Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Trump Just Revealed The Trap John Brennan Caught Himself In And It’s Glorious

Published

on

In what both the mainstream media and social media, along with the Democratic party deemed a highly controversial move, President Donald Trump revoked the security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan. For the rest of America, they are simply wondering why it was not done sooner.

After revoking Brennan’s security clearance, President Trump ordered a review of other officials believed to have played roles of some significance in events leading up to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the subsequent farcical investigation into Russian collusion.

Brennan was first on the list due to the use consistent use of his status “to make a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations” and “wild outbursts on the Internet and television about this administration.” Yet social media and the propaganda outlets of the Democratic party purporting to be the “free press” tried to break the internet as they furiously took to various forms of social media to express their collective criticism and outrage over President Trump’s decision.

Brennan himself went nuclear over the loss of his security clearance writing an op-ed in the New York Times claiming that President Trump is trying to silence him. Brennan also took his tirade to Twitter, tweeting about President Trump’s decision, with claims the actions of the President are “part of a broader effort by Mr. Trump to suppress freedom of speech and punish critics…”

Trending: Corvette Driver Rolls Window Down & Flips Guy The Bird – Will Never Do That Again!

Brennan adds – “It should gravely worry all Americans, including intelligence professionals, about the cost of speaking out. My principles are worth far more than clearances. I will not relent.”

Clearly, the irony of Brennan’s statements is lost on him, considering the extreme measures employed by the Obama administration to silence critics and detractors. Weaponizing various forms of the government, wiretapping members of the press such as James Rosen of Fox News, Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News, and the Associated Press. Then there was IRS being used to target Republicans and Conservatives, the various intel agencies discovered secretly monitored conversations of members of Congress while the Obama administration negotiated the Iran nuclear deal, despite the 2013 denial by former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper when he assured Congress the NSA was not collecting “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.”

Then there was that time in 2014 when the CIA was caught spying on various Senate Intelligence Committee staffers, despite Brennan’s express and explicit denial of the fact. Then there were also the wiretaps on then-Congressman Dennis Kucinich (OH-D) in 2011 under the Obama regime and countless other additional examples.

No American that has even the most minuscule amount of knowledge of history or even a rudimentary understanding of the Constitution wants American intel agencies to be used much in the same vein as the Stasi in East Germany, the secret police spying on its own citizens for political purposes. The prospect that the likes of the NSA, CIA, FBI, and others have been politically weaponized against the American people is becoming undeniable, however.

Yet there is also significant support for President Trump, even coming from unexpected corners. This may be a sign that the tide is turning and the cabal that conspired to fix the 2016 presidential election in Hillary Clinton’s favor is going to be exposed and ultimately held to account. Their actions when this failed and the course they set on to remove President Trump, a duly elected president from office by any means necessary will be revealed for all to see.

According to the American Thinker,

“As the Democrats and their media enablers bloviate about John Brennan’s imaginary First Amendment right to a perpetual security clearance, a statement of support for the president came from an unexpected source yesterday.

Lou Dobbs tweeted an official statement from establishment Republican Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina, on comments by Barack Obama’s former CIA director John Brennan:

Lou Dobbs may be on to something in terms of the significance of this statement.  Burr is highlighting a trap that Brennan is now caught in.  As Clarice Feldman pointed out, Senator Burr is the chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) and a member of the Gang of Eight that gets access to the most secret documents.  He is also a conspicuous member of the GOP establishment and until yesterday had been reticent in his approach to these Deep State scandals.  Yet here he is, alluding to a trap that Brennan may be in.

Yesterday, President Trump acknowledged Lou Dobbs’ tweet with his own tweet supporting Dobbs’ tweet of Senator Burr’s official statement, confirming the Brennan trap:

Senator Rand Paul (KY-R) was also vocal in his support of the stripping of Brennan’s security clearance and had in fact been urging President Trump to do so for some time. “I applaud President Trump for his revoking of John Brennan’s security clearance,” Paul said in a press release. “I urged the President to do this.”

Paul also stated – “I filibustered Brennan’s nomination to head the CIA in 2013, and his behavior in government and out of it demonstrate why he should not be allowed near classified information.”

Former Trump adviser Sebastian Gorka wrote an op-ed for The Hill stating –  “No one has a right to a top secret clearance.” Gorka contined with – “The argument that some are making that the president’s decision in some way infringes John Brennan’s free speech rights is, in fact, absurd…In the last few months, from his position as a paid commentator on MSNBC, John Brennan has repeatedly stated that the duly elected president of the United States is beholden to Vladimir Putin, potentially being blackmailed by him, and has gone as far as to call the president’s actions treasonous. This is a devastating charge to make, one that no other former cabinet-level political appointee has made about a sitting president. Ever. Yet, he does this without providing any evidence at all of his charge.

