Nick Shapiro, Mr. Helper for John Brennan, released a statement on Friday after Brennan’s 8-hour interview with US Attorney John Durham and his team of investigators.
Should anything put out from or on behalf of Brennan be taken at face value? In a word, no. In two words, hell no.
The CIA is an agency that trains it’s agents in manipulation using lies and deception, supposedly for good. They use deception to protect the nation, no different from their counterparts. But that doesn’t mean they won’t use their learned skills to get themselves out of trouble.
John Brennan is Mr. CIA, as it’s all he’s ever known. It’s in his DNA.
Brennan wanted to send a message on Friday to the world after his interview, but instead of doing so himself, he chose Shapiro to do it for him. Brennan is a known and proven liar (he lied about spying on Senate Republicans while under oath, and came clean only after evidence was discovered that he lied), so in his case using an emissary to tell a lie means it’s still a lie.
The message was conveyed to make it appear that they were Brennan’s words, but they weren’t. Not technically anyway.
Nothing Shapiro put out was ever spoken by John Brennan. He didn’t once quote the miserable grump and Shapiro provided no evidence of anything anyone inside the interview room said. Yeah, I believe him. Not.
John Brennan runs his mouth all the time on Twitter. It seems as if every time news comes out that he could be in real trouble, the former CIA director kicks out a tweet full of fire and brimstone coupled with insults and lies about our president. I honestly think he believes if he makes these deranged outbursts publicly that people will believe he did nothing wrong during and after the 2016 election and that it was all Orange Man/s fault. Yet, we heard nothing from Johnny.
The best explanation for why Brennan went with an emissary is because he didn’t want to be on record for publicly passing off the bogus lies in the statement. Duh. It allows Brennan plausible deniability.
The statement has CIA written all over it. Since we know that Shapiro wasn’t in the room, everything he put in it had to be given to him, and by making the message appear to be in the third person, Brennan can claim he had nothing to do with it. On top of that, Shapiro has a history of misleading the press and the American people on Brennan’s behalf. In short, we were lied to once again by John Brennan.
Here’s the thing. They conducted the interview at the CIA facility instead of at the DOJ or at the FBI building. Brennan no longer works at CIA, so why did he choose that facility to do the interview? That’s simple, because if he got caught giving a false statement at DOJ or FBI, that would be done on federal land as both of those buildings are in DC, but CIA is out in Langley, Virginia. Brennan would rather be fighting charges in Virginia than the DC federal court.
Shapiro’s statement said that Brennan was advised by Durham that he is not the “target” or “subject” of an investigation but only a witness. To most folks who only know these terms by watching crime dramas on TV, there is no such animal as a “subject” in criminal investigations, and a “target” means that a prosecutor believes he already has enough evidence collected to take to a grand jury for an indictment and later a conviction in a trial.
In that world, you are either a target or you are a witness. There’s no third option. And here’s something nobody else in the media are talking about. If Brennan was nothing but a witness he would have been called in to testify before a grand jury without the need of a lawyer by his side. A high profile guy like Brennan, complete with his own lawyers, wouldn’t be called in to an interview with John Durham and his team of prosecutors if he was nothing more than a witness.
Here’s another thing. Witnesses very often talk themselves into becoming targets during these kinds of interviews, and I believe that was the purpose of his interview with Durham. It certainly wasn’t because the US Attorney thought Brennan would provide any truthful information that would help him with his case.
By law, a prosecutor cannot call a “target” before a grand jury, because the “target” may plead the fifth amendment, and it would seem prejudicial to a jury. This begs the question, if Brennan was not a “target” then why wasn’t he called in to the grand jury to explain his knowledge of the events that took place during the 2016 election?
Here’s how Brennan more-than-likely fell into a perjury trap. John Durham didn’t decide to interview Brennan for 8 long hours just to get his input on small details for outstanding questions they still have about the events they are investigating. Not at all.
They brought Brennan in to answer questions about information they already got from other people they already interviewed, who told Team Durham things that Brennan ordered them to do and not do during and after the 2016 election.
Brennan has a history of lying to save his own butt. He’s comfortable telling lies, because that’s the world he comes from. During his interview with Durham, all he had to do was tell the truth, because Durham already knew the truth to the questions they asked him.
Rich is syndicated opinion columnist for David Harris Jr. and owner of Maga-Chat.com. He writes about politics, culture, liberty and faith.
MAGA-Chat.com, where free speech is still free. JOIN the revolution!