Radio America Online News Bureau

intelligence

Dem Calls ‘BS’ on Biden, Sullivan’s Terrible Answers, Vaccine Boosters

by

Listen to “Dem Calls ‘BS’ on Biden, Sullivan’s Terrible Answers, Vaccine Boosters” on Spreaker.

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome Dem Rep. Seth Moulton, a decorated veteran from the Iraq War, calling ‘BS’ on a key element of Biden’s speech. They also dissect National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s painfully bad news conference on Afghanistan. And they roll their eyes as the CDC urges Americans to get a COVID vaccine booster just days after saying it wasn’t necessary. Will people have to have this to be considered “fully vaccinated”?

Please visit our great sponsors:

Omaha
https://omahasteaks.com
Use keyword MARTINI to save over 50% on the Deluxe Grill Out Assortment Plus get 12 FREE Omaha Steaks Burgers.

XChair
https://xchair.commartini.com
Save $100 on your order and use code XWHEELS for a set of free X-Wheel Blade Casters.

Share

Ex-Deputy National Security Adviser: ‘They Were Trying to Blackmail Me’

by

Listen to “Ex-Deputy National Security Adviser: ‘They Were Trying to Blackmail Me'” on Spreaker.

On Wednesday, handwritten notes concerning Trump National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn revealed FBI agents were approaching their January 2017 interview with Flynn for the purposes of trying to prosecute him or get him fired.

The news comes as no surprise to K.T. McFarland, who served as deputy national security adviser under Flynn, who says federal agents were looking to pin a crime on Flynn and President Trump where there was none  The FBI also put the heat on McFarland to give up information it could use to incriminate Flynn or Trump.

In an interview, with Radio America’s Greg Corombos, McFarland says the FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn and she knows what one looks like because they tried to set one for her too.

“They were trying to blackmail Gen. Flynn. They were trying to blackmail me to either admit guilt to crimes we did not commit or to implicate others.  In my case, it was to implicate Flynn or to implicate President Trump in crimes I didn’t think they had committed,” said McFarland.

She says the FBI tried to nab her in a perjury trap.  And how does a perjury trap work?

“They control all your files, all your text messages, phone logs, emails. They have them. You don’t have them. They have them and they let you see a little bit here and a little bit there and then they quiz you on it.

“If you make any kind of mistake, you get the wrong date, you say, ‘I think that was Tuesday night’ and it was really Wednesday morning, then they can jump and say, ‘Well, you should have known that. We think you’re lying. Therefore, you’re committing perjury,” said McFarland.

Listen to the full podcast to hear the two reasons the FBI and intelligence community wanted Flynn out of the White House, what crimes the FBI wanted McFarland and others to point them too, and what needs to happen to make sure these sorts of tactics don’t happen again.

Share

Adam Schiff Rebuffs Calls for Resignation

by

Listen to “Adam Schiff Rebuffs Calls for Resignation” on Spreaker.

During a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Russian election interference, Chairman Adam Schiff rejected calls from House Republicans to step down after the Mueller investigation found no evidence of collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia. Radio America’s Christian Whittle reports.

Share

Avenatti Arrested, Impeachment Off the Table, Bad Week for Brennan

by

Listen to “Avenatti Arrested, Impeachment Off the Table, Bad Week for Brennan” on Spreaker.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America settle in for three schadenfreude martinis today, kicking things off with the news that attention-seeking lawyer Michael Avenatti is charged with attempting to extort Nike for $20 million and stealing the damages awarded to his clients. They also welcome the news that House Democrats will not be pursuing the impeachment of President Trump. And they blast former CIA director John Brennan for joining “the resistance” and damaging not only his reputation, but also the reputation of the intelligence community, by perpetuating the Russia collusion conspiracy.

Share

‘You Cannot Unring A Bell’

by

A former high-ranking CIA official says President Trump’s refusal to stand by the U.S. intelligence community while on stage with Russia’s Vladimir Putin is “devastating” and believes Trump’s efforts to walk back those words on Tuesday was thoroughly meaningless.

