Obama Stopped CIA

PUBLISHED: 10:50 PM 17 Apr 2018

Brennen Outs Obama’s Inaction As CIA Forbidden ‘Any Action’

The former president actively prevented any response because he was afraid.

Why are supporters of Obama not outraged by the news?

There is outrage today that the president did not endorse “cyber action” against Russia for election meddling, but that president is not Donald Trump. Rather, as the Free Beacon observed today, it was former President Barack Obama who “rejected a plan to conduct retaliatory cyber action against Moscow during the campaign,” a fact obtained from former CIA Director John Brennan.

It is written that Obama did not condone action (which the left now wants Mr. Trump to do) against Putin even though there were signs of “unprecedented Russian intelligence operation to influence the 2016 presidential.” This was the ultimate decision at the time and Obama got it wrong.

On Saturday, the former director said that the two-term president was againsta cyber event” because Obama worried that it would make Russia act even more aggressively.

There was consideration about rattling their cages with some type of cyber event,” Brennan stated during a conference of journalists at the University of California Berkeley.

Rather than take a course of “cyber action,” it has been established that Obama relied on “vague warnings to Russian officials” instead.

President Obama was the ultimate decision-maker on that,” admitted Brennan.

Mr. Trump tweeted, “Why didn’t Obama do something about the meddling? Why aren’t Dem crimes under investigation? Ask Jeff Sessions!

Adding to the complexity of this all is the fact that “a former senior counterintelligence official” named Michelle Van Cleave has testified that “the Obama administration weakened American counterintelligence programs by downgrading a top counterspy office.”

This detail is reminiscent of the Chinagate mishaps that took place under Democratic President Bill Clinton, where everyone was made less safe as China got “the bomb.

It does make sense to note that Obama was worried that any actions taken would appear as if a sitting democratic president was trying to sway the elections. Brennan addressed this when he declared, “So if we did more things and stood at the hilltops and cried out, ‘the Russians, the Russians are trying to help Trump get elected,’ and if President Obama who is the titular head of the Democratic Party were to do that, I think that there would have been a lot of people would believe, I think with some justification, that the President of the United States was trying to influence the outcome of a presidential election.

It is also said that when Obama was alerted to the detection of “navigating inside state election voter registration roll computers and other election-related networks,” he feared that Russia would step up efforts if anything was done. So, he seemed to be trying not to make any noise because he feared the big, bad bully Putin.

That is how it seems. After all, could America not just stop the Russians as they were alerted, or did Obama allow American IT minds to gray and become outdated during his 8 years of liberalism?

That appears to be what Brennan said as he added, “They had things that they could have done that they didn’t do.

If Brennan’s claims are true, the Obama administration’s inaction in the face of this Russian cyber aggression represents a serious counterintelligence failure that has had terrible consequences,” proclaimed Kenneth deGraffenreid, former deputy national counterintelligence executive.

It may have all been allowed, too, since data shows that the Russians were not at all trying to help Mr. Trump. Instead, the aim was to create division and this is in step with the goals of democrats as they pursue the Hegelian Dialectic of which they are known for.

One of the details that prove this is the fact that former British spy, Christopher Steele, helped arrange various lies, rumors, and innuendos into a dossier for the DNC to use against Mr. Trump.  Brennan, if he addressed this truth, would show that Putin was helping Clinton, if anyone.

To avoid this from happening, Brennan foolishly opined that “I do not believe he is acting on behalf of them (the Russians).” He does not feel that they swayed Steele, even though the facts imply otherwise.

He does give himself some room to back peddle in the future (which he will surely have to do on this matter) and added, “I do not believe he is acting on behalf of them.

“Good counterintelligence requires an active element beyond collecting and analyzing the secret information that has been uncovered–namely countering this serious foreign intelligence threat in an effective way. The U.S. has the sophisticated tools to do this,” deGraffenreid said, also hinting at this likelihood. America had what it needed, why was it not used?

He went onto say, “There simply is no excuse for not doing so. Our national security depends on American leaders taking the action required.

Signs were cropping up in 2015 that Russia was snooping, but on Aug. 4, 2016, Brennan became the first official to contact Alexander Bortnikov, head of Russia’s FSB security service, and to protest. “I told him rather directly that if the Russians were to go down this road, they would pay a significant price. “I told him that all Americans would be outraged by a Russian effort to try and interfere in our election.”

His words were as hollow as a soda straw, of course, since it appears that no “significant price” has paid at all!

Let it be remembered that “Brennan disclosed that in 1976 he voted for the Moscow-backed Communist Party USA candidate for president, Gus Hall, during the height of the Cold War,” according to CNN.

Since that mindset lines up rather perfectly with the DNC, Brennan, Obama, and “Crooked” Hillary Clinton, the concept that inaction was the democratic president’s answer to the Russian meddling is hardly shocking.