Sunday Talks: NSA Robert O’Brien -vs- Margaret Brennan…

Against the latest revelations that Ms. Shelby Pierson in the office of the Director of National Intelligence, manufactured false and misleading briefing material on Russian efforts to influence the U.S. election, it is interesting to watch the mainstream media create fake news stories attempting to exploit Ms. Pierson’s falsehoods.

During a pre-taped broadcast CBS’s Margaret Brennan questions National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien about the now identified false briefing material that was never shared with the White House prior to misrepresenting the intelligence to congress.  WATCH (transcript below):


[Transcript] – PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: They’re trying to start a rumor. It’s disinformation. That’s the only thing they’re good at, that Putin wants to make sure I get elected. Listen to this. So, doesn’t he want to see who the Democrat’s going to be? Wouldn’t he rather have, let’s say, Bernie, wouldn’t he rather have Bernie who honeymooned in Moscow?

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s the President at a Friday rally in Las Vegas claiming that reports of Russia interfering in his favor was Democratic disinformation. When we were in Las Vegas Saturday I spoke with the White House National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien, who was in our Washington studio. I asked him if he had assured the President that this particular U.S. intelligence finding was real. He strongly disputed it.

ROBERT O’BRIEN (National Security Adviser): Well, I have not seen the finding. I think what he is referring to and what folks are talking about is a briefing that took place last week at the House Intelligence Committee that was leaked to the press. And I– I have not seen that report. I get this second hand, but from Republican congressmen that were in the committee, there was no intelligence behind it. I haven’t seen any intelligence to support the reports that were leaked out of the House.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But the White House was briefed on February 14th. Were you not in that briefing when the President was informed?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: Well, there’s no briefing that I have received, that the President has received, that says that President Putin is doing anything to try and influence the elections in favor of President Trump. We just haven’t seen that intelligence. If it’s out there, I haven’t seen it. I’d be surprised if I haven’t seen it. The leaders of our– the IC have not seen it. So I– again, I don’t know where this is coming from. I’ve heard these rumors and these leaks from Adam Schiff’s committee, but I– I have not seen them myself and I’ve seen no intelligence along those lines.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But just to clarify, are you saying that Joseph Maguire, the former acting director of National Intelligence, did not inform you about the U.S. Intelligence Committee’s– community’s findings?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: No. I, look, I think, you know, and again, I– I don’t want to get into private conversations in a– in a presidential daily brief, but I– I don’t think Admiral Maguire was necessarily informed of what was going to happen at that hearing in the House either. And– and again, there’s nothing that he’s given up– no information Admiral Maguire gave us, Gina Haspel has given us– Director Haspel, Ambassador Grenell the new acting DNI, that comports with what was leaked out of that House Intel Committee. So I haven’t seen it. The leaders of the– of the intelligence community that I have spoken with haven’t seen anything that comports with what was leaked out. But, again, those leaks, I don’t know if that’s what the briefers told the House committee. I mean those were just simply leaked–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But– well, that– that’s contradicted by reports that the director of National Intelligence, Maguire, did brief White House officials. But, more broadly, the FBI director at the beginning of the month, Chris Wray, testified that Russia continues to try to influence the elections mainly through social media manipulation. So, this pattern of behavior has continued, Russia is undeterred. Are you denying that that is happening?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: No, no. What I– look I– what I have heard from the FBI, you know– well, what I’ve heard is that Russia would like Bernie Sanders to– to win the Democrat nomination. They’d probably like him to be President, understandably, because he wants to– to spend money on social programs and probably would have to take it out of the military, so that would make sense. And– and, look, the Russians have always tried to interfere with elections because they want to divide Americans. They want to undermine our democracy. But the idea that they want to– they want to influence the election and somehow cause the President to win, I just don’t see it. But, look, I think there are a number of countries: China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, that would like to influence our elections to– to get the candidate that they feel would be best for their country.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you are saying that it is not, in fact, the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment that Russia has a preference for President Trump?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: I– I have not seen that. And– and again, why would they have a preference for President Trump, who is rebuilding our military, who is giving the Ukrainians lethal aid to fight Russian troops? So that doesn’t make sense. Now, look, we want good relations with Russia. We’d like to have great relations with Russia. I haven’t seen any intelligence that there’s any active measures by the Russians to try and get the President re-elected. And– and we’ve got a simple message for the Russians or any other country that wants to– to meddle in our elections, whoever they are behind: stay out of our democratic elections. And– and we’re doing everything we can. We’re working with state and local officials. We’re going, in many cases–