Rep. Lee Zeldin (NY-R) stated Brennan – who voted for a Communist for US President, “Should’ve never received the clearance in 1st place,” and that he’s “Now monetizing his position of former CIA Director w unhinged recklessness & insanity.”

Meanwhile, Brennan went running for his safe space at MSNBC to rail about the unfairness of it all claiming – “I do believe that Mr. Trump decided to take this action, as he’s done with others, to suppress any criticism of him or his administration … it’s his way of trying to get back at me.”

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Booker Just Slapped With Brutal Karma After Victim Exposes His Dirty Secret – After He Shamed Kavanaugh!

Published

on

We all know by now that the Democrat Party is only good for obstructing and not much else. But in Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation debate they have sunk to an all-time low.

According to Chicks On The Right, the Democrats are trying to derail the Kavanaugh confirmation with the excuse of an allegation of a sexual assault that allegedly happened 35 years ago. But what’s probably even better is that while this is going on they have decided to ignore all the Democrats recently accused of assault or harassment, with evidence, including Keith Ellison, John Conyers, and Al Franken. And they have decided to ignore allegations about one more in their ranks, Senator Cory Booker from New Jersey.

And what’s even worse is that Booker actually confessed to his allegations in a Newspaper column written by himself back on 1992.

Here is the text of the article from The Stanford Daily Signal:

“Telling one’s own personal story is often the most powerful way to make a point, or, more importantly, to make people think. When grandiose statements entrenched in politically correct terminology are made, many may listen but few will hear.

When I hesitated in writing this column, I realized I was basking in hypocrisy. So instead I chose to write and risk.

New Year’s Eve 1984 I will never forget. I was 15. As the ball dropped, I leaned over to hug a friend and she met me instead with an overwhelming kiss.

As we fumbled upon the bed, I remember debating my next “move” as if it were a chess game. With the “Top Gun” slogan ringing in my head, I slowly reached for her breast. After having my hand pushed away once, I reached my “mark.”

Our groping ended soon and while no “relationship” ensued, a friendship did. You see, the next week in school she told me that she was drunk that night and didn’t really know what she was doing.

While she liked me a lot, she said she just wanted to be friends. I have gotten used to those five words, but that’s another column.

Ever since puberty, I remember receiving messages that sex was a game, a competition. Sexual relations were best achieved through luck, guile, strategy or coercion. Another friend in high school counseled me on the importance of drinking: “With liquor you’ll get to bed quicker,” she said. Thinking about her statement back then, I realized its veracity.

Coming to college, I was immersed in the same sort of attitudes.

“What do you think happened? She invited me back to her room at 3 a.m.”

“I’ve got to find a way to snatch that snatch.”

“The best thing for that girl would be to be tied down and screwed.”

Out of context these statements seem shocking, but in context they were barely noticed.

After two years at Stanford, I snapped from one extreme to the other. Once, during my sophomore year, in response to a slew of my verbiage, a friend of mine chidingly called me a man-hater.

In retrospect, my soliloquy titled “The Oppressive Nature Of Male Dominated Society And Its Violent Manifestations: Rape, Anorexia, Battered Wives” may have been a surreptitious attempt to convince her that I was a sensitive man, but more likely I was trying to convince myself that my attitudes had changed.

My polar leap had little to do with residential education. It had to do with a deluge of reality. You see, I had begun listening to the raw truth from men and women discussing rape about two years ago as a peer counselor. The conversations were personal accounts, not rhetoric; they were real life, not dorm programing. It was a wake-up call — I will never be the same.

I find myself with no conclusion for this column. A conclusion would speak of a simplicity I do not feel. I can find little clarity in the torment of emotions I now experience when even allusions to this issue are made. All I have are poignant visions.

I see that preceding all the horrors of rape are a host of skewed attitudes.

I see my friends seeking to “get some” or to “score.”

I see people making power plays.

I see myself at 15 trotting around the bases and stealing second.

I now see the crowds, no, not the spectators, but the thousands, the millions who are rarely seen or heard.

I’ve seen enough.

I spoke to a 40 year old woman who has trouble looking at her self in the mirror when she gets out of the shower; to her, her body is always dirty. She can’t make love, she never had an orgasm, she never will forget what happened her first time. She can’t close her eyes.”

Pretty damning, don’t you agree?

The worst part of this whole article Senator Booker penned is the fact that he just admits his crime in his own words. And even though he does, the Democrat Party, Dem feminists, and their lapdog leftwing mainstream media are ignoring it.

