By John Q. Hosedrinker Leading up to the Alaska summit between President Trump and President Putin, a top CIA Russia expert dedicated extensive hours to preparing Trump’s team. This expert’s role included briefing the team and aiding them in navigating high-stakes discussions, specifically focusing on Ukraine. The expert’s efforts were crucial to ensuring the US delegation was well-informed prior to the summit. This information was provided by a former colleague of the Russia expert.
Read the original article here
Trump, Gabbard fired top CIA Russia expert days after Alaska summit – it’s hard to even begin to process the audacity. The very idea that a top-level CIA officer, someone with decades of experience in understanding the intricacies of Russia, could be summarily dismissed just days after a summit in Alaska is, to put it mildly, alarming. The fact that this occurred, and that the officer was supposedly slated for a prestigious assignment in Europe, approved by the then-CIA Director, John Ratcliffe, makes it all the more suspect. It suggests a deliberate move, a calculated decision to silence or punish someone for their expertise. This isn’t just a personnel issue; it’s a potential breach of national security, a signal that the administration prioritized something other than protecting the interests of the United States.
The implications of this action are far-reaching. It suggests a level of control, or at least influence, that should raise concerns among anyone who values transparency and accountability. If expertise in Russian matters is suddenly deemed undesirable, then what kind of message does that send to others in the intelligence community? It could create a chilling effect, discouraging open and honest assessments of Russia’s activities, and potentially leading to policy decisions based on political considerations rather than informed analysis. The very idea that someone who’s dedicated their career to national security, potentially for 30 years, could be stripped of their clearance and, in essence, their livelihood, is unsettling. It speaks to a ruthless disregard for the contributions of career professionals.
The timing of this event is particularly troubling. It occurred in the immediate aftermath of a summit. The Alaska summit was a moment of potential reckoning between the US and Russia. The fact that this CIA officer was purged just after this summit adds to the suspicion that it was related to the summit. It is possible that the officer’s work or her understanding of Russia was seen as an impediment to the direction of the summit. The possibility of political machinations influencing intelligence operations is deeply disturbing.
The involvement of Tulsi Gabbard, adds another layer to this complex issue. Gabbard has been accused of being a Russian asset. The article mentions Gabbard in the same breath as Trump, suggesting there was cooperation between the two figures. This partnership raises questions about the political motives behind the dismissal. It’s like a political chess game being played at the highest levels, with the security of the nation hanging in the balance. It would be interesting to know what the exact nature of this officer’s expertise was, the kind of information she had access to.
It’s also worth considering the broader context of the political climate. The accusation of treason is heavy. There seems to be a deep-seated distrust of the intelligence community. A pattern of actions seems to be designed to undermine or weaken the very institutions meant to safeguard national interests. This incident would fit perfectly in a pattern of actions that suggests a deliberate effort to dismantle checks and balances, and to consolidate power. The removal of a CIA expert is just another piece of the puzzle. It is difficult to see how someone can lead with such contempt for the very people and institutions they should be protecting.
The comments highlight the role of political ideology. This entire issue seems like a prime example of how deeply political everything at this level can be. It also shows how those in the right circles can easily get tossed aside, and how our nation is being sold. It’s a situation where those with power are playing a game of chess with our nation’s security, and we are left to watch it unfold.
One of the most telling aspects of this whole affair is the apparent lack of surprise. There is a palpable sense of resignation. As though, those who were following the situation were just waiting for the shoe to drop. There is the feeling that the administration was playing to an audience of one, Russia. It is a dark day for the country. The article is a cautionary tale. It is not a story of power, it is a story of betrayal.