Dems, Deep State are petrified of John Radcliffe as Trump’s DNI because they fear exposure

(NationalSentinel) We tend to take reports in foreign media about American politics, especially those in Russian media, with a grain of salt because Moscow’s government uses it as part of their influence operations.

But a lot of what a Russia Today report claimed this week makes a great deal of sense when you factor in all that we know about the “Spygate” scandal and the Deep State government, intelligence, and media players involved.

Specifically, the kids who run things are expressing more outrage than usual over POTUS Donald Trump’s selection of Rep. John Radcliffe (R-Texas) to be his next Director of National Intelligence, replacing outgoing DNI and former RINO congressman Dan Coats.

RT reports that the reason why there is so much extraordinary resistance to Radcliffe’s nomination is that as a noted ‘Trump loyalist,’ he’ll do the president’s bidding while serving as the nation’s top intelligence chief, and in the process, blow the lid off of everything Spygate:

The prospect of John Ratcliffe as the new US director of national intelligence has Democrats and the media alarmed far more so than usual, perhaps because as DNI he could expose things they would prefer to stay hidden.

We can already deduce from the reaction of the reactionary media that something out of the ordinary was animating the establishment, given the utter ridiculousness of the lamestream media in reporting the nomination.

Why? Because…Russia.

Coats, you see, was doing everything he could to ensure that the Russians don’t hack or interfere with the 2020 election — despite working for a president who is, you know, an agent of Moscow.

Or something like that. Responses by the media have ranged from the nonsensical to the stupid to the downright irresponsible.


It has become the new normal that every Trump nomination is met by howls of outrage from both Democrats and the mainstream media. They seem to be alarmed by Ratcliffe far more than usual, however. Amazingly, despite the complete catastrophe that ‘Russiagate’ has turned into for the Democrats, liberal pundits are once again arguing that this somehow helps Moscow. Here’s Atlantic writer Adam Serwer claiming Coats is being replaced because he was trying to “prevent foreign attacks on American elections.”

CNN analyst Juliette Kayyem argued along the same lines, claiming that Trump’s goal is to “stop any attempts to thwart Russian influence in 2020.”

So-called “super forecasters” — analysts who have a knack for predicting events based not on intimate knowledge but on an inherent ability to deduce and think critically — never rely on these kinds of pundits for reliable analysis because they are hacks and ideologues, not serious thinkers.

As such, they (and we) have to look elsewhere for accurate information. Hence, this RT report, which rings true, again, given what we know about Spygate — the players, the motive, and the execution.

It makes sense, then, that those same players — in the Deep State, in the media, etc. — would scream the loudest when someone is appointed to look into this scandal who will actually do that:

RT also made some additional observations that serve as reminders:

Nominating Coats – an establishment Republican and longtime Russia hawk – may have made sense in February 2017, but he has since repeatedly demonstrated that his loyalty was more to the establishment than to the White House. 

You may recall that the day after Trump’s attempt to mend relations with Russia at the Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin, the DNI released a statement doubling down on the Clapper-Comey-Brennan “assessment” blaming Russia for election meddling. His posture even led to MSNBC speculating he might have been the author of the notorious “lodestar” New York Times op-ed, penned by an anonymous executive branch official claiming to be a member of the anti-Trump “resistance” on the inside. Coats has denied that claim, however.

The Deep State Left, Democrats, and their propagandists in the mainstream media are all wedded to the “Russiagate” narrative because that’s all they’ve got to run on in 2020. Plus, they hate the fact that Trump remains ensconced in the White House; he doesn’t belong there, isn’t one of ‘them,’ ‘they’ didn’t pick him, and anyway, he’s foul, belligerent, and doesn’t like to play the game.

So, the crux of what RT is reporting makes a lot of sense:

Amid the outrage about Ratcliffe’s nomination, few remembered that the Texas congressman was one of the two Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee who actually saw the classified FISA documents that were used to get a warrant for spying on the Trump campaign. He did so as part of the House Intelligence Committee probe into the entire unsavory affair, back in late 2017, which resulted in the ‘Nunes Memo’ in February 2018.

The other, former South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy, was so spooked by what he saw that he decided not to seek re-election and retreated into a career of a Fox News pundit. Ratcliffe, by contrast, went on to take a hard line on the Mueller investigation, hammering the special counsel in last week’s hearings. 

We know that Gowdy — a former career federal prosecutor — was upset at what was done to his beloved FBI and Justice Department by Obama sycophants and political hacks. And we assumed that he left Congress because he simply did not believe there was any hope of ‘fixing’ any of it.

Radcliffe apparently disagreed, and in doing so actually positioned himself to become an asset in the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to bring some justice to Americans for what the Obama den of rogues and thieves attempted to do to our country.


Last September, Trump ordered the ODNI and the DOJ to declassify the Page FISA application, the related FBI files, “all text messages relating to the Russia investigation,” and interviews of a DOJ official linked to Fusion GPS, the firm that produced the so-called ‘Steele dossier’.

Within 48 hours, Trump said he would let the attorney general and DNI review those files before making them public, out of concern for allies, and intelligence sources and methods. Precisely nothing has happened since, suggesting that Coats was slow-walking the process. 

With the Russiagate conspiracy now in shambles and Ratcliffe poised to blow the lid on the ‘Spygate’ scandal that spawned it, no wonder the people involved and their partisan supporters are more than a little nervous.

Is the report propaganda? Is it part of an effort by Moscow’s intelligence services to sow distrust, confusion, and suspicion among our populace? Perhaps. But when taken with what we already know to be true regarding Spygate, this aligns nicely.

  • By Jon Dougherty

Follow Jon Dougherty on Parler — the Twitter alternative

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Subscribe our Brighteon channel

You Might Like

Trending Politics

Leave a Reply


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

Notify of
%d bloggers like this: