“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.”
John O. Brennan — Former Director of the C.I.A. (May 23 2017)
May 23 2017 — John O. Brennan, the former director of the C.I.A., said publicly for the first time that he was concerned about possible ties between Russia and the Trump campaign. Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_Today
RELATED POST: Team Trump’s ties to Russian interests — Felix Sater
UPDATE (May 23 2019) — As I watch again Brennan’s testimony for the first time in two years, I can only conclude that the former CIA Director perjured himself over the Steele Dossier.
Near the end of his testimony (1h 54′ 30” mark), Brennan provided the following answers:
GOWDY: Director Brennan, do you know who commissioned the Steele dossier?
BRENNAN: I don’t.
GOWDY: Do you know if the bureau [FBI] ever relied on the Steele dossier as part of any court filing, applications?
BRENNAN: I have no awareness.
GOWDY: Did the CIA rely on it?
GOWDY: Why not?
BRENNAN: Because we didn’t. It wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had. It was not in any way used as a basis for the Intelligence Community Assessment that was done. Uh … it was not.
We have learned a few facts over the last 24 months. And it is undisputable that Brennan lied under oath.
The questions for Brennan are the age-old ones in any political scandal. What did Brennan know? When did he know it? Where did this story really start? And why did he lie?
PS: In December 2016, former FBI Director James Comey told his staff that Brennan insisted that British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s discredited “dossier” on President Trump’s ties to Russia be included in the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Brennan refers to the Steele’s dossier as Crown material. This strongly implies that the British Intelligence Services played a role in the dossier.
Please, keep in mind that during the summer of 2016, Robert Hannigan, then head of GCHQ, flew to Washington to brief John Brennan personally. And then in January 2017, Hannigan surprisingly resigned, supposedly over a bizarre paedophile priest’s story. Really?
END of UPDATE
Mr. Brennan said that he became concerned last year that the Russian government was trying to influence members of the Trump campaign to act — wittingly or unwittingly — on Moscow’s behalf.
Warning to FSB
Brennan spoke with his Russian counterpart, the head of Russia’s FSB, on August 4 2016.
Brennan told FSB Director Alexander Bortnikov that if Russia pursued its efforts to interfere, “it would destroy any near-term prospect for improvement in relations” between the two countries. Bortnikov denied any attempts to interfere.
No evidence of collusion
Brennan said he is “aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign.
“Brennan said that concerned him, “because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals,” and that it raised questions about whether or not the Russians “were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.”
Brennan added he didn’t know if “collusion existed” between the Russians and those he identified as involved in the Trump campaign.
Brennan said Russia used WikiLeaks as a “cut-out,” or go-between, and that protests by WikiLeaks that it is not working with Russia and Russia’s claims it is not working with WikiLeaks are “disingenuous.”
Tense Q&A with REP. TREY GOWDY (R) – SOUTH CAROLINA
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.
GOWDY: Do you know the basis of that information that you shared with the bureau? What was — the nature of the evidence?
BRENNAN: I think, Mr. Gowdy, this committee has now been provided information that relates to that issue in terms of information that the agency shared with the bureau and that is something that is appropriately classified.
GOWDY: All right, and you learned that when? When in this chronology did you learn of the contacts between these official members of the Trump campaign or — because there’s kind of a tripartite hierarchy. There’s Trump himself, there are official members of the campaign, and then there are folks who represented themselves as being connected with him.
BRENNAN: I’m not going to try to identify individuals nor try to parse it.
GOWDY: I don’t want you to parse it, I just want you to identify the individuals. I don’t want you to parse it.
BRENNAN: I’m not going to identify the individuals because this is information that, again, is based on classified sources and intelligence. And I think this committee has access to it…
GOWDY: Were they official members of the campaign?
BRENNAN: I’m going to defer to current agency officials to be able to further provide to you information related to that. But my understanding is that this committee has access to the documents that we would have provided to the bureau.
GOWDY: All right. Last question because I’m out of time, we can use the word onus, we both know what the other one’s talking about. How did you test, probe, examine, cross-examine, otherwise test the reliability or believability, credibility, of that evidence you uncovered?
BRENNAN: I made sure that the components within CIA that have responsible for counterintelligence, cyber, and Russia, were actively working to understand as much as possible about the reliability, accuracy of the information that they already collected and information that was available that needed further corroboration.
GOWDY: We’ll come back to it next round.
Brennan testifies before House Intelligence Committee
Trump-Russia Investigation — Former CIA director John Brennan testifies before House Intelligence Committee
Two Years Ago — Former CIA director John Brennan testifies before House Intelligence Committee (May 23 2017) [UPDATE : John Brennan Perjured Himself Over Steele Dossier]