ROBERT O’BRIEN: –to paper ballots to make sure that– that, you know, governments with ill intent can’t hack secretary of state websites, can’t get involved in our elections, change results. And– and we’re going to work on election security very, very hard through– across the interagency in the federal government and also with our state and– and local partners.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Why not have the intelligence community testify in public about what they are seeing, so that the public can arm themselves, so that they can understand what is disinformation and what is fact?


MARGARET BRENNAN: Why not declassify some of those?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: I’d– I’d have no problem with that. And– and– but that’s not my decision. And the intelligence community is– is very concerned and– and careful about sources and methods and I understand that. But I– I would personally have no problem with–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But back in 20– back in 2016 in October of 2016, when Russia was doing this disinformation campaign, the Obama administration did declassify information at that time. So there is a precedent. Why doesn’t the Trump administration do that?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: I think if there’s intelligence that we can declassify that– that we can get out there all the better, because, again, we weren’t in office in 2016 when– when the last election meddling took place and the administration did very little about it. And– and they– you know everyone admits that– that very little was done about it. We’re in office now and we’re doing everything we can across the interagency and– with our state and federal and local partners to– to ensure that– that American ballots are secure, that– that are our– our ballot machines are secure, that tabulations are secure, that– that state, secretary of state websites are secure. We want to make sure that this is a free and fair election, that Americans select their next President, not some foreign country. And– and we’re going to do– and the President’s been deadly serious about that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I– I want to quickly ask you, though, about Afghanistan. If the Taliban does not make good on its promise to pull back on violence, to sign this deal at the end of the month, is the President positioned to stop the troop withdrawal?

ROBERT O’BRIEN: The President made it very clear the last time we were closed to signing a deal with the Taliban and they– they engaged in some malign activity, they– they had a vehicle-borne IED that killed a number of people, including one American, and the President pulled back from signing the deal. We’re hopeful that– that we can get to a– a place where the Afghans can talk with each other and negotiate some sort of resolution, a political resolution of the conflict. We’ve been there nineteen years. It’s time for us to stop bringing our– our sons and daughters home through Dover Air Force Base and dignified transfers. We’ve got to get out of– of the war in Afghanistan, but we’re going to do it in a way that protects American interests. So if the Taliban does not live up to their agreement on the reduction of violence plan, then we’ll take a very care– careful look at them. I think it’d be unlikely that we’d– we’d sign a peace treaty, but we’re not going to reduce troops to a level below what is necessary to protect American interests and our partners in Afghanistan. I can assure you of that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right. Ambassador O’Brien, thank you for joining us.

ROBERT O’BRIEN: Always great to be here, Margaret.

[End Segment Transcript]

This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, CIA, Decepticons, Deep State, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Russia, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to Sunday Talks: NSA Robert O’Brien -vs- Margaret Brennan…

  1. Reserved55 says:

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Joel says:

    She is a Russian hack

    Liked by 1 person

  3. citizen817 says:

    Terrific Tucker monologue

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Mike says:

    SeeBS also stands by it’s reporting/propaganda that Crooked Hillary will win the 2016 election too. These arse clowns are insufferable.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. screwauger says:

    It’s no wonder the Leftist’s in my life are so self assured and pampas in their assertions when this is what they model their arguments after. Sickening.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. bessie2003 says:

    Interesting that CBS felt it necessary to add that assertion at the end of the interview.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. jeans2nd says:

    Something is hinckey with this Brennan-O’Brien thing.. Explained in yesterday’s Brennan-O’Brien post.
    Cannot put my finger on just what, but something is def hinckey here.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kirsty I says:

      I think your “hinckometer” is flashing red bc this information is exactly the same information that Adam Schiff leaked to the Washington Post and we KNOW, without a modicum of doubt, that the great Shift did it again, as witness Nunes statements to Maria Bartiromo this morning.

