John Brennan

Watch Congressman Trey Gowdy Grill Obama CIA Director Brennan who says He Doesn’t ‘Do’ Evidence

It’s just an amazing series of probing questions and revealing answers. Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the former prosecutor, once again proves his mettle and unmasks a craven political ploy from another Obama lackey.

Former Obama era CIA Chief John Brennan was in Washington, D.C. testifying before Congress on Tuesday morning when Gowdy pressed him for answers to the Russia collusion investigation that Brennan now admits he initiated.

However, as the conversation rolled along it became clear that there simply has never been any evidence of any wrongdoing from anyone in the Trump campaign. In fact, Brennan himself admits such during Gowdy’s prodding and even argues that he “doesn’t DO evidence.”

Brennan in answering Gowdy’s question for what “evidence” existed to justify the Russia investigations:

take our poll - story continues below

Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?

  • Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Fuel for Thought

I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals and it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.

I don’t know whether or not such collusion — and that’s your term, such collusion existed. I don’t know. But I know that there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not U.S. persons were actively conspiring, colluding with Russian officials.

Basically, what Brennan is saying is that some Russian officials contacted Americans connected to the Trump campaign and Brennan was worried that they might be trying to turn those people into Russian agents, so he asked the FBI to investigate.

Again, what was the evidence? Contact between Russian officials and Americans near the Trump orbit.

That’s it.

That’s all.

From that we’ve had 8 months of insanity. 8 months of investigating. 8 months of news reports.

And not a single shred of evidence that anyone in the Trump team has done anything wrong. In fact, it’s worse than that… we don’t even have any evidence that anything wrong was done by anyone, anywhere. There is no evidence that any crime has even taken place!

And it was all based on the word of a known Obama sycophant who has plenty of his own credibility problems.

Watch as Gowdy skewers Brennan and unmasks him for the politically motivated crony that he is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkJMgqVSKCc

A partial transcript from RCP:

Gowdy: Director, thank you for your service to our country. Let’s go back to where we were a couple minutes ago, you mentioned or you testify that you had a conversation in August of 2016 with your Russian counterpart, you testified that you briefed at least eight members of Congress throughout (inaudible) of your investigation.

When you learned of Russian efforts — and we’ll get to that in a minute because my understanding from your unclassified report is, Russia has historically attempted to interfere with our electoral process. And they did so without coordination, collusion or conspiring with any of the candidates, so they have a history of doing it. We’ll lay that aside for a minute, 2016 electoral process. When you learned of Russian efforts, did you have evidence of a connection between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors?

Brennan: As I said Mr. Gowdy, I don’t do evidence…  and we were uncovering information intelligence about interactions and contacts between U.S. persons and the Russians. And as we came upon that, we would share it with the bureau.

Gowdy: I appreciate that you don’t do evidence, Director Brennan. Unfortunately, that’s what I do. That’s the word we use, you use the word assessment, you use the word tradecraft. I use the word evidence. And the good news for me is lots of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle use the word evidence, too. One of my colleagues said there is more than circumstantial evidence of collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign.

Now, there are only two types of evidence; there’s circumstantial and direct. So if it’s more than circumstantial, by necessity, it has to be direct. Those aren’t my words; those are the words of one of my colleagues on the other side of this very committee. Another Democrat colleague on the other side of this committee also used the word evidence, that he has seen evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians and yet a third California Democrat, said she had seen no evidence of collusion.

So that’s three different members of Congress from the same state, using the same word, which is evidence. And that’s the word that my fellow citizens understand, evidence. Assessment is — is your vernacular. Tradecraft is your vernacular. You and I both know worth the word evidence makes. And we’re not getting into whether or not you corroborated, contradicted, examined, cross-examined. We’re not getting into how you tested and probed the reliability of that evidence; it’s a really simple question.

Did evidence exist of collusion, coordination, conspiracy, between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors at the time you learned of 2016 efforts?

Brennan: I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals and it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.

I don’t know whether or not such collusion — and that’s your term, such collusion existed. I don’t know. But I know that there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not U.S. persons were actively conspiring, colluding with Russian officials.

Tags

Constitution.com 🇺🇸

I am the supreme law of the United States. Originally comprising seven articles, I delineate the national frame of government. My first three articles entrench the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress; the executive, consisting of the President; and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts. Articles Four, Five and Six entrench concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments and of the states in relationship to the federal government. Article Seven establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it. I am regarded as the oldest written and codified constitution in force of the world.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.