By Ray McGovern
On “The Critical Hour” yesterday, Ray was asked to comment on the NYT’s latest attempt to exculpate former CIA Director John Brennan for making up stories about a CIA agent close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. (See: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/politics/cia-informant-russia.html .) As Justice Department investigators (AND the NY Times) well know, Brennan was the “brains” (not sure this the right term) behind the yarn that Putin himself ordered that the Democratic National Committee be hacked.
https://sputniknews.com/radio_the_critical_hour/201909111076772301-trumps-third-national-security-adviser-bites-the-dust-bolton-is-out-whats-next/Ray’s interview runs from minute 26:40 to 41:15, ending with some comments on the just announced firing of John Bolton.
Ray welcomed the opportunity to put the latest NY Times report in context and try to explain why it is doing its best to help miscreants like Brennan and his parters-in-distortion. It was a rare chance to explain what actually happened and to show that, even though NYT Executive Editor Dean Baquet has told his minions to STOP ALREADY with their miserable performance on Russiagate, they seem unaable to do so. [See: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/new-york-times-chief-outlines-coverage-shift-from-trump-russia-to-trump-racism ].
If ever a deus ex machina were needed, former CIA Director John Brennan desperately needs one now. [ See:
And (honor among thieves?) the NY Times remains hell bent on helping Brennan, who had been their most lucrative Russiagate source. Read this again and weep: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/politics/cia-informant-russia.html
Brennan told everyone — and even the not-so-usually-gullible strove mightily to believe him — that the CIA had a very sensitive source with direct access to Russian President Vladimir Putin. And that is why the rump intelligence agency group of CIA, FBI, and NSA were able to “assess” that “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.”
See: “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections:, 6 January 2017
and Ray’s two-year-later commentary: [ https://consortiumnews.com/2019/01/07/a-look-back-at-clappers-jan-2017-assessment-on-russia-gate/ ].
As for the media, so much is at stake that, even though top executives like Dean Baquet see the futility of doubling down on Russiagate, TV and print pundits, sadly, are unlikely — EVER — to acknowledge they got Russiagate dead wrong. After all, many of the same ones got away with misfeasance/malfeasance on WMD in Iraq and (equally non-existent) ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. So why not now?