      Liked by 4 people

    • KJinCton says:

      I feel that as well. The fact that she re-asked the question four different times, in four different ways makes me think that she was firmly expecting him to confirm her position. Almost as if it was a pre-arranged outcome.

      I’ve been ok with O’Brien so far, but maybe Grennel coming in has thrown a wrench in all kinds of plans,

      Liked by 2 people

      • jeans2nd says:

        That is exactly what Brennan did 11 Feb 2020 when O’Brien had a Q&A with Brennan at the Atlantic Council, no less. Brennan also kept insisting her point was correct and not O’Brien’s.
        Brennan was O’Brien’s first interview Oct 2019, then a full sit-down in O’Brien’s office Nov 2019.
        And that is just off the top of my head.
        smh Wish i knew what it was…


    • Unleashed says:

      Did you mean Hinckley, like the one who shot Reagan? Oh the Bush family was friends with the Hinckleys! Hmm


  8. Reserved55 says:

    Liked by 8 people

    • Kirsty I says:

      …and you wonder why Ric Grenell was given the top job at the DNI. Wonder no more, my friends.
      This man is exceptionally clever, diplomatically brilliant and has been around forever.
      …and if anyone on the left DARE question his qualifications, use their own words against them, and scream, “homophobe!”
      After all, they do it to excuse everything!

      Liked by 6 people

    • Rynn69 says:



  9. Reserved55 says:


    • visage13 says:

      “but admits to @GStephanopoulos he hasn’t looked at or sought out materials surrounding those reports.” This is such bs spin, I watched the interview and O’Brien said over and over if someone has the underlying intelligence to let him, Grenell & Haspell see it as none of them have yet. I see you posted the interview below and Georgie asked him three times and he was incredulous that it could somehow be a false report/leak and now all these hours later it is admitted by the fake news that in fact it was. Which is what O’Brien, the President and Devin Nunes (my hero) has been saying since the leak was reported.

      Liked by 2 people

  10. Pa Hermit says:

    Wow, Marguerite B. is in a class with Crissy W., Hannity, and others in that I can no longer watch these clips to the end! Looks like the telly is going the way of “8 tracks!”

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I get very weary of two tropes:

    (1) “The Russians.™” It is always “the Russians,” even after the USSR ceased to exist. Anytime America wants a booger-man, it has one go-to country to go to. Every time.

    (2) “Meddling.” Posting on social media isn’t meddling. Actually tampering with election results of course would be – which we have no evidence of. (And which of course would be something that any country so-inclined might wish to do if they could.) But what “The Russians™” been blasted for is basically social media. It isn’t a crime to say that someone should win, or even to advertise on his or her behalf.`

    Liked by 5 people

  12. geoffcsaltine says:

    All Russia all the time. They will not let it go,she so wanted to keep on it.DemoClowns all of them.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. KMD says:

    Brennan pushing OBrien to go on record as to current knowledge & capability to defend against 2020 election vote tampering. Wisely,he doesn’t not show his hand, instead mentions “paper ballots”, LOL…
    Also, LOVED the (not so) subtle slam against crooked hillary when he mentioned preventing against future SOS server hacking / access. OBrien KNOWS crooked sold our country to the highest bidder…

    My goodness, that Brennan woman is evil

    Liked by 6 people

    • I sincerely believe that a Federal law should immediately be passed requiring that all States implement voting processes that are based on electronically-counted paper ballots. The paper should first pass through a scanner that checks it for errors, then a second scanner which records the votes. Only this is a sufficiently auditable system.

      The State of Colorado demonstrated how it is possible to use elementary statistical quality-control processes to establish a “X% confidence interval” that the election results are “probably” correct, based on a random sampling of a surprisingly-small number of randomly selected sealed boxes. (Remember the classes where the professor asked you how many light-bulbs you’d need to randomly pick off a production line, to see if they actually lit up? Yeah, that.)

      Without that, it’s simple: “If you create an electronic ballot box that can be ‘stuffed’ without detection … guess what is going to happen?” This is not rocket science, folks … it’s good ol’ human nature.

      Liked by 3 people

      • whoseyore says:

        Unfortunately all states won’t do that. President Trump should take advantage of this false ‘Russian Collusion ‘ claim was o sign an emergency Executive Order for paper ballots nation wide! Ninth District Court of Appeals finally has some honest judges.” in case California wants to fuss.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Beau Geste says:

          Excellent idea, whose,

          “To prevent russian and other foreign vote tampering, or actual foreign voters, it is hereby ordered that all votes shall be by paper ballot, with voter proof of citizenship at a voting precinct with video face recognition. In addition, blockchain technology shall be utilized to give voters a printed record, and unique code to check after vote counting, that their vote has been counted properly. “.

          Liked by 1 person

  14. uptothere says:

    I saw a lot of stumbling, mumbling, hesitation throughout O’Brian’s interview and he came across as unsure of his facts and timelines. Not very effective in my opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Reserved55 says:

    This is only a part of the deconstruct I did of the WaPo article of a couple days ago.
    Like the President said, it’s a disinformation campaign.

    “U.S. officials have told Sen. Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to help his presidential campaign as part of an effort to interfere with the Democratic contest, according to people familiar with the matter.”

    “Some analysts believe the Kremlin’s goal is to cause maximum disruption within the United States and that it throws the support of its hackers and trolls behind candidates based on that goal, not any particular ***affinity for the people running.”***

    The Kremlin is or is not helping Bernie, which is it?


    • “Why should ‘the Kremlin’ give a damn?” And, if so, precisely what could they do except advertise? There are nearly 200 recognized nations on Earth … wanna check them all?

      I’ve just got this advice for the Democratic Party: (1) Find a real candidate. Quickly.


    • California Joe says:

      Well, either Russia wants Bernie Sanders to be President or they want Donald Trump. They can’t have both??? Why didn’t O’Brien jam that up her rear end!

      Liked by 2 people

  16. samwise163 says:

    The Brennans (Margaret and Johnny Boombots) are abhorrent pathological liars and traitors to the US of A. She is disgusting to listen to.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. fred5678 says:

    Every day, in every way, MSM is colluding with Dems for the inevitable need for an excuse for their candidate losing in a landslide in November.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. The real threat to the Democrat party is that a lot of voters plan to interfere with the election. 🙂

    Liked by 9 people

  19. OhNoYouDont says:

    Chappaqua native. (Hilliary’s home turf) Democrat for Congress #NY17


  20. Jean Sember says:

    At the end Brennan said this…
    MARGARET BRENNAN: The Trump-appointed official overseeing US election security – Shelby Pierson – reported to Congress that Russia was interfering in the election and has shown a “preference” for President Trump but sources tell our Major Garrett there was bipartisan push back on her assertions and questions about the strength of the evidence. Congress has requested to see the underlying intelligence to back up that assessment, which as you heard, the National Security advisor said he had not seen.

    CBS stands by Major’s reporting the President was told Russia was trying to help him win. We’ll be back in a moment.

    I wonder if they still stand by their reporting now.


  21. CharterOakie says:


    NSA O’Brien – why do you give that moron the time of day?!

    Liked by 1 person

  22. coldanger says:

    O’Brien should not be allowed on any media programs. He’s weak, ineffectual and a bumbler…

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Rotor says:

    I’m reassured CBS stands by the story they manufactured.


    • Beau Geste says:

      All CBS-manufactured stories come with a 3-day warranty, which is the public attention span.

      PDJT’s 1-day response time has adversely affected the CBS warranty plan.


  24. starfcker says:

    Wow, they’re going to be fitting Margaret for a straitjacket soon enough. Watch her tweak out at 3:58. From 6 minutes on, she’s ready to start crying. That’s one hell of a performance. The walls are closing in, baby. And you chose the wrong side.


    • todayistheday99 says:

      I think she might be showing signs of cognitive dissonance, when a tiny dose of reality is interfering with her “reality distortion bubble”.


  25. Rynn69 says:

    “During a pre-taped broadcast CBS’s Margaret Brennan questions National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien about the now identified false briefing material that was never shared with the White House prior to misrepresenting the intelligence to congress.”

    And we wonder why the President feels hesitant to share national security decisions of extreme secrecy with them? The enemy is within.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. I’m sure Margey has been practicing her “extreme skepticism” look to accompany her lame gotcha ambush journo questions…
    She probably thinks it makes her look braving, tough, brilliant…
    But all I see is a 40 year old version of St Greta.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s