Herbert E. Meyer served as special assistant to Reagan-era CIA Director William Casey and also as vice chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council.  He’s also an accomplished producer and author, most recently writing the booklet, “Why is the World So Dangerous.”

As a Trump voter, Meyer says the president’s inability to decide whether U.S. intelligence or Vladimir Putin is telling the truth about meddling in the 2016 campaign, is deeply disappointing.

“He’s done a lot of good things and I’m supporting him.  What he said in Helsinki was appalling.  There’s just no way around it.  He can apologize.  He can back off, but you cannot unring a bell.  What he said, the entire world heard it.  Sorry, that was devastating,” said Meyer.

Meyer says Trump’s logic in granting equal weight to multiple U.S. intelligence reports and Putin’s denials would be considered ludicrous in any era of U.S. history.

“If somebody got up and said, ‘I don’t know, some people say the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor, but I was talking with the Japanese Prime Minister and he says they didn’t do it.  I have complete confidence in our military, but I’m not sure who attacked us at Pearl Harbor,’ we would say that man’s an idiot,” said Meyer.

In addition to the lack of confidence Trump’s comments inflict among the various intelligence agencies, Meyer says the president isn’t even consistent with his own allies in Congress.

“He trashed not only our intelligence community, but the committees in Congress, Devin Nunes’ committee for example, that issued an extensive report a month ago on what happened,” said Meyer.

Nunes, R-Calif., chairs the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Meyer says a damage to morale is significant damage to any organization and the intelligence agencies are no exception, but he says the repercussions are far more broad.

“It’s devastating, not just to the intelligence community.  It’s devastating to the United States.  If you are an ally of our country now, you can’t pay any attention to what he says, because if it bounces badly he’ll just say something else,” said Meyer.

On Tuesday, Trump read a statement indicating he did accept the conclusions of intelligence professionals that there was meddling in the 2016 campaign.  But Meyer says the clarification still carries two problems, starting with the fact that it comes too late.

“When he walks it back today, it’s meaningless.  It’s like saying, ‘I think you’re a liar.  Oh no, I don’t think you’re a liar.’  It just means that words don’t mean anything anymore,” said Meyer.

“Why should anybody pay attention to what he said (Tuesday)?  He’s only issuing a clarification because it blew up in his face.  I was just watching it on TV when you called me.  He doesn’t believe a word he’s saying.  He’s sort of mumbling it and reading it.

“He’s not only the country’s president, he’s the guy I voted for, and what he’s saying is just awful,” added Meyer.

Meyer is confident Putin is loving every minute of the controversy.  Her doesn’t believe Putin is changing any major policy or plans based on his perceived diplomatic victory, but there’s little doubt that the Russian leader considers Trump’s comments a big win.

“Putin’s primary objective in office is to humiliate the United States.  That’s what he wants to do.  Now you and I can say that doesn’t make any sense, but that’s what he wants to do.  If he could throw a banana peel under our feet, he would rather do that than have another one percent economic growth in Russia,” said Meyer.

Meyer says Trump is causing all sorts of trouble for himself by conflating Russian meddling with political collusion in his own campaign, when the two are distinctly separate issues.

“He folded the two of them together and made everything confused,” said Meyer.

So, is there an avenue for Trump to repair relations with our intelligence agencies?  Meyer’s short answer is no.

“The president and I are the same age.  Guys our age don’t change.  Sorry, what you see is what you get.  Words don’t mean anything.  He could say anything.  He can go out to Langley and give a speech and all that.  It doesn’t mean anything.  He stood on stage with the leader of Russia  and trashed American intelligence,” said Meyer, who finds himself wincing as an American and as a Trump supporter.

“He’s wounded himself and that’s very bad for the United States, whether you’re Republican or Democrat.  We have a president with a self-inflicted wound and that’s bad,” he said.

