Why was it so important to Brennan, Comey, McCabe, et al. to bust through layer upon layer of standard investigative and analysis protocol to convince the public that "Putin had a clear preference for Trump and aspired to help him win"?
Why not keep the assessment within...
Why not keep the assessment within...
...the lines of vetted, verified or verifiable evidence and simply report that Russia was attempting to sew doubt and discord into our election process through hacks and fake Facebook-centric influence operations?
If their goal, as they often state, was to alert the country...
If their goal, as they often state, was to alert the country...
...to these tactics (as they did in the joint DNI/DHS statement in October 2016), why was it so important to take the next step and claim it was all in service of Putin's desire for Trump to win?
The answer is simple: It's because they were desperate to tie Trump to Russia...
The answer is simple: It's because they were desperate to tie Trump to Russia...
...in order to initiate their own influence operation to bring him down. This was their pretext - false or sketchy as the intel backing it up may be - and they desperately needed that hook to justify their subsequent actions.
The Steele dossier was a central part of that hook...
The Steele dossier was a central part of that hook...
...regardless of how many times they tell us it played no role in their actions. It did. Brennan testified that he didn't see the Steele dossier until December of 2016 but the letter Harry Reid sent to Comey right after being briefed by Brennan in August 2016 almost directly...
...quoted the Carter Page allegations in the Steele dossier segment dated July 19, 2016. 
How could it be that Brennan had no knowledge of the dossier prior to briefing Reid of the Page allegations in August?
All of this raises a question that should be put to Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Clapper, Strzok, Page and their fellow travelers:
If Putin's "clear preference...
All of this raises a question that should be put to Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Clapper, Strzok, Page and their fellow travelers:
If Putin's "clear preference...
...for Trump" and his aspiration to "help him win" was such an important and dispositive indicator of potential malfeasance, what conclusions should we draw from your clear preference for Clinton and your aspirations to help her win?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
