John Brennan Entered CIA in 1980 Though Voted Communist in 1976

If true, a remarkable admission by the man who many credit with creating the Russiagate psyop, which now dangerously poisons relations between the two greatest nuclear powers on earth.


Crossposted with Strategic Culture Foundation

Barack Obama’s CIA chief, John Brennan, told the Annual Legislative Conference of the Congressional Black Caucus, on 15 September 2016, in Washington DC, that when he had applied in 1980 to join the CIA, he admitted to them that in the 1976 Presidential election, when Jimmy Carter was running against Gerald Ford, Brennan had voted instead for the candidate of the US Communist Party, Gus Hall, and that he was then greatly relieved to find that this information didn’t cause rejection of his CIA-application. This had happened 11 years before the 1991 end of the Cold War (which ended actually only on the Russian side, but not also on the US-NATO side, where it continues without stop, and has accelerated since 2014, now finally being joined by both sides).

The Caucus made no mention of Brennan’s having spoken there, nor did the CIA include in its public archives any indication that he had spoken there, though, for example, they did include the complete transcript of “Director Brennan Delivers Keynote at Miles College” on 13 September 2016, in Birmingham Alabama, at which event he said nothing at all that was newsworthy. (The Miles College event was mentioned by CBS, in this brief video.)

Furthermore — though there is online a webpage devoted to, and covering each day of, the 2017 Annual Legislative Conference, on 20-24 September of last year — the webpage for the 2016 Conference, on September 14th-18th, mentions events only on September 14th and September 17th, as if Brennan hadn’t even appeared there at all. The entire day’s events on September 15th are missing. So: both the Caucus, and the CIA, blacked-out his 15 September 2016 presentation, and the transcript of it isn’t publicly available (nor is any video or audio of it available publicly).

However, a little coverage of Brennan’s remarkable statement did appear in the press, first, as a sparse and poorly written news-report on CNN that didn’t even mention where Brennan had made the remark (nor in which year he had voted that way), and, then, finally a week later, in a professionally competent news-report, at Buzzfeed, titled “Congress Doesn’t Really Care That The CIA Chief Once Voted Communist”, and reporting, on September 22nd, that, “Brennan copped to the vote in little-noticed remarks last week [September 15th] at the Congressional Black Caucus’s annual conference. The spy chief spoke of his stomach-turning fear while undergoing the vetting process to be employed at the CIA in 1980 — strapped to a polygraph during the height of the Cold War,” and “Brennan said he came clean about the his 1976 ballot during the polygraph, expecting it to disqualify him from a clearance. But to the director’s surprise, he was offered admission to the agency, and, nearly 40 years later, landed in the top office.” Furthermore, when Buzzfeed’s reporter, Ali Watkins, asked some US Senators what they thought about Obama’s having selected to run the CIA a man who only a few years prior to joining the CIA had voted for the communist candidate, Gus Hall, none seemed to care. Whereas the war against communism had ended, the war against Russia still has not, and so Senators from both Parties didn’t want to talk about the matter — didn’t want to draw the public’s attention to the clear fact now, that the ideological excuse for the Cold War had been merely a fake, a rationalization, all along, on the American-NATO side; that the Cold War was never really about communism at all, but about conquest, on the American side — that Soviet, and then Russian, leaders had been conned into thinking that abandonment of communism and ending the Warsaw Pact mirror to America’s NATO military alliance, would bring peace with The West. Increasingly since 1991, it has been made clear that Russian leaders had been swindled.

In 2013, when the Obama Administration was intensifying its efforts, in conjunction with the Sauds, to replace Russia-allied Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, the Wall Street Journal reported that “Mr. Brennan has been in periodic contact by phone with Prince Bandar”, who until 9/11 had been personally financing at least two of the 15 Saudis who were among the 19 hijackers/pilots; and, moreover, Bandar and his brothers were the main funders of Al Qaeda throughout the period leading up to 9/11. And, furthermore, Bandar had worked with the US Government before Al Qaeda even existed, so as to help Osama bin Laden to set up Al Qaeda, originally against the Soviet Union. (And, now, Al Qaeda is America’s key organization leading Syria’s jihadists to overthrow and replace Syria’s Government.)