They don’t care that one of their stars, their “Spartacus,” conveniently assaulted a woman by his own admission. But they are ok with dragging an innocent man through the ringer on an accusation that’s over 35 years old and where no police report was ever filed. From a woman who all of a sudden is a victim but who at the same time barely remembers the alleged incident.

Convenient, Don’t you agree?

Continue Reading

CNN Asks Women If They Believe Kavanaugh’s Accuser – This Was NOT What They Were Expecting

Published

on

Careful what you ask CNN and who you ask it of, you might just get the truth. CNN has been all over the Kavanaugh mess… salivating and praying that this will do him in as a Supreme Court nominee. But sadly for them, this whole sexual assault allegation from Professor Ford doesn’t seem to hold any water whatsoever.

CNN decided to ask five women if they believed Judge Brett Kavanaugh over the woman accusing him of sexually assaulting her 36 years ago. CNN’s Randi Kaye got the surprise of her life when the women told her what they really thought. She certainly didn’t expect this from women in the #MeToo age. Oops.

From Update America:

“A show of hands; how many of you believe Judge Kavanaugh when he says this didn’t happen?” the CNN host asked.

“All five women immediately raised their hands.

“I believe him,” one woman said.

“I believe him, too,” another agreed.

“How can we believe the word of a woman of something that happened 36 years ago. This guy has an impeccable reputation,” Lourdes Castillo de la Pena told CNN. “There is nobody who has spoken ill-will about him. Everyone that speaks about him — this guy is an altar boy. … Because one woman made an allegation, I’m sorry, I don’t buy it.”

“Yet another woman on the panel indicated she would still support Kavanaugh even if the allegation was true.

“But in the grand scheme of things, my goodness. There was no intercourse,” Irina Villarino said. “There was maybe a touch. Really? 36 years later, she’s still stuck on that? Had it happened.”

“Several of the women on the CNN panel also questioned the timing of Ford’s allegation, asking why she didn’t come forward sooner — like when Kavanaugh entered the Bush White House or became a federal judge.

“I have no sympathy,” Pena said of Ford.”

Alrighty then… any more questions? I have some and they concern Ford’s memory. She can’t recall the year it happened, where it happened, when it happened, who hosted the party, who was there, who brought her or who took her home. And I find the timing far too suspect here.

More from The Daily Caller:

“Irina Villarino continued, “She’s also destroying his life, his wife’s life, his children’s lives, his career. I mean, why didn’t she come out sooner if she’s telling the truth?”

“Angie Vazquez stated, “I would hate to think that 30, 40 years later, somebody’s going to destroy your life because somewhere at some party you — it’s not right, but —maybe you touched somebody the way you’re not supposed to … ”

“Castillo de la Pena said, “No, I have no sympathy. And perhaps at that moment, she liked him and maybe he didn’t pay attention to her afterwards and he went out with another girl and she got bitter or whatever the situation is. They’re kids,” when asked if she felt sympathetic towards Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.”

Kavanaugh wants to testify on this and clear his name next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Ford is making demands of the committee that are outrageous and I have severe doubts of there being a hearing at all. In the end, Kavanaugh has a right to face his accuser and have counsel present. Both of which Ford is objecting to.

From CNN:

“Congressional sources said Thursday that Ford wanted assurances about her safety before agreeing to testify and a guarantee that she will never be in the same room as Kavanaugh. She wants to be questioned by senators, not an outside lawyer — possibly to avoid the impression that she is on trial.

“Ford’s attorneys also suggested that Kavanaugh testify first, that they would like Mark Judge — a key witness to the alleged assault — to be subpoenaed, and that they would prefer no time limits on what is likely to be a deeply emotional opening statement.

“Several of those conditions are likely to be non-starters for the committee’s Republican majority, including the notion of compelling testimony from Judge, who has said he has no memory of the alleged incident and does not want to appear.

“Multiple sources said that most of Ford’s stipulations were not red lines but an opening point for negotiations. She has apparently moved off her initial request that the FBI conduct an investigation before a hearing.

“Winning assurances on her key concerns could help Ford answer the question she posed when she identified herself as the source of previously anonymous accusations against Kavanaugh in The Washington Post on Sunday.

“Why suffer through the annihilation if it’s not going to matter?” said Ford, who has faced death threats and has not returned to her family home since identifying herself.”

At first, Ford ignored the committee’s invitation to testify. Then she wanted the FBI to investigate. Now, she’s setting conditions before she will speak to lawmakers which is simply unheard of. She wants Kavanaugh to testify first, but he has a right to respond to the allegations made by his accuser.

Welcome to the obstructionist circus that we now see on The Hill. President Trump is right to question this woman’s credibility and to call for a vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination immediately.

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend