Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is a fixture on CNN, and Breitbart News reports that on a recent appearance on “Anderson Cooper 360,” he asserted that even though the Mueller report might have cleared President Trump of charges that he actively colluded with Russia, perhaps he was guilty of some “passive collusion”; for example, retweeting messages “that had been planted by the Russians in social media.”
So now the guy who used to lead our national intelligence operation is saying that “passive collusion” is an actual thing. Tony Shaffer is a retired intel operative and bestselling author who had an interesting take on Clapper’s claim.
I know Jim Clapper – I've briefed Jim Clapper several times – he was an idiot then – he is a more severe idiot now: Clapper: If Active Collusion Wasn't Proven, I Think We Have 'A Case of Passive Collusion' | Breitbart https://t.co/02ebJKmNXa via @BreitbartNews
— Tony Shaffer (@T_S_P_O_O_K_Y) April 20, 2019
Trump Derangement Syndrome appears to have deteriorated his intelligence.
Know several who dealt with him and confirm
— jerry parnell (@jerryparnell3) April 20, 2019
Everyone I've talked to that knew him had the same opinion.
— Engr Psychologist⭐️⭐️⭐️ (@PsySciGuy) April 20, 2019
Says it all Tony 👍
— Kathryn Lucarello (@kel50) April 20, 2019
— Kevin Loughnane (@KevinLoughnane1) April 20, 2019
I’m running through the US Legal code right now and NO WHERE does it say “collusion” is a crime, be it active or passive. What the Hell is Clapper blathering about? The man should have his security clearance revoked immediately, and be barred from ever possessing one.
— 🇺🇸 ♱ Mr. Will ♱ 🏴☠️ (@Dudeteronomy) April 20, 2019
So, does Clapper have knowledge of the LAW that defines "passive collusion"? Or is this, too, another rhetoric game –like trying to alter the meaning of Nationalist?
— Brontefan47 (@lowoodschool1) April 20, 2019
These people are using the same terms they apply to spying and intelligence collection. If it wasn't active then it must've been passive because they are certain, without any factual evidence, that it happened. Our intelligence community is so much better without him or Brennan.
— M0hicanSon (@MohicanSon) April 20, 2019
Passive collusion, aka imaginary collusion.
— Joe Gunter (@JoeGunter) April 20, 2019
Now we just make stuff up when we don't like the outcome? WTH, man?
— Teresa Warner (@teresawarner) April 20, 2019
Let it go people.
— alexis (@alexissmirks) April 20, 2019
Double Secret Collusion?
— Harry Parker (@RaidersHLP) April 20, 2019
"Passive collusion"? Interesting term. Is such a thing even POSSIBLE? I don't think so, but let's have a discussion, if you think it is. (HINT: I'll win!)
— Tom Hiter (@TomHiter) April 20, 2019
What we have is a case of active meddling in a U.S. election by the nation's secret police. The good news about Clapper is that he's too dim a bulb to have thought it up or led it. Brennan did that.
— Robert A. Hahn (@Robert_A_Hahn) April 20, 2019
Can't wait for his testimony under oath.
— DrLaurie (@acobra334) April 20, 2019
Clapper's ignorance persuaded him to drift to the wrong side of history and he will pay dearly for his decision to get involved.
— Chuck (@satcom_1) April 20, 2019
How long before we hear that no collusion is illegal and Trump should be impeached for not colluding?
— Rick Whittaker (@CRiwhittak) April 20, 2019
Scary that this man lead an Intelligence Agency for Obama. But makes sense now seeing they did nothing about Russia under their watch.
— Joe DeFranco (@realJoeDeFranco) April 20, 2019
President Obama did tell Vladimir Putin to cut it out. He probably assumed that was enough.
HUH? James Clapper's defense of John Brennan proves he's 'too DUMB to have clearance' https://t.co/TUJ1tY6fFx
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 15, 2018