Last week, the New York Times and Axios released hit pieces against Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, citing anonymous sources who claimed that her revocation of 37 security clearances from “current and former intelligence professionals who have abused the public trust by politicizing and manipulating intelligence” has sabotaged investigations into deep state criminals such as those who launched the Russia-gate hoax.
Because a dozen of these staffers are allegedly listed as potential witnesses in the case against former CIA Director John Brennan, Gabbard’s decision is said to be undermining the cooperation and credibility of these individuals in the pursuance of that case. But if the fake news merchants would tell the true story, they would write that the holding or not holding of a security clearance does not impact conversations with the DOJ about ongoing investigations whatsoever.
The clearance gives individuals the ability only to see new material. It does not require analysts to forget what they have received. It does not allow or prevent operatives from talking to investigators about what they already understand. That is all based on a recipient’s clearance and need to know, not whether they presently hold a clearance. If the DOJ has the legal right to ask the specifics about what an interviewee knows during an investigation, the status of that particular interviewee’s security clearances is irrelevant.
The notion that individuals with a removed security clearance would have diminished credibility among a jury is outright absurd. Admitted criminals, such as murderers, drug dealers or those guilty of financial impropriety, are often used as witnesses in high-profile trials. Federal prosecutors regularly build successful cases based on witness testimony from people with less-than-reputable records. There is no reason why this could not similarly be done with individuals who have had their security clearances revoked.
It is essentially the same approach that was taken with the Afghan War Commission – when investigators wanted to interview personnel who had their security clearances revoked, a new clearance did not need to be issued. The interviewee is able to respond to unclassified questions with classified information since they are repeating what they learned when their clearance was valid, and the investigator receiving the information currently has a valid clearance. It is not an issue for the person who has lost the clearance because they have already obtained the information and would be compelled to provide it under potential penalty of perjury.
The fake news is cynically creating a red herring, planting a false narrative, in the hopes that prosecutions of deep state hacks can be upended, and then Gabbard can be framed as the culprit for the failure in the aftermath. David Metcalf, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, has not issued a single subpoena in the case against former CIA Director Brennan. Erik Siebert resigned as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia rather than prosecute former FBI Director James Comey for obvious and evident perjury. The lack of action from these establishment apparatchiks speaks volumes.
The people who deserve the blame for lack of prosecutions are the Attorneys who lack the courage to prosecute. There will always be novel excuses to justify the lack of action, but it ultimately comes down to complicity or inertia. These attorneys are either complicit in the destruction of the country and have wormed their way in their roles to protect the deep state, or they are far too concerned about preserving their reputation or personal prestige to act with integrity. Either way, they are the ones who should shoulder the blame and be forced out of their posts, not an effective public servant like Gabbard.
Gabbard has become a frequent scapegoat from both the liberal media and the neocon pro-war establishment. Because of her surgical focus on exposing and rooting out anti-Trump sleeper cells from within the intelligence industry, she has earned the ire of the fake news who recognize her as a threat to deep state hegemony. Because Gabbard stands against the failed foreign policy of military interventionism and has never stopped advocating for peace, she is attacked by the likes of radio host Mark Levin and Sen. Tom Cotton who pine for the “good ol’ days” of George W. Bush.
In actuality, if there are any deep state criminals put behind bars, we will have the actions of Gabbard to thank for releasing information that has been damning toward them. She has exposed sensitive documents that were previously kept under wraps by former National Intelligence Directors, including current CIA Director John Ratcliffe, showing that the genesis of Russia-gate went straight to the top, with former President Barack Hussein Obama having intimate knowledge of the conspiracy, and officials such as Brennan, Comey, former NSA Director James Clapper and others having knowingly pushed faulty intelligence.
Any news reports denigrating Gabbard should be treated with extreme skepticism. She is surviving in the
ferocious snake pit of the Washington D.C. swamp, which is no easy task, as we have seen many good people flame out or lose their positions attempting to do what she has done. Gabbard has become the unsung hero of President Trump’s second administration, showing how President Trump learned from initial hiring flubs to appoint the right person for this job. The Trump administration and MAGA must continue to put pressure on federal attorneys to initiate deep state prosecutions, accepting no excuses. They have not come nearly fast enough, and any more feet dragging is unacceptable. Justice must come expediently and punitively for the rule of law to be restored.
