NYTimes Tries to Discredit Durham’s Russia Hoax Probe, Questions of CIA Cover-Up

‘Mr. Durham appears to be pursuing a theory that the C.I.A. … had a preconceived notion about Russia … and was nefariously trying to keep other agencies from seeing the full picture…’

 1

John Brennan / IMAGE: MSNBC via Youtube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) New reports confirm the long-held suspicions that disgraced former CIA Director John Brennan is among those being investigated by federal prosecutor John Durham‘s Justice Department probe into the role corrupt intelligence operatives played in the Russia hoax against President Donald Trump.

“Questions asked by Mr. Durham …  suggest that Mr. Durham may have come to view with suspicion several clashes between analysts at different intelligence agencies over who could see each other’s highly sensitive secrets,” The New York Times reported.

Brennan—a partisan hack who lost his security clearance for making inappropriate comments about the president in 2018—has been exposed previously for several instances of lying to Congress and leaking classified information while in his official capacity.

Among those he likely colluded with to propel the fraudulent Russia collusion narrative through selective leaks was The New York Times, which reported on the recent developments by insinuating that the ongoing DOJ investigation was designed to target Trump’s political adversaries.

.

“Since his election, President Trump has attacked the intelligence agencies that concluded that Russia secretly tried to help him win, fostering a narrative that they sought to delegitimize his victory,” claimed the overtly biased Times piece attempting to lay cover for Brennan—and possibly for itself.

Contrary to the article’s claims, Brennan long maintained that there was overt collusion between Trump and Russia, and the Times unquestionably obliged his libelous attacks until they were discredited by the Mueller Report.

“[Trump] has long promoted the investigation by John H. Durham … as a potential pathway to proving that a deep-state cabal conspired against him,” it claimed derisively.

The reporting echoed the debunked Ukraine theories advanced by House Democrats that Trump sought to damage political rival Joe Biden by calling on Ukraine’s new president to re-open corruption investigations involving Biden and his son Hunter.

Both falsely framed narratives preclude the possibility of corruption and malfeasance on the part of the Obama administration, despite a preponderance of evidence already showing their abuse of power in both circumstances.

“Mr. Durham appears to be pursuing a theory that the C.I.A. … had a preconceived notion about Russia or was trying to get to a particular result—and was nefariously trying to keep other agencies from seeing the full picture lest they interfere with that goal,” said the Times.

 1

John Durham / PHOTO: U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut via Facebook

The Durham investigation began last May, shortly after the report by special counsel Robert Mueller determined that there was no evidence to support the theories—long reported by the Times and treated as fact by partisan members of the political Left—that Trump colluded with Russia.

Durham’s investigation, now in its ninth month, is known to have been to several key sites in Europe, where his staff interviewed former intelligence assets who helped to plant and spread the Russian collusion claims during the 2016 election.

In October, the DOJ announced that the probe had become a criminal investigation, similar to the Mueller probe that preceded it, with the power to empanel a grand jury and indict.

The announcement raised the alarm of deep-state intelligence operatives, such as frequent Brennan accomplice James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, who declared on CNN that they had been following the direct orders of then-President Barack Obama.

Durham entered into the investigation with sterling credentials as someone with experience investigating internal corruption.

Yet, the Times suggested that despite his decades of experience investigating the intelligence community, Durham had a fundamental “misunderstanding of how the intelligence community functions.”

The article then attempted to cast aspersions on him and the Justice Department, suggesting that it was Trump—rather than Obama—who had weaponized the law agencies to do his political bidding.

“Mr. Durham’s questioning is certain to add to accusations that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies, like Mr. Brennan, who has been an outspoken critic of the president,” claimed the Times.

However, the intensifying pre-emptive offensive may suggest that Durham has struck a nerve.

Brennan made an appearance Thursday on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” echoing the same talking points as the Times article.

“It clearly, I think, is another indication that Donald Trump is using the Department of Justice to go after his enemies any way he can,” he claimed.

Likewise, CNN head Jeffrey Toobin, an avowed Trump-basher, sought to attack what he claimed, according to Mediaite, was Trump’s ‘grotesque’ score-settling in a separate criminal investigation related to former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

CNN hired McCabe as an analyst shortly before the criminal investigation against him was announced.

As with many of the “facts” springing from his network, Toobin’s accusations were quickly disproven when the Justice Department announced Friday that it was dropping the McCabe investigation.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, D.C., wrote to McCabe’s lawyers “that, after careful consideration, the Government has decided not to pursue criminal charges against your client, Andrew G. McCabe, arising from the referral” made by the Inspector General’s office to investigate his behavior.

Despite the decision, it remains possible that McCabe also will be implicated in Durham’s findings, which are broader in scope than what Inspector General Michael Horowitz was tasked with investigating.

Contrary to exonerating him, in fact, the decision to drop McCabe’s charges in the IG probe may clear the path for further criminal indictments from Durham.