How Did John Brennan Ever Get A Security Clearance? Secret Trips To Russia And The Creation Myth Of Russian Collusion.

by Ruby Henley

President Trump had every reason to revoke Ex-CIA John Brennan’s security clearance.  It should have been done a long time ago, considering his past testimony in which he stated “no evidence of Russian collusion.”

The MSM is having a field day with this latest action by President Trump, and, of course, John Brennan is pouting like a spoiled little boy.  He got caught by the President of the United States one too many times with the botched Russian collusion story. Lest he forget he is a CIA Director no more, but Donald Trump is the sitting President of the United States.

In the video below President Trump tells it like it is, while reporters question him about his reason for revoking the security clearance of John Brennan.


In a report from last year, I spoke about the confusion surrounding a testimony by John Brennan.  I mentioned several different reports, which were quite perplexing.

In one instance, ‘Breitbart News Daily,’ SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam talked with the Center of Security Policy President Frank Gaffney about the testimony of former CIA DIRECTOR JOHN BRENNAN on Tuesday to the House Intelligence Committee about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Brennan was asked the question if any evidence of actual “collusion” between the Trump 2016 campaign and the Russian government had been uncovered.  He said, “No such evidence has been found.”

“What I think he’s stating there, and has elsewhere, is if there is reason to suspect that our government is now under undue influence from foreign agents – or a candidate is, or an election may be – that there is a duty to look into it,” he said of Brennan’s testimony.

Kassam made the following statement:  “One of the things I believe very much needs to be done is rather than chase the will o’ the wisps, let’s get these investigators looking into actual evidence, abundant evidence, in fact, that exists of assorted Democratic officials – including, notably, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama – who engaged in activities with the Russians,” he added.

Gaffney said. “Those should absolutely be looked at against the prism of the Russians not being our friends. I didn’t see John Brennan expressing any interest in those sorts of investigations at all, either when he was in office or now, for that matter.”

He advised the Trump administration not to attempt blocking investigations and, instead, “insist that the investigators, both Robert Mueller and the congressional investigators, broaden the focus of their investigations to ensure that we get an actual investigation into the full extent of Russian influence operations, whether they were aimed at this past election or previous elections or simply stealing our technology or otherwise subverting our national interest.”



In another report, I want to refer to a short transcript from Fox News:

JILLIAN MELE: President Trump hiring a lawyer to represent him in the federal investigation into his campaign’s alleged ties to Russia. This, despite former CIA Director John Brennan telling lawmakers there’s no hard evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia.


REP. TREY GOWDY (R-SC): Did evidence exist of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors at the time you learned of 2016 efforts?

JOHN BRENNAN: I don’t know whether or not such “collusion,” that’s your term, such collusion existed.



Unless one actually documents the reports and quotes Brennan’s own words, one cannot decipher the truth from fiction.  With each day, MSM reports a different version of the same story.


I am going to be honest, as I look back on this past report I simply become disoriented from the conflicting news.  I had to review it several times to decipher the contents. Maybe you will have better luck.



CHRIS CUOMO: To those who do not want to believe there’s any collusion, they say ‘John Brennan just said it, there is no proof, they’ve been investigating this forever, there’s leaks all over the place. This is a hoax, the president is right.’ Your response?


PHILIP MUDD: Chris, let’s watch this over the next day or two because Sean Spicer and the White House have consistently misportrayed what intelligence officials are saying. Let me give you a clear distinction between intelligence and investigations. The intel guys are going to get the intelligence. That is, for example, intercepts of Russian communications, showing, at most, one half of the story, and more than likely significantly less than one half. They do not have visibility that is intel guys like the DNI, the director of national intelligence, and the CIA director, into the significant part of the investigation that’s conducted by the FBI. Interviews of American citizens. Looks into their travel, into their financial records. So of course the intel guys are going to say, “I saw some smoke when Russian people talked about their interactions with the Americans.” But there’s no way you can look at one half of the conversation and draw a conclusion about collusion.




ALISYN CAMEROTA (CO-HOST): Did collusion exist? That’s the burning question that everybody wants answered. And then Brennan says, “Well, I know of contacts and communication.”

MUDD: Well [Rep.] Trey Gowdy [(R-SC)] ought to have his ass kicked. He knows the difference between intelligence and evidence. Let me tell you something, Alisyn. If you’re an American citizen, and the National Security Agency collects intelligence that is intercepts of Russians who report what you said, do you think it’s fair to go to a court and say that’s evidence of something that you did wrong? That’s why the FBI’s going to take a year or more to investigate this because the American citizens involved in this have a right to have evidence presented in a court beyond a conversation that a Russian official reports. In my world, this distinction is black and white. It is a hard line. I know it’s frustrating for the American people, but I hope they don’t want evidence to be perceived as something that a Russian official says, and that’s it, you can be convicted on that.



I am not getting this, so I am going to look further.  Lets look at this from another angle. Ex-CIA Mike Morell said the Obama Administration did nothing to deter Russian/ US collusion.

Brennan revealed for the first time that he was so concerned about Russia’s attempts to meddle in the election that he contacted Alexander Bortnikov, Russia’s FSB chief, on Aug. 4 to warn him against continuing its active measures against the U.S.

President Obama is said to have warned Russian president Vladimir Putin the following month against interfering in the election. But the Kremlin appears to have not been deterred.

