I’m glad someone as distinguished as former U.N Ambassador John Bolton said it first and not me.

On Fox News Sunday, he said he doesn’t trust Barack Obama’s heavily politicized intelligence agencies to make a clear, objective conclusion that the Russians hacked the Democratic National Committee and released tens of thousands of emails to WikiLeaks to help Donald Trump defeat Hillary Clinton for the presidency last month.

“It is not at all clear to me, just viewing this from the outside, that this hacking into the DNC and the RNC was not a false flag operation,” he said. “We just don’t know. But I believe that intelligence has been politicized in the Obama administration to a very significant degree.”

Exactly – I was thinking the same thought.

Look who runs the CIA – John Brennan. Do I really need to say more?

For those of you who don’t know who I am talking about, let me fill you in on his unofficial, but verified, certified resume:

  • Brennan was sworn into office not on a Bible, as the tradition goes in America, but on an original draft of the Constitution sans the Bill of Rights. Get the picture? He was swearing to uphold the Constitution not on a complete copy, but on one that omitted the documents that most clearly limit State powers, such as the First Amendment and Second Amendment, which prohibit the federal government from abridging freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and the individual freedom to bear arms.
  • You think that wasn’t by intention? Listen to this: In his 1980 graduate thesis at the University of Texas at Austin, Brennan denied the existence of “absolute human rights” and argued in favor of censorship on the part of the Egyptian dictatorship. “Since the press can play such an influential role in determining the perceptions of the masses, I am in favor of some degree of government censorship. Inflammatory articles can provoke mass opposition and possible violence, especially in developing political systems.”
  • Not surprising with that background, an obscure November 2012 Wikileaks email dump points to Brennan as the person behind the “witch hunt” of journalists who reported unflattering Obama administration leaks.
  • In his confirmation hearing to become CIA director, Brennan refused to answer direct questions by Sen. Rand Paul about the Obama administration’s use of lethal drone attacks on U.S. citizens on U.S. territory. He would only say the U.S. “has not carried out such attacks” and “has no intentions of doing so.” The Obama administration did, however, conduct such attacks on U.S. citizens abroad.
  • In November he warned Donald Trump that scrapping the nuclear deal with Iran would be “the height of folly” and “disastrous.”
  • He went out of his way to attack Trump throughout the campaign, even saying publicly he would not authorize the use of waterboarding if directed to do so by a future president after Trump condoned its use in extreme cases: “I can say that as long as I’m director of CIA, irrespective of what the president says, I’m not going to be the director of CIA that gives that order. They’ll have to find another director.” I always thought this was incentive enough to elect Trump.
  • Brennan admitted in 2016 to supporting the Communist Party presidential candidate – a hardline, unrepentant Stalinist named Gus Hall – in the 1976 presidential election. Neither was Brennan penitent about casting that vote.
  • Brennan has long been cozy with the Muslim Brotherhood. Despite evidence presented (and later upheld) in federal court during the landmark 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial, which established the Islamic Society of North America as a Muslim Brotherhood organization and financial supporter of the terrorist organization Hamas, Brennan has continued to meet with ISNA officials and participate in ISNA events. At ISNA’s annual conference in 2009, for example, Brennan delivered the keynote address.
  • It gets worse. One of the FBI’s former top experts on Islam says Brennan converted to Islam years ago in Saudi Arabia. John Guandolo says Brennan remains a closeted Muslim, having been recruited by the Saudis as part of a counter-intelligence operation.
  • In a speech delivered Aug. 9, 2009, to the Center for Strategic and International Studies that is archived on the White House website, Brennan said using “a legitimate term, ‘jihad’ – meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal” – to describe terrorists “risks reinforcing the idea that the United States is somehow at war with Islam itself.”
  • In 2010, when Brennan was serving as Obama’s Homeland Security chief, he said that having 20 percent of terrorists released by the U.S. return to terrorist attacks “isn’t that bad,” since the recidivism rate for inmates in the U.S. prison system is higher. The statement prompted Sen. John McCain to assert Brennan had “lost touch with reality.”

Trust me, I could go on and on about Brennan.

He’s a partisan. He’s either a clueless nutcase or just a very dangerous person to have leading agencies like Homeland Security and the CIA. Best case scenario: He’s a partisan hack. Worst case scenario: He’s an anti-American kook who has spilled more security secrets than Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen combined – maybe throw Julius and Ethel Rosenberg into the mix, too.

This is the guy we’re going to trust to determine who hacked the DNC and Hillary’s unsecured server? It could be a junior high school kid, for heaven’s sake.

What do YOU think? What’s behind this Russia election hack claim? Sound off in today’s WND poll

Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact media@wnd.com.

Receive Joseph Farah's daily commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Joseph Farah’s alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.
  • Where we will email your daily updates
  • A valid zip code or postal code is required
  • Click the button below to sign up for Joseph Farah's daily commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.