On 29 November 2015, Andrew Emett of Activist Post bannered “Obama Accepted $1.3M In Gifts Last Year From A Country Who Beheads More People Than ISIS” and he reported and documented that, “Although the State Department listed several gifts to CIA Director John Brennan and multiple anonymous agency employees, the donors’ names have been redacted because ‘such information could adversely affect United States intelligence sources or methods.’ Besides receiving a $10,000 Omega men’s watch, Brennan was also given a $7,500 decorative rug.” And, “the Saudi king gave President Obama and his family roughly $1.35 million in gifts last year.”

Then, on 28 September 2016, Eli Yokley at Morning Consult headlined “Congress Overrides Obama’s Veto of 9/11 Bill” and reported that:

“Congress on Wednesday forcibly voted to override President Obama’s veto of legislation that would allow 9/11 victims’ families to sue the government of Saudi Arabia, despite Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan’s warning of “grave” risks to American national security if it becomes law. Despite his late plea, the Senate voted 97-1 to override Obama’s veto… In the House, the override attempt passed in similar fashion, 348 to 77.”

Those Senators and Representatives of the Sauds needed to display public support for the victims of 9/11, but Obama wasn’t running again, so didn’t need to worry. Anyway, the entire 9/11 case remains in legal limbo now under Trump.

Whereas the Sauds’ main strategic objective, in fulfillment of an agreement the royal Saud family had reached with the fundamentalist-Sunni Wahhab family in 1744, is to defeat Iran and Shia Muslims everywhere, and the Sauds’ secondary objective is ultimately to take over from Russia as being the main source of oil supplying the EU, which is the world’s largest energy-market; the US aristocracy’s main objective is simply to conquer Russia. (Conquering China would then be next, and would complete their plan.)

So, on many levels now, it is clear that for the American aristocracy (the people who control America’s Deep State), defeating communism, which had served as its ideological excuse for the Cold War, was just a cover-story. The reality, on America’s side, was always about conquest, which is why the CIA, even at the start, took in and protected so many Nazis.

FDR would turn over in his grave, if he knew what came after him.

Appendix
Source: Buzzfeed

Congress Doesn’t Really Care That The CIA Chief Once Voted Communist

“I think I’m going to let that one go.”

 


Bebeto Matthews / AP

Everything is fine.

WASHINGTON — CIA Director John Brennan can breathe a sigh of relief: 40 years after casting his ballot, Congress has let him off the hook for voting for the Communist USA party during the height of the Cold War.

Brennan copped to the vote in little-noticed remarks last week at the Congressional Black Caucus’s annual conference. The spy chief spoke of his stomach-turning fear while undergoing the vetting process to be employed at the CIA in 1980 — strapped to a polygraph during the height of the Cold War, Brennan was asked if he had ever worked with or for a group that was working to overthrow the United States.

“I froze,” Brennan said. “This was back in 1980, and I thought back to a previous election where I voted, and I voted for the Communist Party candidate…we’ve all had indiscretions in our past.”



[bg_collapse view=”button-orange” color=”#4a4949″ icon=”arrow” expand_text=”Read the rest—click here” collapse_text=”Show Less” ]Brennan said he came clean about the his 1976 ballot during the polygraph, expecting it to disqualify him from a clearance. But to the director’s surprise, he was offered admission to the agency, and, nearly 40 years later, landed in the top office.

It looks like lawmakers interviewed by BuzzFeed News on Thursday don’t mind.

“I think [Brennan’s] the only one who can comment on that,” said Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee leaving a briefing Thursday.

“I really am not interested in how the CIA Director voted decades ago,” said Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) leaving a Senate Intelligence Committee briefing Thursday.

But, Wyden recalled the still-lingering tensions over the Intelligence Committee’s torture report, and the agency’s decision to dig into the computers of its Senate overseers while the investigation was being conducted. And as it turns out, there are still plenty of other reasons some lawmakers want to fire the spy chief.

“I continue to be troubled about his skewed and distorted views about the separation of powers,” Wyden added.

But for the most part, the spy chief’s overseers seemed to prefer leaving 1976 in 1976.

“I think I’m going to let that one go,” Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-New Mexico) said, declining to comment on Brennan’s self-described indiscretion.

Then again, Thursday was Brennan’s birthday, so maybe everyone was just taking it easy on him.

[/bg_collapse]


[/su_spoiler]


About the author

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity. Besides TGP, his reports and historical analyses are published on many leading current events and political sites, including The Saker, Huffpost, Oped News, and others.

 

horiz-long grey
What will it take to bring America to live according to its own self image?


[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]