What struck me…is that the U.S. government was concerned enough last summer about Russian interference in the election that they had the CIA director make contact with his Russian counterpart and tell them to stop,” Morell said Wednesday.

“So my question is what did the Obama administration do after that, after they learned that the warning had fallen on deaf ears,” said Morell.

We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!

“Well it appears they did nothing,” host Norah O’Donnell chimed in.

“It appears they did nothing,” Morell agreed.



Ok…let’s look further.  Let’s look at how Diane Feinstein sees it:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.), who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said she had seen no evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump’s associates and Russia during the 2016 campaign.

CNN host Wolf Blitzer recalled Feinstein previously saying she hadn’t seen any evidence of collusion and asked her on Thursday: “Has anything changed since we spoke last?”

“No it hasn’t,” Feinstein responded on Blitzer’s show “Situation Room.”

Feinstein touted newly-named special counsel Robert Mueller as “sophisticated.” Blitzer responded by continuing to press her on whether she saw any evidence of collusion.

In conclusion, your guess is as good as mine.  Whoever would think the truth could be that hard to decipher, and it is not even in a foreign language?  However, these officials are so used to lying, they would not know the truth from a hole in the ground.



So as we look back, I think we can obtain a better view of the reasons President Trump had for revoking the security clearance of John Brennan.

Furthermore, the entire witch hunt began with John Brennan. In reality, John Brennan should never have obtained a security clearance.

The following article is the best I have read on Brennan, and it is essential you read it.


The real story about John Brennan’s security clearance is not that he lost it under a Republican president but that he once got one. One of the peculiar footnotes of Brennan’s history is that he obtained a position in Bill Casey’s CIA after having supported the Soviet-backed American Communist Party at the height of the Cold War. Had Casey conducted the polygraph test in which Brennan admitted to voting for Soviet proxy Gus Hall in 1976, Casey would have tossed him out of the office. Casey hated communists. Whoever hired Brennan must have been a Deep State holdover from the Carter years.

All of Brennan’s propaganda about “Trump-Russian collusion” is just sour grapes over the loss of his preferred candidate, Hillary, for whom he was desperately auditioning by launching an unfounded investigation into her opponent, and a remnant of his pro-Soviet nostalgia. Brennan’s much-vaunted “conscience” was pricked not by Soviet leaders who slaughtered their own people and enslaved hapless nations but by a Russian leader who — brace yourselves — isn’t keen on postmodern Western propaganda in favor of gay rights. Brennan prided himself on his “commitment” to alternative lifestyles and would pad down the halls of the CIA in a “rainbow lanyard,” as Bill Gertz once reported. Putin’s refusal to hold “gay pride” parades in Moscow infuriated Brennan. He also didn’t care for Putin’s unsentimental approach to Islamic terrorism. Brennan defined jihad as “self-improvement” and lobbied Obama to embrace the fanatics of the Muslim Brotherhood. Brennan got his wish when the Obama-backed Morsi rose to power in Egypt and wrecked it.

The only criticism that Trump deserves for yanking Brennan’s security clearance is its delay. He should have done it on day one. Brennan was a security risk from the start — an anti-American radical of staggering proportions who should never have been permitted within a hundred-mile radius of Langley.



In conclusion, do not forget the words of the past, for that is the only way to catch these Deep State operatives.

Although, one may document the past for future reference, it is becoming useless as so many stories change daily.  It is almost as if we have no history of the truth to look back on. We see the ‘facts’ disappearing into thin air, as we grasp desperately to retrieve them.

This is creating a vacuum where the truth used to be, and we are entering a faux information age.


As I was wrapping this report up, I came across another very important article, which I am thankful for.  This is of major importance in the Brennan story.


“It’s no secret that Brennan was here,” claimed Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Oleg Syromolotov.  “But he didn’t visit the Foreign Ministry. I know for sure that he met with the Federal Security Service (the successor agency to the Soviet KGB), and someone else.”

No further remarks clarify what Brennan was allegedly doing in Moscow or what he discussed with the FSB.  Syromolotov insists it had nothing to do with Russia’s withdrawal from Syria.

Sputnik News, a Kremlin-controlled propaganda outlet, quotes CIA Director of Public Affairs Dean Boyd as affirming that Brennan did, in fact, discuss Syria during the visit.  “Director Brennan,” he allegedly said, “reiterated the US government’s consistent support for a genuine political transition in Syria, and the need for [President Bashar] Assad’s departure in order to facilitate a transition that reflects the will of the Syrian people.”

Brennan once proudly admitted that he voted for Communist Party leader Gus Hall and openly supports liars and perjurers like Andrew McCabe, James Clapper, and James Comey.  The possibility that he went to Moscow to personally obtain a copy of the dossier and similar material is real. As I wrote here recently, Brennan may have colluded with foreign spies to help Hillary Clinton.

There is another scenario as plausible as the one asserting that Team Trump, and perhaps President Trump himself, colluded with the Russians.  It is that John Brennan himself colluded with the Russians to help Hillary win to guarantee his continued tenure as CIA director. It involves the infamous anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, used by Brenan and others as a pretext for a Trump investigation bonanza.

Read more:

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook



In conclusion…again…I think we now have a better understanding of why John Brennan had his security clearance revoked.  C’mon, Brennan, man up and pay the price you should have paid a long time ago.



Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.