Muhjoo shill #1 here (at least according to (((some))) on this board, kEk).
The latest from former 22 year CIA veteran and Bin Laden unit head Michael Scheurer on John Brennan. Shockingly, he's not a fan.
A few points to recall about John Brennan
Below are a pair of pieces I wrote about the danger the republic would face if John Brennan was ever given a senior position of trust in the U.S. Government. I am reprinting them here because: (a) both appeared on this blog before Godaddy deleted it, and so are not on non-intervention2.com, and (b) Brennan just said he would be glad to testify before the Congress about whether or not he had been part of a coup against the president. I thought the pieces might suggest a few questions that could be asked Brennan if the testimony he is so eager deliver comes to pass.
The first piece is dated 3 June 2018, the second 6 February 2013. The latter was prepared for the Republican Senator’s staffers — at their request — before the Senate hearing on Brennan’s nomination as CIA Director. The Republican Senators ignored the points made in the piece.
Brennan’s innate perfidy has been known, obvious, and ignored for a long time. The republic has paid a high cost for that reality.
————————————————————-
John Brennan and Osama Bin Laden: The protector and the protected? The scent of Arab money?
Posted on June 3, 2018 by mike
I have kept quiet about former-CIA Director John Brennan’s ongoing, near-hysterical tirades against President Trump and the Republicans for two reasons. First, I thought that the critical response was pretty strong and coming from commentators whose words command a large audience. Second, I had my say in this space when Brennan was nominated to the post of CIA Director.
On 1 June 2018, however, I read Brennan’s OpEd in the New York Times. It is an egregious piece of propaganda and faux nostalgia. It also infused with the author’s overweening — and thoroughly baseless – sense of self-righteousness and personal heroism. Two items in the article particularly caught my eye. The first was Brennan’s claim that he is a “non-partisan”, which is true only in the sense of his own willingness to do anything for anybody who will improve his official position and, so, his financial position. The second was his claim that in the Oval Office of four past presidents he had heard the presidents “dismiss the political concerns of their advisers, saying, “I don’t care about my politics, it’s the right thing to do.’” (1)
The latter statement rings hilariously and viciously false to anyone who worked in the Clinton administration to prepare operations for the CIA to capture or the U.S. military to kill Osama bin Laden. Clinton, I happen to know, had ten chances in 1998-1999 to try to end the bin Laden problem and refused each opportunity when it was presented to him.
I never understood why Clinton refused every anti-UBL operational opportunity. Did he honestly believe that Americans would damn him if some Afghan and Arab civilians were killed in an attack on bin Laden that was meant to defend them and the republic, an explanation that he gave to an Australian audience on 10 September 2011?
But now, in the swirl of events that will, pray God, culminate in the annihilation of the republic’s bipartisan governing elite, I wonder if there was more to it than simply Clinton’s personal hubris and moral cowardice, and if that more could be money, Arab money.
WAY MOAR AT SAUCE http://www.non-intervention2.com/2019/02/26/of-venezuela-andrew-mccabe-and-the-coming-reckoning/