House Intelligence Committee now looking at targeting of Trump Campaign by Obama intel agencies, also raisng perjury questions

Exclusive at Real Clear Investigations: CIA Ex-Director Brennan’s Perjury Peril (link here)

Here is the heart of Paul Sperry’s report:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes next plans to investigate the role former CIA Director John Brennan and other Obama intelligence officials played in promoting the salacious and unverified Steele dossier on Donald Trump — including whether Brennan perjured himself in public testimony about it.

In his May 2017 testimony before the intelligence panel, Brennan emphatically denied the dossier factored into the intelligence community’s publicly released conclusion last year that Russia meddled in the 2016 election “to help Trump’s chances of victory.”

Brennan also swore that he did not know who commissioned the anti-Trump research document, even though senior national security and counterintelligence officials at the Justice Department and FBI knew the previous year that the dossier was funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Last week, Nunes (R-Calif.) released a declassified memo exposing surveillance “abuses” by the Obama DOJ and FBI in their investigation of Trump’s ties to Russia. It said the agencies relied heavily on the uncorroborated dossier to take out a warrant to secretly surveil a Trump adviser in the heat of the 2016 presidential election, even though they were aware the underlying “intelligence” supporting the wiretap order was political opposition research funded by Clinton allies — a material fact they concealed from FISA court judges in four separate applications. –Paul Sperry at Real Clear Investigations


  • Dave Schuler
    February 13, 2018

    My recollection is that the perjury case against Brennan is a sure thing—he gave diametrically opposed testimony under oath.

  • missimo
    February 26, 2018

    Thank you for your kind words, Charles Lipson.

  • Creekside
    February 27, 2018

    Comey swore under penalty of perjury that he was kept in the dark by McCabe, apparently. If he didn’t commit perjury, that means he was ignorant of the biggest and politically most important case the FBI was handling at the time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.