➡ The speaker expresses skepticism about the fairness of investigations involving President Trump, suggesting that Trump should oversee such cases himself rather than relying on agencies like the FBI or Justice Department. They also criticize the lack of accountability for actions against Trump, such as withholding Secret Service protection. The speaker concludes by stating that these agencies are conflicted and cannot effectively investigate themselves.

Intent of Russian interference. There you go. They already knew. Before they even wrote the report what it was going to say. They wired it. While officers involved in drafting the ICA consistently said they did not feel pressure to reach specific conclusions, Brennan’s premature signaling that agency heads had already reached consensus before the ICA was even coordinated, risk stifling analysis debate. Of course it did. So the other big news this week, actually a positive piece of news, was the announcement, or again the leak, that there is going to be, there is a criminal investigation of Brennan, the former FDA director under Obama, and James Comey, for alleged perjury and conspiracy.

I don’t know if that includes Comey as well in terms of the directed charges or potential crimes, but they’re trying to investigate them over, it looks like, their role in the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax abuse of power targeting Trump. The question is that they lie under oath, or conspire to lie, conspiracy to commit perjury or something like that, in a way that would require prosecution. And the reason this issue has popped up again is because John Ratcliffe, who is the CIA director appointed by President Trump, directed an analysis of what is called an intelligence community assessment that the Obama gang started up to undermine President Trump.

And the assessment, which is supposed to be top secret, was almost immediately leaked as soon as it was created, and it generated a lot of news because it provided a hook based on the false allegation that Putin wanted to get Trump elected, and they had this dossier that showed that Trump was on the hook with the Russians. It was the Russia-gate smear, the steel dossier smear, that they used to try to destroy Trump. And Brennan’s testimony about that and his role in this is being criminally investigated, it looks like, and maybe Comey’s as well. Now, separately, I still don’t know why Comey hasn’t been arrested yet for threatening or promoting the murder of Trump online, but that’s another matter.

So in this CIA note, which I encourage you all to read, because, by the way, take it with a grain of salt, because it’s the CIA covering its you-know-what in this document. Brennan isn’t around anymore, William Brennan isn’t around anymore, so they can dis him, but they’re going to protect the institution. So essentially what they say is this intelligence community assessment into Russia’s foreign interference was compromised by Brennan and the leadership of the FBI and the White House, etc., forcing the use of the steel dossier, which was garbage, as a basis to suggest that Putin aspired to get Trump elected.

I’m summarizing the document, I’ll get some into detail. And there was really no basis for that other than the fake dossier. And in fact, there was other basis to suggest, which I thought was much more plausible at the time, that the Russians wanted to see Hillary re-elected, or elected, excuse me, and that efforts to interfere in our elections were designed to undermine Hillary if she were president. But that didn’t comport with what the goal of the Obama gang was. Obama did it, I just want you to remember, Obama did it. He directed this fake document that I’m referencing here be produced.

The review identified multiple procedural anomalies in the preparation of the ICA, the intelligence community assessment. I guess I should bring it up now, so you can see some of it at least. Let me see here. Yes, I’m starting to read from the bottom here. The DIA review identified multiple procedural anomalies in the preparation of the ICA. These included a highly compromised production timeline, stringent compartmentation, and excessive involvement of agency heads, all of which led to the departures from standard practices in the drafting, coordination, and reviewing of the ICA. These departures impeded efforts to apply rigorous tradecraft, particularly to the assessment’s most contentious judgment, which was that Putin aspired to get Trump to become president.

It was false. And here’s some sections I thought were sharing with you. I encourage you to read the entire document, which we will link below. On page 3, a D&I report in 2017 indicated that the highest classified version of the ICA had been shared with more than 200 U.S. officials. That’s a way to guarantee it gets leaked. This is unusually high for such a highly compartmental, there’s that word again, compartmented product, and calls into question whether the extreme limitations on access to underlying intelligence within the ICA during the ICA’s preparation was justifiable. So what they’re saying is, we couldn’t look at a lot of the so-called evidence that was being used to justify this crap, yet then they share it with 200 people as if it was, even though supposedly it was one of the most top secret documents in the government.

You know what they were doing. And then Brennan was trying to rig it. One business day before IC analysts convened for the only coordination session on the ICA, Brennan sent a note to the CIA workforce stating he had met with the D&I, Director of National Intelligence, and FBI Director. I think Clapper was Director of National Intelligence at the time. Is that right, guys? And then Comey was the FBI Director. And that there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent, intent of Russian interference. There you go. They already knew before they even wrote the report what it was going to say.

They wired it. While officers involved in drafting the ICA consistently said they did not feel pressure to reach specific conclusions, Brennan’s premature signaling that agency heads had already reached consensus before the ICA was even coordinated risk stifling analysis debate. Of course it did. It’s rigged it. I don’t care what they said they didn’t feel pressure. Their bosses said we already know what the conclusion is going to be. Do you think they’re going to put their heads on a block and conclude otherwise? The decision right under that block by agency heads to include the Steele dossier in the ICA ran counter to fundamental tradecraft principles and ultimately undermined the credibility of a key judgment.