Share

Dissecting the Memo

by

President Trump declassified the high anticipated memo from House Intelligence Committee Republicans on Friday, and the four-page summary of federal FISA abuses convinces former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli that the government manipulated the system for partisan purposes and that the entire FISA system must be reformed.
The memo casts a critical eye on actions taken by FBI and Justice Department officials since October 2016, the first time they obtained a foreign intelligence surveillance, or FISA, warrant to keep tabs on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page over concerns about his ties to Russia.
The committee Republicans contend the warrant to conduct surveillance on Page was based on a dossier compiled by avowed Trump critic Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent.  Furthermore, the memo says recently ousted Deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe testified just weeks ago that the warrant would never have been issued without the dossier.
The head of the FBI’s counterintelligence unit, Bill Priestap, testified that the bureau had not even vetted the dossier before using it to obtain the warrant, telling lawmakers their corroboration efforts were in their infancy at the time the initial warrant was granted.
That information was not presented to the court, neither was the information that the dossier had been paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli III says one revelation stands out above the rest.
“The biggest single piece of this is that Deputy Director McCabe, no big fan of Donald Trump as best we can tell, testified a little more than a month ago that without the Steele dossier they would not have gotten the initial FISA warrant,” said Cuccinelli.
“Even today McCabe acknowledges that without that dossier information, which has now been largely discredited, they would not have gotten a warrant in this most super-secretive courts that we have in this country,” said Cuccinelli.
Cuccinelli has argued before the FISA court and says the shadowy way it functions ought to be the second biggest headline in this story.
“Is this super-secret court working in a way that we as American citizens are comfortable with?  I’m not, and I think this memo is going to educate a lot more Americans about what’s wrong with how this court works over and above the political gamesmanship that went on with it, coming out of the FBI in the 2016 presidential election,” said Cuccinelli.
The memo reveals that former FBI Director James Comey signed off on the pursuit of the FISA warrant and two renewals.  McCabe signed another, as did former Justice Department officials Sally Yates and Dana Boente.  Current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversees the special counsel probe headed by Robert Mueller, also authorized a renewal.
Cuccinelli says getting a renewal is much easier than getting the initial warrant since FISA court judges are inclined to continue what one of their colleagues already approved.  In addition, Cuccinelli notes that the FISA court approves more than 99 percent of all warrant requests.
“It’s overwhelming.  It would strike you as laughable.  It really begs the question of why do we bother having a court that’s supposed to act as an independent filter?” asked Cuccinelli.
Yet he says politicians keep approving the FISA system to keep functioning in the same way, including a multi-year reauthorization in recent weeks.
“Here you have all these people who have voted to let this process go through.  Virtually the majority in both parties has voted for this multiple times and now they’re upset about it,” said Cuccinelli.
Democrats worked feverishly to prevent public release of the memo – or at least delay it long enough to release their own counterpoints.  In addition to concerns about providing the full context, Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the top Democrat in the intelligence panel, and other federal officials expressed concern about exposing sources and methods in the memo.
Cuccinelli says those need to be feverishly protected but that nothing of that nature appears in the memo.
“There’s nothing in here and this wasn’t changed very much.  We understand there was one change made at Schiff’s request, but there’s nothing in here that touches on sources and methods other than the dossier itself and a Yahoo news article that was also informed by Chris Steele,” said Cuccinelli.
The bottom line, says Cuccinelli, is that a lot of people
“It is Monday morning quarterbacking but this is a constitutional republic and this is what we call accountability.  This does not make the decision-making in the FBI nor the use of the FISA court look very good in the rear view mirror,” said Cuccinelli.
He says Democrats will likely try to make the case that the warrant would have been issued apart from the dossier, regardless of McCabe’s testimony.  Indeed, the memo does mention that George Papadopoulos was being investigated in July of 2016.
Cuccinelli sees the probe of the Trump team and its alleged ties to Russia as a house of cards, and he says there’s only one reason it still has any oxygen.
“This is genuine conspiracy theory stuff.  The only reason it’s treated more respectably is because the media wants to.  They do it for the same reason they were all covering Donald Trump so thoroughly in the Republican primaries – ratings,” said Cuccinelli.
In the end, Cuccinelli suggests Democrats ask themselves a serious question.
“How would the Democrats feel if the Trump administration’s law enforcement arms were able to do this in the fall of 2020?  How do you think they would like?  I don’t think they would like it very much and I think it ought to be fixed before we get there,” said Cuccinelli.
Standard Podcast [ 14:44 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘All About Nothing’

by

Politicians and media are salivating over Wednesday’s Senate testimony from the top figures in the intelligence community and the opening testimony expected Thursday from former FBI Director James Comey concerning the investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign, but a former House intelligence committee chairman says so far nothing has really changed.

