There were dueling headlines this week, one from a liberal British newspaper, the other from a conservative U.S. magazine.
"British spies were first to spot Trump team's links with Russia," wrote The Guardian. Well, bother, that'll put the prezzy in a bit of a spot.
But wait, there was this other headline -- same story, just a different headline, from The American Spectator: "Confirmed: John Brennan Colluded With Foreign Spies to Defeat Trump."
But The Spectator shined the spotlight into the dark crevasses of the story:
Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, [John] Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people.
John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. An official in the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s retinue of political radicals didn’t even bother to hide their activism, decorating offices with “Hillary for president cups” and other campaign paraphernalia.
Huh. What a very different story.
What's important from the U.S. side, of course, is what our own CIA director did.
I don't know the truth ,but this sure lines up rights with the information coming out and Inteligence sources swearing to it and Obama right on top of the whole thing putting sanctions on Russia on phony evidence.