has already suggested he would resign rather than comply with Trump’s orders to employ harsh interrogation methods or torture against America's enemies, and it’s unclear whether others would join him.

Nonetheless, Trump's comments demonstrate a startling lack of faith in the 16 federal intelligence agencies and their tens of thousands of employees.

Later Wednesday, Trump is scheduled to receive his first briefing on intelligence mattersfrom senior government officials as part of a routine process of bringing potential new presidents up to speed on world events.

Trump's comments follow a House Republican analysis last week confirming reports that intelligence produced through the military’s Central Command had been edited or squelched in order to provide an unrealistically positive image of the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

The conclusions seriously undermine the Obama administration’s claims about the anti-ISIS push and help explain the trouble it has had routing the extremist group from its bases in Syria and Iraq.

Trump is attended the Wednesday briefing with former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who led the Defense Intelligence Agency earlier in the Obama administration.

Meanwhile, regardless of how #DonaldTrump feels about the national security agencies he is quick to disdain, the fact is, his leadership role demands for him to show support for the experts who work very hard to protect America against future terrorism attacks.