Now, there's so many reports coming out that underscore the fact that there has definitely been an intelligence community political war being waged against President Trump.
We can see that the alphabet agencies were totally politicized under the former administration.
We're protecting Hillary Clinton while trying to harm President Trump.
And now we have an ex-spy chief who gave an interview to Politico about Russian meddling in the election, but he actually makes some very surprising admissions where he talks about his leading role within the CIA and how they were waging a political war against the incoming president.
This is former acting director of the CIA, Michael Morrell.
Who describes his actions as something he didn't fully think through.
In August of 2016, when I became political, right, when I endorsed Hillary Clinton with an op-ed in the New York Times, and that was a very difficult decision for me because I had never been political before.
Okay, so flash forward a year.
Was that a mistake?
So I don't think it was a mistake.
I think there were downsides.
Politico summarizes the interview in a revealingly self-critical and at times surprising interview.
Morrell acknowledges that he and other spy world critics of the president failed to fully think through the negative backlash generated by their going political.
This was a significant downside.
Let's put ourselves here in Donald Trump's shoes.
So what does he see, right?
He sees A former director of CIA and a former director of NSA, Mike Hayden, who I have the greatest respect for, criticizing him and his policies, right?
And he could rightfully have said, huh, you know, what's going on with these intelligence guys?
It embroiders his narrative.
Exactly.
And then he sees a former acting director and deputy director of CIA criticizing him and endorsing his opponent.
And then he gets his first intelligence briefing after becoming the Republican nominee and within 24 to 48 hours there are leaks out of that that are critical of him and his then national security adviser Mike Flynn.
And so this stuff starts to build, right?
And he must have said to himself, what is it?
With these intelligence guys, are they political?
So Morel was surprisingly frank for someone who worked in the CIA, and he's admitting that, you know what, it probably wasn't very smart for the intelligence community to leak against the incoming president and to publicly bash him.
Now, this Michael Morel, he was...
Someone who took the unusual step of openly endorsing Hillary Clinton in a New York Times op-ed.
It was entitled, I ran the CIA. Now I'm endorsing Hillary Clinton.
So in this New York Times op-ed, Morell goes so far to say that he was committed to doing everything in his power to getting Hillary Clinton elected.
And he makes this outrageous claim that Putin himself had recruited an unwitting Trump to be a member of the Russian Federation.
Basically underscoring President Trump's feelings that there is a political divide within these intelligence agencies and that they've been politicized.
Now there's even some damning text messages between some high-level FBI officials that basically suggest that the Russia collusion investigation is a sham.
They saw it as sort of an insurance policy to derail Trump if indeed he did get elected.
Russiagate.
Yeah.
Or whatever we want to call it.
I don't know if you have a better name for it than that.
Based on your sort of intelligence analyst hat, looking at the dots that are out there, how do we construct a narrative around them that makes sense?
Is there enough information?
The New York Times, the Washington Post, every media outlet that is worth its salt has reporters digging into this, and they haven't found anything.
And I think that had there been something there, they would have found something.
And I think Bob Mueller would have found it already and it would have leaked.
So I'm really open to the possibility that there's no there there on a crime being committed by the campaign and the Russians.
So in this interview, Morell is actually confirming Trump's concern that there was a Russiagate fake news, willful intelligence leaks that were meant to harm the president.
He's admitting all of this is going on.
Then he becomes president, and he's supposed to be getting a daily brief from the moment he becomes the president-elect, right?
And he does it.
And within a few days there's leaks about how he's not taking a briefing.
So he must have thought, right, that who are these guys?
Are these guys out to get me?
Is this a political organization?
So he's talking about the fact that the president...
Doesn't really trust his intelligence briefers.
And why would he?
Let's not forget that Harry Reid himself, during the 2016 election, said that he hoped the CIA would give him fake intelligence briefings, that Trump was too dangerous to be receiving classified information.
You can tell none of these government agencies expected a Hillary Clinton loss.
They did not see it coming.
That is why they were so bold in their nefarious dealings and going out of their way to demonize.
And really, we should be thankful for this Russian collusion investigation because it's brought to light so much evidence of actual collusion between the Hillary Clinton campaign, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, and the media itself.
Just really the worst politicization of all of these government departments and our very untrustworthy mainstream media.
The question is now, what are we going to do about it?
In ancient times, man roamed the earth in a constant state of hunting or being hunted.
Introducing Caveman, where cutting-edge science meets ancient super nutrients.