Washington’s swamp just got murkier. Former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey are now under FBI criminal investigations for their roles in the Trump-Russia probe, with allegations of lying to Congress and potential conspiracy, as Fox News reports. The probes signal a long-overdue reckoning for Obama-era intelligence shenanigans.
The FBI is digging into Brennan and Comey’s actions during the 2016 election, focusing on their handling of the discredited Steele dossier and the politicized 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). These investigations, sparked by CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s referral of evidence, aim to uncover whether the duo misled Congress or conspired to push a flawed narrative. Two sources called their interactions a “conspiracy,” opening a Pandora’s box of prosecutorial possibilities.
In July 2016, Brennan briefed Obama and top officials, including Comey, about a Hillary Clinton campaign plan to link Trump to Russia. Declassified notes reveal Brennan’s awareness of this political ploy, which aimed to distract from Clinton’s email scandal. Yet, the FBI launched its “Crossfire Hurricane” probe into Trump’s campaign just days later, raising questions about impartiality.
The Steele dossier, funded by Clinton’s campaign and the DNC, became a cornerstone of the Trump-Russia narrative despite being riddled with unverified claims. CIA officials warned it was a mere “internet rumor,” but Brennan pushed for its inclusion in the 2017 ICA. His insistence, formalized in writing, ignored tradecraft principles and tainted the ICA’s credibility.
A December 2016 email from a deputy CIA director to Brennan flagged the dossier’s inclusion as a threat to the ICA’s integrity. Despite this, the FBI’s senior leadership insisted on referencing it in a footnote. The dossier’s shoddy sourcing, later exposed by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz in 2019, fueled flawed FISA warrants against Trump aide Carter Page.
Brennan’s 2023 testimony to Congress, claiming he opposed the dossier’s inclusion, contradicts his earlier written stance. “The CIA was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier,” Brennan said, a statement now under scrutiny as potential perjury. Such flip-flopping smells like a desperate dodge from accountability.
Ratcliffe, no stranger to calling out Brennan’s politicization, declassified a “lessons learned” review of the 2017 ICA last week. The review exposed a rushed process marred by “procedural anomalies” and deviations from intelligence standards. Career CIA officials admitted Obama-era appointees skewed the ICA for political ends.
The ICA’s claim that Russia aimed to boost Trump in 2016 leaned heavily on the dossier, despite its “limited corroboration,” as noted in a declassified footnote. Ratcliffe’s review confirmed the dossier’s inclusion ran counter to fundamental intelligence practices. This wasn’t analysis—it was narrative-crafting.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt didn’t mince words: “President Trump was right -- again.” She demanded accountability for what she called a “political scandal” that peddled lies to the American public. Her statement captures the frustration of millions who see the probes as justice delayed but not denied.
The FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, launched in July 2016, ignored a clear warning about Clinton’s political scheme. Special counsel John Durham later called this oversight “startling and inexplicable,” noting the FBI’s failure to scrutinize Clinton’s motives. The probe’s haste and bias set the stage for years of baseless Trump-Russia hysteria.
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s 2019 report found no evidence of Trump campaign collusion with Russia, debunking the dossier’s core claims. Yet, the damage was done -- public trust in institutions eroded by a politically charged investigation. Durham’s findings underscored how the FBI became a pawn in a Clinton-led manipulation.
Brennan’s handwritten notes from the July 2016 briefing, attended by Biden, Lynch, and Clapper, detailed Clinton’s plan to tie Trump to Russia. These notes, declassified by Ratcliffe, show the CIA flagged this as a Counterintelligence Operational Lead to the FBI. Comey’s silence on this intel raises red flags about his complicity.
The FBI and CIA have stayed mum on the ongoing investigations, and neither Brennan nor Comey responded to inquiries. Their silence speaks volumes, as the specter of criminal charges looms. The probes’ scope -- potentially including conspiracy -- suggests a deep dive into their coordinated efforts.
Ratcliffe’s referral of Brennan’s actions to FBI Director Kash Patel underscores the seriousness of the allegations. The CIA review criticized Brennan’s preference for “narrative consistency over analytical soundness,” a polite way of saying he cherry-picked intel to fit a story. Such hubris demands consequences.
These investigations could finally expose the rot in Obama’s intelligence apparatus, which weaponized flimsy evidence against a political foe. The American people deserve answers, not more bureaucratic stonewalling. If Brennan and Comey’s actions prove criminal, their fall will mark a victory for truth over partisan gamesmanship.
