Seven Days in January: This Time CIA Soft Coup Plotters and #NeverTrump ers Have Gone Too Far

The online news site BuzzFeed on Tuesday published a letter containing salacious allegations — which even the left-leaning outlet acknowledged are unverified — against President-Elect Donald Trump.

The letter, purporting to come from a retired British intelligence agent, details Trump’s alleged relationship with Russia and contends that the Kremlin has been “cultivating, supporting and assisting” Trump for at least five years.

“Even Donald Trump deserves journalistic fairness.”

It alleges that Russians have been feeding Trump intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, for years. It also details Trump’s alleged “personal obsessions and sexual perversion.”

BuzzFeed acknowledges that it has not verified the accusations and even notes that the document contains a number of basic factual errors. Yet it published the full document.

“Now BuzzFeed News is publishing the full document so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government,” BuzzFeed wrote.

It is a shocking breakdown of journalistic ethics.

Even Mother Jones declined to publish the full details and dossier.

”Even Donald Trump deserves journalistic fairness,” tweeted David Corn, Mother Jones’ Washington Bureau chief.


Having failed miserably to stop Trump's inauguration with their faithless electors plan and now the big bad Russia hacked the election report, a certain faction of the dirty Deep State has apparently decided to go full retard (with all apologies to the mentally handicapped) psyop, figuring if it led to libel suits it would just be a few of their idiot presstitute sock puppets who got burned. But having watched the domestic psyops networks involved in this latest idiotic smear for some time, we think they're badly mistaken -- Trump's enemies have given him a legal pretext to widen a planned shakeup of the U.S. IC into the biggest exposure of CIA criminality and purges since the Church Committee hearings of the 1970s.

As we wrote in the intro to this piece, the salacious skazky (tales) as the Russians call them were released after Trump's supposedly constructive meeting on Friday at Trump Tower in New York with James Clapper and John Brennan, the director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and CIA respectively. Trump acknowledged in a carefully worded statement that Russian hacking of the DNC may have taken place, but focused on the intel community's admission that it could find no evidence any vote machines were tampered with:

“I had a constructive meeting and conversation with the leaders of the Intelligence Community this afternoon. I have tremendous respect for the work and service done by the men and women of this community to our great nation.

“While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines. There were attempts to hack the Republican National Committee, but the RNC had strong hacking defenses and the hackers were unsuccessful.

“Whether it is our government, organizations, associations or businesses we need to aggressively combat and stop cyberattacks. I will appoint a team to give me a plan within 90 days of taking office. The methods, tools and tactics we use to keep America safe should not be a public discussion that will benefit those who seek to do us harm. Two weeks from today I will take the oath of office and America’s safety and security will be my number one priority.” — statement of President-elect Donald J. Trump after meeting with U.S. intel chiefs on Friday, January 6, 2017


The conclusion Trump's closest circle of loyalists may draw from this episode, in which the tiniest fig leaf of respectability (claims that DJT was briefed on 'Russian efforts to compromise him') was used to glue a raft of BS against the wall, in hopes that it would stick? The Washington Establishment and the dirty Deep State are out to destroy him, and appeasement or playing along to pretend some of the neocons' priorities will be served won't work. The fact that CNN had attached famed Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein's byline to the story alongside those of Democrat-machine linked reporters Jim Sciutto and Jake Tapper also revealed the Establishment 'big guns' were out and trained on Trump on the eve of his planned press conference Wednesday.

Another important data point in this crazy scheme was the involvement of Sen. John "McInsane" McCain in circulating the dirty 'Russian kompromat on Trump' dossier for months until turning it over to the FBI-- note that the UK Guardian 'story' about McCain's role is coming out shortly after the wannabe American proconsul to Kiev returned from a 'fact finding' junket to Ukraine and the Baltic states. Did McCain's hosts from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) play a part in concocting this crock of lies? We know Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) also was likely referring to the dossier in his furious letter to FBI director James Comey last October, alleging that the Bureau was holding back incriminating information about Trump and his advisers ties to the Kremlin. But the whole thing is basically a scam, reports built on reports citing an addendum to what was presented to Trump no one without high clearance has seen, which in turn refers to a crock of crap put together by an 'ex' British spook with no name:

To establish the construct of their political narrative they must first set the cornerstone. The cornerstone must appear reasonable and prudent. The cornerstone establishes their ‘high horse’ credibility position.

