John Brennan, once the CIA’s top dog, might have stepped into a legal minefield over his role in the Trump-Russia saga. A new report suggests the former spymaster could face perjury charges for allegedly misleading statements tied to what some call a politically charged "hoax."
Miranda Devine’s latest column in The New York Post, published July 6, 2025, at 10:30 p.m. ET, lays out the case against Brennan.
The article, steeped in political intrigue, claims his actions during the Trump-Russia investigation may have crossed legal lines.
The heart of the matter is simple: Brennan’s alleged fibs could land him in hot water. Devine’s piece, filed under "Politics," doesn’t mince words, framing the Trump-Russia probe as a dubious endeavor from the start. For conservatives, this is catnip—a chance to spotlight what they see as deep-state overreach.
Let’s rewind: Brennan was CIA director when the Trump-Russia investigation kicked off. The probe, which consumed headlines for years, aimed to uncover ties between Donald Trump’s campaign and Moscow. Critics, including Devine, argue it was less about truth and more about political sabotage.
Devine’s article doesn’t pull punches, suggesting Brennan’s statements during this period might not hold up under oath. Perjury, after all, isn’t a slap on the wrist—it’s a felony that could tarnish a legacy. For a man who once wielded immense power, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
The claim hinges on what Brennan said and when. While no direct quotes from the article spell it out, the implication is clear: he may have misled investigators or Congress. It’s the kind of accusation that makes you wonder who’s watching the watchmen.
Fast-forward to 2025, and the story still resonates. The Trump-Russia saga, long a lightning rod, continues to fuel distrust in institutions. For MAGA supporters, Brennan’s potential legal woes are proof the system was rigged against their guy.
Devine’s framing of the investigation as a "hoax" taps into a broader conservative narrative. It’s not just about Brennan—it’s about a bureaucracy they believe weaponized its power.
Yet, even skeptics must admit: perjury is a serious charge, not a partisan talking point. The article’s timing, just days into July 2025, suggests this isn’t old news being rehashed.
It’s a fresh angle on a saga that refuses to die. And with 653 comments, readers are clearly eating it up, from MAGA diehards to curious moderates.
Brennan, for his part, hasn’t been charged—yet. The article only raises the possibility, but that’s enough to set tongues wagging. If true, it’s a reminder that even the mighty can fall when truth catches up.
Still, there’s a flip side. Accusations don’t equal guilt, and Brennan’s defenders might argue he’s being scapegoated. The lack of direct quotes in Devine’s piece leaves room for speculation—perhaps intentional, to keep the buzz alive.
Conservatives will cheer this as a long-overdue reckoning. But let’s not get carried away: a rush to judgment risks repeating the same mistakes of the past. Justice, not vengeance, should guide the conversation.
The road ahead is murky. If perjury charges materialize, Brennan could face a legal battle that reopens old wounds. The Trump-Russia probe, already dissected to death, might get a second life in courtrooms and cable news.
Will Brennan skate, or will he face the music? Only time will tell, but one thing’s certain: this story’s got legs. With 653 comments and counting, the public’s verdict is still being written.
