The Russian collusion hoax is unraveling quickly and there is little time for those involved to save their skins let alone their public images. Look for the rats to start abandoning a sinking ship as evidence piles up that the entire thing has been a set-up to get Trump from the beginning.
Robert Mueller’s vaunted hit squad continues to be revealed as a collection of political hacks whose bias should have been ferreted out early by the former FBI director if he was really running an honest game.
The Republicans in Congress are beginning to ask serious questions about the motivations of Peter Strzok and others as well as their involvement with murky research firm Fusion GPS.
Things are falling apart so quickly that dirty Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe is reportedly backing out of a scheduled appearance before the House Intelligence Committee today.
In a nutshell, the shit is getting ready to hit the fan and Mike Morrell knows it.
Barack Obama’s former acting director of the CIA has come out in an interview with Politico and came clean that it may not have been the best idea for a politicized intelligence community to go to war against in incoming president.
— POLITICO (@politico) December 12, 2017
Excerpted from the Global Politico story “Ex-Spy Chief: Russia’s Election Hacking Was An ‘Intelligence Failure’” as Morrell laments his mistake:
But in a revealingly self-critical and at times surprising interview for this week’s Global POLITICO, Morell acknowledges that he and other spy-world critics of the president failed to fully “think through” the negative backlash generated by their going political. “There was a significant downside,” Morell said in the interview.
The second was in August of 2016, when I became political, when I endorsed Hillary Clinton with an op-ed in The New York Times, and that was a very difficult decision for me, because I had never been political before. I worked at this nonpolitical agency, bright red line between intelligence and policy, and intelligence and politics. So, I had never played that role before.
But I was so deeply concerned about what a Trump presidency might look like from a national security perspective, and believed that there was such a gap between Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump with regard to how well they would protect the country, that I thought it extremely important to come out and say that.
So, I don’t think it was a mistake. I think there were downsides to it that I didn’t think about at the time. I was concerned about what is the impact it would have on the agency, right? Very concerned about that, thought that through. But I don’t think I fully thought through the implications.
And one of the ways I’ve thought about that, Susan, is—okay, how did Donald Trump see this? Right? And from—it’s very important—one of the things we do as intelligence analysts is make sure that our guy—the president—understands the other guy. Right?
So, let’s put ourselves here in Donald Trump’s shoes. So, what does he see? Right? He sees a former director of CIA and a former director of NSA, Mike Hayden, who I have the greatest respect for, criticizing him and his policies. Right? And he could rightfully have said, “Huh, what’s going on with these intelligence guys?” Right?
And so, this stuff starts to build, right? And he must have said to himself, “What is it with these intelligence guys? Are they political?” The current director at the time, John Brennan, during the campaign occasionally would push back on things that Donald Trump had said.
So, when Trump talked about the Iran nuclear deal being the worst deal in the history of American diplomacy, and he was going to tear it up on the first day—John Brennan came out publicly and said, “That would be an act of folly.” So, he sees current sitting director pushing back on him. Right?
Then he becomes president, and he’s supposed to be getting a daily brief from the moment he becomes the president-elect. Right? And he doesn’t. And within a few days, there’s leaks about how he’s not taking his briefing. So, he must have thought—right?—that, “Who are these guys? Are these guys out to get me? Is this a political organization? Can I think about them as a political organization when I become president?”
So, I think there was a significant downside to those of us who became political in that moment. So, if I could have thought of that, would I have ended up in a different place? I don’t know. But it’s something I didn’t think about.
Is Morrell’s frank admission that the IC was politicized a sign that the worm is turning on the Deep State coup against Trump?
That remains to be seen but the tide definitely seems to be turning and the rapid shift away from Russia, Russia, Russia to calls for Trump to resign over old sexual harassment allegations shows that what has always been a bogus witch hunt may be about to implode.