The team attempts to do this by presenting notification of a two page addendum to the DNI report on Russian interference with the 2016 election. The CNN crew claim the addendum discusses Russians attempting to find opposition research on Trump.

The existence of this addendum comes from the ever predictable “unnamed official intelligence sources” etc. Sound familiar? It should.

The reported claim as outlined by Jack Tapper and crew, within the addendum, stems from a political opposition research file commissioned by Team Hillary Clinton and Team Never Trump in the run up to the election and reportedly executed by a British former intelligence agent.

[Pause and Insert Big Flashy reminder-to-self of Democrat operative Bob Beckel saying he was headed off to England to explore potentially damaging information about Donald Trump’s sexual escapades – January 2nd 2016]


Countdown to Open Confrontation: Trump Didn't Believe the US IC, So Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Threatened PEOTUS "They Have Six Ways from Sunday at Getting Back at You"

Just over a week ago, The Wall Street Journal reported that the incoming Trump Administration planned to pare back the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the inter-agency bureaucracy set up after the 'intelligence failures' of 9/11 and the WMDs that weren't found in post-U.S. invaded Iraq. This along with his tweets early on January 4 suggesting Wikileaks' Julian Assange may be telling the truth about not having obtained DNC and Podesta emails from the Russians, indicated that Trump views significant elements of the 'Intelligence Community' with great suspicion, if not as politicized hacks out to undermine the legitimacy of his presidency.

Nonetheless, under great pressure from the 24/7 chorus accusing him of being soft on Putin and the Russians, over the weekend Trump's spokesman Reince Priebus reluctantly conceded that his boss acknowledged Russian hacking directed against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) if not John Podesta happened. Priebus' acknowledgement on Fox News came after Trump was finally briefed by intel chiefs ODNI director James Clapper and DCI John Brennan at Trump Tower on Friday, when the IC released their alleged consensus report. While praising the (in reality often incompetent and far from apolitical) motives of the US IC, Trump's statement pointed out no Russian hacking effected the actual counting of votes and the intelligence community could not demonstrate any impact on the outcome. Trump then doubled down on defying the Washington Establishment's demand that he bow to their desire to scuttle any detente with Russia, by tweeting that only fools desire conflict with the largest country and second largest nuclear power on Earth.

I don’t know what Trump was thinking when he listened to this load of bovine excreta, but I know that had I been in his position I would have literally kicked the folks presenting this report down the stairs of my house and that I would have immediately fired all the persons and offices linked to the drafting of this text. Why?

Because as somebody who wrote analytical reports himself I know that this report is so bad and vague that it would have been unacceptable even coming from a first year junior analyst, nevermind top intelligence officials. Second, because this report contains absolutely no actionable intelligence whatsoever. So the Russian don’t like Hillary and they say so. What’s the big deal?

Hillary was the most incompetent and Russophobic Secretary of State in US history and had she been elected the risks of thermonuclear war would have been immense. Does it really surprise anybody that most Russians (including yours truly) absolutely hate, despise and fear her?

What is Trump suppose to do now: call Putin and tell him “Vladimir, please tell RT not to criticize US public figures?!”. And what was Trump supposed to answer if Putin replied to him “Donald, the USA has been deeply interfering inside Russia, you ran our country in the 1990s, you rigged out elections, your snipers shot our people from the roof of your embassy in 1993 and your media has been demonizing me personally for years now – and you want me to tone down RT?!”.

The good news is that Trump did the right thing: he ridiculed this absolutely laughable report and reiterated his desire for a good relationship with Russia. - The Saker



As my Swiss/White Russian Floridian The Saker, who used to write analysis for intelligence customers wrote at his blog this week, Team Trump is likely realizing appeasement will never work. The neocons have to be exposed and, wherever legitimate legal cases can be drawn up, indicted as unregistered (Saudi/Qatari) foreign agents, fraudsters, and leakers of classified intel whenever a real case exists. Even with Trump demonstrating his willingness to listen to the spooks who would never lie to the American people about something this big, the enmity between a Trump Administration and elements of the U.S. Deep State still desiring to rule rather than advise is only growing. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY)'s mafia-style threat as Paul Joseph Watson called it, appeared to us to be bluster, hiding fear that the big bad spooks can be made to pay too.