On Wednesday, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein joined Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

While each of the men seemed reluctant to say there had been no prodding from the Trump administration on the Russia investigation, all of them rejected the idea that Trump or his team did anything inappropriate.

“In the three-plus years that I have been director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate,” said Adm. Rogers.  “And to the best of my collection, during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so.”

Former House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Pete Hoekstra says that is the most important takeaway from Wednesday.

“What the senators did learn is exactly what they needed to learn, that the heads of these agencies and these departments did not feel any pressure at all from the president or from the White House to stop their investigations of what Russia did in the 2016 election, said Hoekstra, who served 18 years in the House.  He is now chairman of Hoekstra Global Strategies.

He says those hoping for a room full of smoking guns came up empty.

“It really ended up being all about nothing.  I think there were people expecting that they’d hear more about conversations between President Trump and some of these individuals who work with him and that there might have been a revelation that said they felt pressure from the president.  Really, nothing materialized today,” said Hoekstra.

However, Hoekstra says he is glad to see strong bipartisan cooperation from the Senate committee, a process he says ought to bring confidence to the American people that the investigation is being handled responsibly.

That’s also what Hoekstra expects to materialize on Thursday, when the immensely hyped Comey testimony takes place before the same Senate committee.  On Wednesday, the committee released Comey’s opening statement for Thursday.

Both parties are already seizing on different passages.  Trump critics cite Comey’s contention that Trump demanded loyalty from Comey and repeatedly asked Comey to find a way to ease up on former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

At the same time, Comey seems to confirm that Trump himself was never personally under investigation and that Trump’s comments to him, while awkward and possibly inappropriate, did not constitute obstruction of justice or any other crime.

In the end Hoekstra suspects few minds will be changed.

“What the American people will probably see as a result is that the talking heads, for the next 24-48 hours, will both claim victory and some justification for their points of view.  Then we’ll get to next week and something else will take over the headlines,” said Hoekstra, who says investigators should then focus on where the evidence is screaming for them to go.

“(Special Counsel Robert) Mueller’s got to focus on what the original intent of this investigation was: the Russians.  What did the Russians do, not what did Trump do or what did Hillary do, what did their teams do or anything.  What did the Russians do?  That’s where the focus will hopefully now move to,” said Hoekstra.

Hoekstra says the American people will be the ultimate judges on whether the Democrats take their accusations too far.  He admits Republicans would be fiercely critical if Comey had ever suggested President Obama had asked for his loyalty or to go easy on a political ally.

Still, he says Republicans could do themselves a world of political good by actually doing what they promised to do, rather than letting the Russia story suck all the oxygen out of Washington.

“They’d like to have better roads, better bridges, more income, more jobs and those sorts of things.  They’re sick and tired of Washington,” said Hoekstra, who says there’s not reason for the GOP not to plow ahead on its legislative agenda.

As for the ongoing intelligence probe, Hoekstra says we also need to dig deeper into reports of extensive Obama administration surveillance on American citizens.

“I think there should be a lot of focus on the surveillance issue.  This is an issue that I’m not totally comfortable with.  I’d really like to better understand where NSA has evolved in terms of monitoring and unmasking Americans, where that has evolved to over the last seven to eight years since I’ve left the Hill,” said Hoekstra.

Standard Podcast [ 10:28 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Montana Meltdown, Loose Lips Shame U.S. Intel, Impeachment Election?

