Before Donald Trump had the bad taste to defeat the most criminally investigated presidential contender ever — Hillary Clinton — many American legal traditions that were still pretty much intact have been completely and irreversibly shattered.
One of them is the presumption of innocence.
Trump has been tried and convicted time and again in the court of public opinion by Democratic and Republican politicians alike, as well as the contemptible and corrupt “mainstream” media, for one false narrative after another.
The “Russia collusion” hoax was the result of the greatest political scandal in the history of our country — Spygate, the deep state effort to undermine and then depose Trump after he was duly elected by the American people and our electoral system.
The coup attempt is ongoing, however, as now he’s been accused of committing an “impeachable offense” in a telephone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky, in which he has been accused of withholding military aid to that country unless its leader gave him “political dirt” on potential 2020 opponent Joe Biden.
And, of course, the corrupt media has already ‘tried’ and convicted him of same. Ditto for far too many elected officials in Congress.
In an interview with his benefactor, the little-watched MSNBC, noted Trump critic and former CIA Director John Brennan actually intimated on-air that the legal pillar of presumption of innocence until proven guilty was no longer.
In fact, Brennan said all that is necessary now to establish guilt is for individuals to merely be accused of something. And of course, he didn’t get a single word of pushback from the zombie Left-wing partisan hosts.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1180893006402146304
Asked to “speculate” as to who might be the next person to come forward to allege wrongdoing by President Trump, Brennan refused adding, “People are innocent, you know, until alleged to be involved in criminal activity…”
Huh?
Brennan has been implicated in setting up Spygate — by his own words, he’s automatically guilty
Surely he was just kidding, right? Not according to his body language and delivery, which you can plainly see on the above video clip.
Amazing. But what’s even more head-scratching is that Brennan should be careful about saying such things, given that he’s been alleged to have been involved from the outset in crafting the Spygate scandal to ensnare the president and illegally remove him from office. (Related: RUSH LIMBAUGH: John Brennan traveled to Ukraine with fake passport — to research Trump.)
As The National Sentinel reported in August, some in Congress have begun to focus on Brennan as a sort of ‘mastermind’ behind Spygate.
“You know, I really am very curious about the role the CIA played here,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo. “We know that the FISA warrant application was based on a dossier prepared by Christopher Steele, who was biased against Trump, that was unverified. That’s one problem. But this whole intelligence operation — what role did the CIA play?”
He then asked: “Who knew about this in the White House? Here’s a question: Was President Obama briefed on the fact that they were opening up a counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign? I’d like to know that.”
Using Brennan’s own rationale and words, just suspecting him of being guilty makes him guilty.
Bartiromo noted then that Brennan was running the CIA at the time, asking Graham if he planned to call him before his committee. “We’ll see,” he responded.
The Epoch Times added:
Brennan appears to have played a key role in establishing the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign—including making repeated use of questionable foreign intelligence.
Indeed, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper confirmed U.S. intelligence community involvement in Spygate during congressional testimony in May 2017.
As obvious as it appears that Brennan (and Clapper) played starring roles in setting up President Trump for a fall, we still believe they are innocent until proven guilty — even if we don’t think it would be hard to prove it.
Sources include:
Please contact us for more information.