What does tradecraft mean? It generally means the kind of rigorous process through which an intelligence agency officer entity collects information to ascertain its credibility. It’s where it came from. Let’s say a source or sources say this happened. Well, what’s the source interest in saying it? Who else might have an interest in pushing that with us? How is it we are sure that we’re not being played? All sorts of things have to be in place in order for something to be validated as being in line with tradecraft principles. The ICA authors first learned of the ICA and FBI’s leadership’s insistence on its inclusion on 20 December.

The same day the largely coordinated draft was entering the review process at CIA. FBI leadership made it clear that their participation in the ICA hinged on the dossier’s inclusion and over the next few days repeatedly pushed the weave references to it throughout the main body of the ICA. So remember what the dossier was? It was a joint series of memos jointly funded by the Clinton campaign in partnership with the FBI. Christopher Steele was the individual who was managing the creation of this information and it was full of malicious smears, half-truths, no-truths, falsehoods about President Trump and Russia.

I’m not even going to bore you with the details of how wrong it was. But it became the fundamental basis for this ICA. James Comey insisted to be put in there. His buddy Brennan said, sure thing. And it was rigged. And it was used to justify the attempted destruction of President Trump for four years by Mueller through impeachment and all the rest. Now here’s the part where the key thing was, the key judgment, which was false, that Trump, that Biden, excuse me, that Putin, aspired to put Trump in office, was false and elevated among other more likely judgments.

In one instance, the authors cited part of a credibly sourced report that supported the high-confidence assessment on the first two goals of the Putin-directed campaign, undermining U.S. democratic processes generally, right? And denigrating Clinton, but omitted information that conflicted with the aspired judgment, meaning Putin aspired to put Trump in. The omitted information, as well as a small body of other credibly sourced reporting that was also not cited in the ICA, suggests that Putin was more ambivalent about which candidate won the election. So they withheld evidence and manipulated the placement of evidence in this intelligence community assessment that was used to destroy Trump and justify criminal investigations and the destruction of him and his family and countless others.

And by the way, none of this is new. I remember making these observations initially when they said Putin wanted Trump to win. I was like, what was the basis for that? There was no basis. I remember reading the ICA because it was leaked immediately trying to destroy Trump even before he got into office. It was used to push out the Steele dossier. That smear operation eventually led to the destruction of General Flynn’s career at the time and countless others. And it was quite obvious that to the degree the Russians were interested in our politics, it was because they thought Hillary was going to win, like everyone else in the country practically.

Do you think the Russians knew that Trump was going to win? No, they were following what everyone else was thinking. I didn’t think Trump was necessarily going to win. The odds were he was not going to win. It was a surprise. And for them to pretend that Putin was rooting for the underdog when Hillary was on his payroll, practically speaking, is absurd. These are a bunch of criminals. I’m not going to read any more of this garbage. You know why the rest of it’s garbage? Because then they kind of highlight how Brennan manipulated the ICA, but then they say, oh, by the way, generally our product otherwise was perfect, which of course is ridiculous.

The CIA had it in for Trump as much as anyone else did. Not only with this ICA, specifically this fake report or assessment they put out, but generally speaking, it was an intel operation against Trump. It involved the CIA. Now Brennan’s under criminal investigation. Now people say, well, Brennan being under criminal investigation and Comey being under criminal investigation over these issues was a way to distract from the bad news and the disruption over the Epstein fiasco. Maybe. I don’t rule it out. But it’s better than nothing. But I have to tell you, I don’t trust the FBI to investigate this.

I don’t trust the Justice Department to investigate this. And remember, this is just one aspect of the whole lawfare against Trump. What about what they did to Trump the last four years? Trying to jail him for disputing the 2020 election, trying to get him killed, literally trying to get him killed by depriving him of needed Secret Service protection. We’re coming up on the one year anniversary of Butler and there’s been zero accountability, practically speaking. Oh yeah, some Secret Service agents were reassigned or, excuse me, suspended for a few weeks. That’s it. No one’s fired. No one’s being seriously investigated for withholding Secret Service protection and assets from Trump.

So forgive me for still being very, very skeptical of these agencies. I’ve made the point once and I will make it again. No matter the issue, President Trump should, when it comes to these big political cases, cases that touch on politics because of who the potential targets are, he should be running the show. He shouldn’t rely on the Justice Department to investigate the Justice Department, the Secret Service to investigate the Secret Service, the FBI to investigate the FBI. He should pick his own people who report directly to him to run any criminal investigations or potential prosecutions.

He is the Chief Magistrate and that’s what he should do. I mean, look at the conflagration between Pam Bondi and Cash Patel and Dan Bongino now. Do you think those agencies, as they’re currently run, even if they wanted to, could run a complex investigation or a serious criminal investigation, not only of people like Joe Biden and his gang, their family, you know, you name it what needs to be investigated. But also the role of their own agencies in this criminality. They’re conflicted and compromised and it’s not a criticism of them. It’s an observation. The agencies are conflicted and compromised.

Let’s say they’re all great people over there, but they can’t investigate themselves, especially if there are other ways to do it other than the FBI or Justice Department because others can do it. The President can empower them. So I don’t know what the Justice Department is doing, but I know what Judicial Watch is doing. Thank you. [tr:trw].

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.