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America react to reports – and audio – of Montana GOP House candidate Greg Gianforte getting physical with a reporter, who claims Gianforte body slammed him and broke his glasses.  They also shake their heads as Manchester police stop sharing intelligence on Monday’s bombing with U.S. officials after several sensitive items were made public.  And they groan as Washington Post columnist David Ignatius has already decided that the 2018 midterm elections will be all about whether to impeach Trump because he is just so very sure that Robert Mueller will recommend impeachment, Trump won’t resign and Republicans won’t pursue impeachment on their own.

Share

Trump & Intel, Dem Wage Hypocrisy, Mad Dog’s Cell Number

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss reports that President Trump revealed very sensitive intelligence during his meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.  They also get a kick out of a lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee, alleging staffers weren’t paid the current minimum wage for their work in 2016.  And they have some fun with the news that a published photo of President Trump’s bodyguard revealed the personal cell phone number of Defense Sec. James Mattis.

Share

Hoekstra: Bring in the Whistleblowers

by

The former chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence says it would be highly unusual for any raw intelligence transcripts to reach the White House, and he says if any “incidental” surveillance that did go to political operatives, then lawmakers should actively encourage and protect whistleblowers for coming forward.

This week, the current chairman of the committee, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., told President Trump and the media that he has seen evidence suggesting Trump associates and possibly even Trump himself were picked up communicating with foreign targets under U.S. surveillance.

Former Chairman Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., says the idea of transcripts from incidental surveillance ending up at the White House is stunning.

“My sources and what I gleaned from what Chairman Nunes said on Wednesday, it appears there was raw intelligence, actual transcripts of this incidental collection at the White House,” said Hoekstra, who notes that more corroboration needs to come forward to back up the claims from Nunes..

“It’s not that I was generally refused access to raw intelligence .  I never saw it.  I can’t remember one instance.  I checked with my legal counsel this morning just to make sure I hadn’t and said, ‘Is it true I never saw raw intelligence?’  He said, ‘ That’s right.  We never did,'” said Hoekstra.

Under normal circumstances, intelligence on American citizens uncovered by the intelligence community must meet very high standards to move anywhere along the government food chain.

“Number one, for it to see the light of day in any other agency, it has to reach a pretty high hurdle that says we’re going to share this information with other agencies but we’re going to mask the American presence,” said Hoekstra, referring to the practice of obscuring the identity of Americans involved with any foreign surveillance.

“The second thing then is to get those names unmasked.  That’s another high hurdle, because while it’s not illegally collected intelligence, it’s inappropriately collected intelligence because it’s outside of their charter,” said Hoekstra.

Government agencies like the CIA and NSA are forbidden by law from directly ordering surveillance on American citizens.

But with Nunes discussing evidence he has seen but does not have and the top Democrat on the committee focusing on alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, Hoekstra says getting people with direct knowledge of the issue to come forward and testify is essential.

But there’s a problem.

“The intelligence community has some of the weakest whistleblower protections anywhere in the federal government,” he said.

Nonetheless, Hoekstra says Nunes needs to make it safe for intelligence professionals to tell what they know.

“I would open the doors and get on TV and in the hearings and all of that, saying ‘If there are people in the intelligence community who believe that there were things that were done wrong, please come to the committee, bypass the whistleblower steps in the intelligence committee, and bring materials immediately to this committee.  We will protect you,'” said Hoekstra.

Hoekstra also hopes to see the intelligence committee put more heat on the key officials who addressed them this week.

“I would bring (NSA Director) Mike Rogers and I would bring (FBI Director) James Comey back.  I’m glad they’re coming back and I would nail them for what I believe is incomplete testimony last week,” said Hoekstra.

“For that (raw intelligence) information to have found its way to the White House.  I believe that James Comey and Mike Rogers of the NSA would both have known of that information being at the White House.  They should have shared that with the committee.  If anything, they led the committee in different directions,” said Hoekstra.

He points specifically to Comey denying evidence exists to support Trump’s tweet that Obama ordered him to be wiretapped.  Hoekstra says that allowed Comey to dodge the broader issue.

“In the larger context, it is people working on behalf of the president under the authority of the former president may have directly or indirectly surveilled his transition team .  Mr. Comey maybe should have been more open about that,” said Hoekstra.

Standard Podcast [ 9:28 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share