After all, President elect Trump hasn't been smuggling vast quantities of heroin opiates from Afghanistan into Europe or the Americas, nor arming Al-Qaeda through the cutouts of 'moderate Syrian rebels'. If the US IC wants to hurt Trump, people loyal to The Donald have more than a few ways to damage them right back, particularly in the eyes of the 62 million plus 'deplorables' who elected Trump. Remember, reports were already circulating in the French and overseas media even before the WSJ hint of a shakeup that CIA would be purged to some extent, with the only question being how many of outgoing director John Brennan and #NeverTrump former deputy director Mike Morrell's pals would be hearing the signature Trump line, "You're fired" courtesy of incoming director Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS):

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), whose opinion on almost all international issues is different from the US President-elect Donald Trump’s beliefs, is going to experience one of the biggest shake-ups in its history after the inauguration of the new President on January 20, the French Intelligence Online news portal reported in its article, entitled ‘La CIA attend sa purge’. Some former and current employees of the agency compare these shocks with the ones experienced after US President Ronald Reagan got into power in 1980.

According to the news portal, citing circles close to Trump, replacements of personnel in 50 positions can be expected in the CIA. The future director Mike Pompeo, a former Republican congressman from Kansas, is already conducting extensive consultations in Washington in order to form his future team. As a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, he already has a formed circle in the intelligence community.


Trump's Tweeted Message to the Dirty Deep State: I'm the President, Not You, We're Gonna Have Detente With Russia Whether You Bastards and McInsane Like It or Not!

'Trust Us' vs. 'Trust But Verify' When It Comes to the U.S. 'Intelligence Community's' Claims

According to former House Intel Committee Chairman Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) speaking to the soon to be ex-Fox News blonde talking head Megyn Kelly, this document represented the views of only three NOT 'all 17 agencies' as the media had relentlessly claimed. Notably absent from the list of supporting agencies behind the farcical Friday report was the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the same agency current Trump National Security Adviser retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn used to lead. Also notable from the report -- the CIA and America's domestic counterintelligence agency the FBI expressed 'high confidence' in their findings, whereas the NSA's assessment was a weaker medium confidence. While most Americans have no idea what that distinction means, they do know that the NSA has vastly more technical capacity and reach to determine if a Russian state-sponsored hack occurred than the other three letter agencies.

The report itself contained no new technical disclosures whatsoever supporting its sweeping conclusion that Vladimir Putin personally ordered Russia's intelligence agencies to tear down Hillary Clinton and support the election of Trump. As cyber security expert Jeffrey Carr wrote, in a stinging rebuke of the DNC-hired and Atlantic Council linked (a pro-NATO think tank funded by foreign governments such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia) firm Crowdstrike and its CEO Dmitri Alperovich:

If the White House had unclassified evidence that tied officials in the Russian government to the DNC attack, they would have presented it by now. The fact that they didn’t means either that the evidence doesn’t exist or that it is classified.

If it’s classified, an independent commission should review it because this entire assignment of blame against the Russian government is looking more and more like a domestic political operation run by the White House that relied heavily on questionable intelligence generated by a for-profit cybersecurity firm with a vested interest in selling “attribution-as-a-service”.


Besides Jeffrey Carr, whose skepticism of Crowdstrike and the weak publically available evidence to support attribution of the 'hacks' has been cited by The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald, House Intel Committee member and ardent Putin critic Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) has also been critical of the CIA's refusal to directly brief his colleagues with their classified evidence:

Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and a member of the Trump transition team, told me Sunday that he intends to check the sources and analysis of the report.

”With all major intelligence products, we are the legislative branch of government that has a responsibility to do oversight over the intelligence community,” he said. “Given the size and scope of this report, this will be something we will take a look at.”

Nunes said his committee intends to interview the analysts who wrote the report and ask them how they reached its conclusions and the basis for determining with “high confidence” that Putin was behind both the hacks and the leaks of the Democrats’ e-mails. The report says the National Security Agency, which focuses on electronic eavesdropping, has “moderate confidence” in the conclusions.

Nunes of course has been checking the intelligence community’s work since he became chairman of his committee in 2015. But under President Barack Obama, he often complained that he was slow rolled by the spy chiefs. In some cases he had to reach out to lower-level intelligence officials to get information.

Nunes has said he is puzzled by the speed with which the government produced this intelligence product on the Russian operation against the 2016 elections, given that the Obama administration has not previously released unclassified reports on Russia’s hacking and dirty tricks. Russia is alleged to have hacked the State Department’s unclassified e-mail system in 2014. The GRU was linked to a bomb placed outside the U.S. Embassy in Tblisi, Georgia, in 2011. U.S. intelligence assessments of these claims have not been made public.

Nunes has been a tough critic of Putin for some time. In April he said the intelligence community’s failure to understand the Russian leader’s intentions and plans was the greatest intelligence failure since 9/11. On Sunday, he told Fox News that he was skeptical of efforts to work cooperatively with Putin given the failure of past presidents to reset the relationship.



The Missing Chain of Custody from the Alleged Russian Hacks of the DNC/Podesta Files to Wikileaks, Plus @20CONmittee's Either Lying or Revealing NSA Sources and Methods (We'll Go With Lying, as Usual, to a Twitter Fanbase That Will Believe Anything Re: the Russians)

In response to the skepticism of those like the Russia Analyst who've pointed out Julian Assange can't go to the toilet inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, much less receive (unless it's by human courier or carrier pigeon) data from Assange's alleged Russian handlers and GCHQ not know it...all we have are vague references to that 5Eyes surveillance partner to the NSA in The New York Times. That is hardly the slam dunk case that SIGINT fanatics like ex-NSA counterintelligence officer (who was not even involved in the construction of Ft. Meade's bulk collection architecture) John R. Schindler have presented, along with innuendo from people who supposedly still work at NSA about the Russians referring to Trump as 'their guy'.

In their Establishmentarian zeal to bash Trump as an alleged Putin puppet while preserving the absolute freedom of the US IC to leak whatever they see fit, 'ex' spooks like Schindler don't get to have it both ways. Either Schindler's NSA source is authentic and he's revealing classified 'sources and methods', the same kind the apologists of the US IC insist would be burned if further details supporting the quality of the evidence were presented to the public, or Schindler's just making stuff up as usual.

Schindler, who we previously profiled as a domestic psyops pusher and wannabe intel cult leader here, is not surprisingly claiming vindication today from the kompromat dossier that's already being rejected by many legacy media figures opposed to Trump as scurrilous nonsense. So too, are his partners in Twitter warfare against Trump, like neocon 'Mideast expert' and RFE/RL paid hack Michael 'Daeshbag' Weiss and ex-rock groupie turned Heat Street editor Louise Mensch. Together with Evan McMullin and Rick Wilson, all of these people are networked on Twitter, have reportedly pushed talking points to each other by email (according to blogger @LibertyLynx who claims to have been doxxed or publically outed by Weiss or his various sock puppets and 'pro-Syrian revolutioon' aka jihadi fanboy minions).

If Schindler isn't lying in this case and the NSA or GCHQ wiretaps/network hacks really did pick up Putin's men joking inside the Kremlin bathroom about how Trump is their guy, then Schindler's super secret source inside Ft. Meade should have his clearance revoked aka be fired, if not prosecuted. After all, the same wiretaps/bugs Schindler's source may have exposed just to get back at The Donald for allegedly denigrating the spooks, in Schindlerland anyway, could reveal Putin's dastardly plan to send his spetsnaz commandos aka 'little green men' to take over Narva tomorrow!

When the Spooks' 'Protecting Sources and Methods' Excuses Don't Cut It, Especially When They and Lame Duck Obamanistas Are Willing to Risk Those Just to Make Trump Look Bad

Regardless of whether John R. Schindler is talking out of his rear end as usual, the fact remains: the US IC has not demonstrated any chain of custody from the supposedly hacked by Russian intelligence services emails to Wikileaks, only asserted that it's ID'd the intermediaries. IF said intermediaries between Wikileaks and the Russian security services do exist (and Schindler seems to think one of them is Unz Review contributor and Swedish/Israeli citizen Israel Shamir, who is mentioned by name in a recent Swedish report about 'Russian propaganda'), the sources and methods protecting excuse is hardly going to fly when it comes to the U.S. government's revealing failure to indict them.

