Skip to content

Radical Dem Says Trump Wants to Sell Nation’s Secrets to ‘Highest Bidder,’ Demands Stripping Intel Briefings

    The Democrats are going all-in with their revenge tour against former President Trump, shirking all pretenses at “healing” and “unity” in a shameless effort to spite a political foe.

    Not only are the Dems pressing a dubious impeachment case against now-citizen Trump in the U.S. Senate, all in the likely futile endeavor to prevent him from ever running for higher office again, they are now looking to strip the former president of intelligence briefings.

    Radical Democrat Rep. Val Demings, for her part, is stoking the flames of resentment by suggesting that Donald Trump, who has never been shown to have jeopardized America’s secrets like his adversaries have on countless occasions, should be stripped of his intelligence briefings.

    “Let me just say this, I think President Biden was being very kind when he said there’s no need for the former president to get intelligence briefings,” she said, referring to Biden’s remarks in a sit-down interview that will air in full on CBS on Sunday.

    Biden responded to a question on the matter and replied, “I think not.”

    “I’d rather not speculate out loud,” Biden continued when asked about what reservations he might have. “I just think that there is no need for him to have the — the intelligence briefings. What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?”

    Rep. Val Demings apparently took the president’s remarks as her cue to go on a fact-free rant.

    “We watched this president in action for four years. We saw him stand on the stage with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki and basically do everything but ask the Russian dictator for his autograph. We’ve seen him on a phone call with the Russian dictator and refuse to ask him about bounties put on the heads of American soldiers,” she said.

    Demings thus rattles off several baseless claims in a short span to justify taking unprecedented actions against a former president. This includes the facts that the Mueller investigation, despite the exorbitant time and expense, never found evidence that showed Trump colluded with the Russians. Secondly, the Trump administration was objectively tougher on the Russians than most presidential administrations. Furthermore, the U.S. military was never able to establish that the breathless Russian bounty reports circulated by the mainstream media were ever true.

    This is quite a lot to be wrong about in one breath. One might question the “intelligence” of the Congresswoman.

    “We’ve seen our former president snuggle up with Kim Jong-Un of North Korea,” she went on referring to Trump’s basic diplomacy that kept the North Koreans contained, unlike the Biden administration.

    “I believe this former president and I believe it with all of my heart, that he would use intelligence as a bargaining chip or sell it to the highest bidder,” she baselessly claimed in fact-free fashion.

    “I prefer to join in on the words of my intelligence committee chairman, there is no need — there’s no circumstance where the former president should receive any intelligence, not now, or quite frankly, in the future.”

    It should be noted that former President Obama is believed to have been behind the Iranian stuxnet leak that risked America’s foreign intelligence operations.

    “The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. It’s wrong,” Obama claimed at the time.

    Obama would later pardon the general at the center of the leak to the New York Times, which many believe was to help the Obama administration appear to be tougher on Iran. No one has suggested that Obama be stripped of security clearances.

    What there is “no need for” in this country is more baseless Democrat attacks on the institutions of our government, such as the office of the presidency, and pushing more needless division based on cooked-up allegations and reckless speculatoin.

    "*" indicates required fields

    Who's your favorite former President?*
    This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
    This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.





    OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion.