The new narrative of the angry Left is that Donald J. Trump’s presidency is “not legitimate” because “the Russians hacked the election” and helped their chosen candidate win in November.
Not one single shred of proof has been offered by anyone to substantiate the insinuation that somehow, Mother Russia was able to manipulate balloting in key states (which would have been impossible to do); that Russia was behind the hacks of the DNC and the Clinton campaign; or that Russia turned over hacked data to WikiLeaks for release (a DNC insider actually took credit for that).
It is nonetheless clear to seasoned observers that some #nevertrump careerists within the IC are attempting to make it seem as though the proof exists so that they can undermine and thwart a president who has called them out for being political.
One such observer is controversial investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald, who, while at The Guardian, allowed himself to be used as a conduit to the public by Edward Snowden, the former NSA contractor who spilled the beans on the agency’s pervasive (and likely unconstitutional) domestic electronic surveillance programs.
Greenwald said he is seeing what he characterized as “obvious open warfare” between the two, while angry Left-wing Democrats – still smarting over Hillary Clinton’s loss to The Donald – were “openly calling for and cheering for the intervention of the CIA.” This is extremely out of character for a party that has historically been hostile towards the intelligence community. (RELATED: Stay current with all the news pertaining to the Trump administration at WhiteHouse.news)
In discussing allegations included in intelligence briefings alleging Trump’s Russian connections, along with certain sexual proclivities contained in a bogus “dossier,” Greenwald said that the angry Left was “hoping that this unelected faction in Washington will undermine and subvert and destroy the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s presidency … .”
And while all of this may seem like nothing more than petty politics, Greenwald assured viewers that it is very serious. “I think what you’re seeing is actually quite dangerous,” he said.
The investigative reporter went on to claim that it is very apparent that the CIA favored Clinton to win. And he noted that the intelligence community in general viewed Trump as nothing but a “threat to the CIA’s primary institutional priority of regime change in Syria.”
It’s obvious that such regime change is what the CIA wanted, because that’s the policy that Clinton pursued as secretary of state, on the instructions of Obama. But no one has said why President Bashar al Assad has to go, or why other Syrian rebel factions would be in the United States’ best interests – other than that Assad is a pal of Vladimir Putin’s.
“Beyond that,” Greenwald added, “Clinton wanted a much more confrontational and belligerent posture toward Moscow, which the CIA has been acrimonious with for decades, whereas Trump wanted better relations. I think they viewed Trump as a threat to their institutional preeminence, to their ability to get their agenda imposed on Washington.”
Trump’s laying down of the gauntlet with intelligence officials is simply not done; others have opined that Trump is essentially putting crosshairs on his presidency, if not literally then figuratively.
Intelligence officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, have vehemently denied that leaks emanated from any intelligence agency – and they may not directly have come from the IC. But clearly, the information being leaked was intelligence, whether the IC did the leaking or it came from a political operative.
That is especially true of the “dossier,” which had been circulating around Washington media circles for months, but was never pursued before CNN and BuzzFeed reported on it, because none of it could be substantiated. Even the IC couldn’t do so, though it was included in briefings to Trump. (RELATED: All things Trump can be found at Trump.news)
It is clear that there is growing animosity between Trump and the intelligence community, and that rift is only likely to grow before it ever improves.