While handling emails purloined from non-government entities like the DNC in of itself is not a crime -- otherwise journalists could be indicted for reporting the contents -- knowingly obtaining them from a hostile foreign intelligence service like the GRU/SVR could be prosecuted as an act of espionage. The fact that no such indictment has been forthcoming from an Obama Administration that has never hesitated to prosecute American leakers under the Espionage Act or indict Chinese military members it cannot hope to extradite speaks volumes, as to just how confident the US IC is in its supposedly rock solid case in this instance.

Until we see indictments of Wikileaks intermediary with the GRU/SVR/FSB, we'll assume the spooks are lying and they don't have any proof debunking Wikileaks claim that the emails came from disgruntled Democratic party insiders, not the Russian government or its hackers. Again, it's one thing to 'prove' despite only seeing public evidence of 'script kiddie' generic hacking tools (including some proudly offered for download on sites which say 'Made in Ukraine'!) being revealed, that the Russian security services may have gotten inside the DNC or John Podesta's inbox. It's quite another thing to prove the over the top case that Clapper and Brennan have presented to Sen. John McCain's Armed Services (notably NOT the Senate Intelligence) Committee, that Vladimir Putin personally directed this operation and was caught red-handed by US intelligence.

If our intel is/was really that good, logical questions proceed such as -- why then did Russia's response in Crimea and Donbass to the violent U.S.-supported coup d'etat in Kiev, or its overt intervention in Syria come as surprises to the US IC? Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), a notable neocon and supporter of the Syria jihadists, was recently asked that very question by Fox News' Tucker Carlson and could only mumble that the spooks weren't caught off guard by Putin's 'polite people' op in Crimea, plus usual BS about protecting sources and methods.

Perhaps this is why the report has been touted 24/7 in the anti-Trump, all in for Cold War 2.0 legacy media, while having very little resonance with Trump's supporters on Main Street. Whether it's the Snowden leaks that ex-spooks like Schindler complain convinced many right wing Americans that the three letter agencies could not be trusted, or simply ordinary Americans smelling the distinct scent of MSM/D.C. bullshit after so many lies propping up Hillary, The New York Times admits many folks in deep red counties across America aren't all that exercised about the Rooskies reportedly being up to no good:

COVINGTON, La. — “Sour grapes,” explained Bob Marino, 79, weighing in on the recent spycraft bombshell from the corner table of a local McDonald’s.

“Sour grapes,” agreed Roger Noel, 65, sitting next to him.

“Bunch of crybabies,” Reed Guidry, 64, offered from across the table.

The subject of conversation was the report released by United States intelligence chiefs on Friday informing President-elect Donald J. Trump of their unanimous conclusion that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia ordered an extensive, but covert, cyberoperation to help Mr. Trump win the election. The Russians had hacked and leaked emails, unleashed “trolls” on social media and used their “state-run propaganda machine” to spread stories harmful to Hillary Clinton.

In Washington, the report was viewed as extraordinary, both for its timing, raising sharp questions about the president-elect’s legitimacy on the verge of his taking office, and for its assertions, describing the operation as Russia’s boldest effort yet to meddle with American elections, to spread discontent and to “undermine the U.S.-led democratic order.”

But interviews with Trump supporters here in Louisiana, a state the president-elect won by 20 points, and in Indiana, a state he won by nearly the same margin, found opinions about the report that ranged from general indifference to outright derision...

The Russians may have very well gotten involved, several people said. They added that kind of interference should be combated. But many assumed that foreign actors had long tried to play favorites in American elections, and that the United States had done the same in other countries’ elections. Even if the Russians did do it — which some were more willing to concede than others — what difference did it make? People did not need the Russians to make up their minds about Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump’s election opponent. Blaming her loss on the Russians was, as one Trump supporter here said, “just being sore losers.”

