Pictured: Former CIA Director John Brennan. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
In a shocking moment of honesty and clarity, Obama CIA Director John Brennan gave the rest of America keen insight into The Washington DC Establishment's plans and actions for the Trumpsters and other "Deplorables" populating the land.
In an interview, Brennan lies and exaggerates to the public about a supposed domestic terrorist insurgency across the country that is gaining strength and threatening the republic. Brennan asserts that he knows that members of the Biden team:
"... are now moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about what looks like insurgency movements that we've seen overseas, where they germinate in different parts of the country, and they gain strength, and it brings together an unholy alliance, frequently, religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians. And, unfortunately, I think there has been this momentum that has been generated as a result of, unfortunately, the demagogic rhetoric of people that just departed government, but also those that continue in the halls of Congress. And, so, I really do think that law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence, and even defense officials are doing everything possible to root out what seems to be a very, very serious and insidious threat to our democracy and our republic."
How do libertarians and authoritarians fit in the same rhetorical political basket? Very tough to reconcile those positions, unless you really do not care about the "logic" of your assertion. Why did Brennan leave out communists? Brennan reportedly voted for Communist Party presidential candidate Gus Hall in 1976, while a student at Fordham University. What about Islamic supremacists? Why did Brennan leave them out of the "unholy alliance?"
Answer: Because it STILL is really all about Trump, Trumpism, and Trumpsters, and destroying any remnant of the MAGA movement. Anyone outside the Uniparty is suspect. In case you still do not get it yet – The Establishment holds staged Uniparty events like a solidarity and bipartisanship wreath-laying. Political cowards stage this sort of propagandistic thing at Arlington National Cemetery – using real heroes as props. It is not a pretty sight.
The proposed solution for the threat Brennan and The Establishment see is Rep. Adam Schiff's (D-CA) new domestic terrorism law proposal. Schiff, who cannot be trusted given his documented track record on his "proof" of President Trump's "collusion" with Russia, and his failed effort to impeach Trump out of the secretive meetings of the House Intelligence Committee, made the following statement in conjunction with his new proposed law:
"When violence fueled by homegrown, hateful ideology poses a more immediate threat to the safety and security of Americans on American soil than an international terrorist organization, it's time for our laws to catch up."
We have every reason to suspect Schiff's motives and the law enforcement legitimacy of his proposal. Combined with Brennan's theories – this sort of thinking comprises the dark fantasies of people seeking to destroy liberty in the name of defending the Constitution.
Thankfully, not everyone in Washington, DC is buying the nonsense. Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) spoke intelligently in opposition to the Schiff, Brennan, and the "deprogramming Trumpsters" mania. Like Gabbard, there are some who have clearly articulated the truth: These overreactions are an unconstitutional over-reach that threaten our individual liberties
You will recall that Brennan once tweeted at President Trump:
"When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America... America will triumph over you."
Now, your government has doubled-down on Brennan's dark fantasies of insurgent guerrilla forces germinating in different regions of the country, seeking to overthrow the government. The Department of Homeland Security just issued a bulletin alerting the public about a growing risk of attacks by "ideologically-motivated violent extremists" agitated about President Biden's inauguration and "perceived grievances fueled by false narratives." Troops, apparently without credible threat, will reportedly be remaining in Washington DC until the end of March.
Purportedly, the bulletin aims to warn the public about a "heightened threat environment" across the United States "that is likely to persist over the coming weeks." [Read: years]. Who are these people behind the "threat?" Homeland Security has an obligation to name names and identify groups. Give us a "Most Wanted" list of 10 people. We just had 25,000 National Guard troops protecting a few politicians in an empty city during the Biden inauguration. What are we reacting to now?
Pay close attention here:
"DHSFo does not have any information to indicate a specific, credible plot; however, violent riots have continued in recent days and we remain concerned that individuals frustrated with the exercise of governmental authority and the presidential transition, as well as other perceived grievances and ideological causes fueled by false narratives, could continue to mobilize a broad range of ideologically-motivated actors to incite or commit violence." [Emphasis added.]
The Biden administration, its allies, advocates, and television sock puppets are advancing a Constitution-threatening series of initiatives disguised as "safety and security" measures. This, combined with the Big Social Media-backed suppression of free speech, and not-so-subtle "shaming," are all aimed at crushing opposition and stopping people from questioning decisions, motives and authority. The pressure is palpable. Our liberties are in grave danger.
Chris Farrell is a former counterintelligence case officer. For the past 20 years, he has served as the Director of Investigations & Research for Judicial Watch. The views expressed are the author's alone, and not necessarily those of Judicial Watch.