“I don’t think the Russians posed as big a problem to the Clintons as the Clintons posed to themselves,” said Paul Emenes, 49, while he sold ribs, shoulders and chops at a frigid outdoor farmers’ market in Covington. Russian hacking was concerning, sure, Mr. Emenes said. He added that, as long as Mr. Trump was not involved himself, “it doesn’t change the way I view him.”


US IC Report Reveals Spooks Obsession with Losing Control Over the Narrative to RT, Formerly a Channel Only Conspiracy Theorists and Guys in Their Mom's Basements Watched

In a revealing window into the U.S. Deep State's obsession (apparently shared by their erstwhile comrade Schindler) with losing control over the Narrative, last Friday's report spent over half its 25-page length discussing the alleged vast influence Russia Today (RT) TV. More bizarrely, the report mentioned shows like Abby Martin's Breaking the Set which were cancelled in 2015, months after Ms. Martin condemned Russian troops Crimea operations before the peninsula's people voted overwhelmingly to secede from Ukraine and join Russia.

The reason for this? According to Sputnik, the slap-dash, amateurish nature of the report is not just an impression, but a fact: many of the report's portions dealing with RT were written in 2012, not 2016-17. The question is, why did it take this long to formally issue these shocking 'findings' that RT and Sputnik have a pro-Kremlin slant and highlight sources of socio-economic discontent in the U.S.? Did all these people have to wait for Politico and War on the Rocks to push out these talking points first before they could formalize them as 'intelligence assessments' apparently written by college sophomore interns at Langley or the ODNI?

A highly-anticipated declassified US intelligence report, aimed to prove that Russia supported Donald Trump, has turned out to be a huge embarrassment. The annex that contained factual material that was thought to provide evidence of RT influencing the American public was compiled in December 2012, right after the reelection of Barack Obama.

The report focuses on television shows and interviews that took place four years before Trump was elected, and well before he was even a politician. In Annex A of the report, intelligence agencies claim that “Kremlin’s TV Seeks To Influence Politics, Fuel Discontent in US.” Buried at the bottom of that page is a note stating, “This annex was originally published on 11 December 2012 by the Open Source Center, now the Open Source Enterprise.”


I am told that the senior civil servants at CIA are expecting a massive purge and re-organization. - — Col. Patrick Lang, USA ret. former Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) analyst


Overall the Kremlin critics are correct that the ODNI/CIA deserve a thank you bouquet from RT director Margarita Simonyan for boosting the Russian state budget allocation cred of her organization.  Finally, in terms of how Trump can respond to corrupted elements of the U.S. IC primarily centered in the CIA trying to support malicious libel of him in the media through 'ex' colleagues such as Evan McMullin, we leave RogueMoney readers with these thoughts from retired Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Army Col. Patrick Lang. Like many other actual experts on the workings of the U.S. IC, Col. Lang saw a significant purge of its ranks as all but inevitable even before #GoldenShowers-gate:

“ ... how tenable is this for Trump? How long can he go on questioning the information he receives from intelligence briefings, as he seems intent upon doing?” Washpost


Wait for it! The answer to the question is - indefinitely. I would think that the Trump Administration will go through the ranks of the SES/SIS position holders at CIA/DIA/NSA, etc. like a scythe. These folks, of whom I was one (SES-4) are not career protected like the lower members of the federal civil service. In return for their elevated rank (equivalent to military flag officers) they lack actual legal job security and can be much more easily removed. They are usually highly politicized schemers and enablers for their presidential appointee bosses at the very top of the food chain. But who will run things!? Well, pilgrims there are lots of eager beaver GS-15s awaiting their turn and eager to prove their loyally to the administration.

Hey, why not ? Payback is a bitch and people like Clapper and Brennan could not have staged this intelligence “coup” without the cooperation of the SES corps.

And then there is the little matter of the chain of command in the federal government. NEWS FLASH!! The IC agencies work for the president. He does not work for them. If he does not accept their analysis - so be it! They are not semi-divine creatures endowed with some special gift of understanding the world, Well, some are, but not many.

Any intelligence is destined to support decision making for policy. It should NEVER be prescriptive. The news idiots keep asking old intelligence hands what policy should be... What a sad joke.

For Trump, the IC is just another consultant group. pl