Ex-CIA Analyst Issues Grave Warning About 2024 Election: The ‘Deep State … Will Reemerge’

With the 2024 election year finally officially opened, Americans are being given a harsh warning about one of the biggest dangers they are going to be facing this year.

No, the threat will likely not be from the efforts of the clearly dishonest establishment media. Or even the empty-headed activism of the predictably liberal Hollywood establishment.

Think: Deep State rising up from their lairs.

This from westernjournal.com.

Former CIA analyst John Gentry, an adjunct professor of political science at Georgetown University, told Fox News in an article published Tuesday that he expects the might of the nation’s spy services to weigh in heavily when it comes to shaping the atmosphere surrounding the presidential race.

And that weight will be heavily against

a re-election of President Trump—

or any candidate the GOP fields against Joe Biden.

Gentry told Fox:

My guess is that the proverbial deep state within the intelligence community will reemerge because presumably a Republican candidate will again be seen as a threat to the internal policies that many intelligence people like.

This is no idle warning.

Americans of all political stripes should remember that 2020 saw a blatant insertion of the supposedly non-political intelligence agencies into the politics of the 2020 election when a letter signed by 51 former intelligence officers helped squelch the bombshell story broken by the New York Post about the Hunter Biden laptop—a motherlode of evidence that the younger Biden had used his father’s name and political power to build an influence-peddling network that spanned the globe.

Not to mention Hunter Biden’s … adventurous … lifestyle when it came to drugs and sex—an obvious national security risk in the man who was the son of the vice president of the United States while he was cavorting with prostitutes and bragging about knowing ‘the spy chief of China.’

The Beltway website Politico headlined its article about the letter with a clearly deceitful summary:

Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.

That both misstated the actual content of the letter and shaped the narrative around the laptop story in a way that favored the Biden presidential campaign—and lied to the American people.

The letter did not actually brand the laptop story ‘Russian disinformation.’ It used weaselly worded formulations like ‘classic earmarks of a Russian information campaign’ and ‘makes us deeply suspicious’ to raise questions about the credibility of the story without ever actually taking a stand (a classic strategy of bureaucracy warriors).

But that was enough, with Politico’s headline, to taint the Post’s story and encourage the lords of social media at Twitter and Facebook to censor or restrict the story and limit how much American voters knew about the man who eventually became their president (with the disastrous results that have become all too familiar over the past three years).

Likewise, Americans—regardless of their politics—should remember the blatantly anti-Trump activities of the FBI in 2016 from the adulterous lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Paige to then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and then-FBI Director James Comey.

Those activities did not stop with Trump’s inauguration in 2017—they haunted his presidency with the “Russia collusion hoax” for the next two years.

Gentry: In 2024 Americans can expect more of the same.

As the author of a book titled Neutering the CIA: Why US Intelligence Versus Trump Has Long-Term Consequences, it’s pretty clear where Gentry stands—and it’s not with his politically corrupted former employer in Langley, Virginia.

He cited a commentary piece published Dec. 18 in a publication called Just Security by former FBI counterintelligence agent Asha Rangappa and former CIA senior intelligence officer Marc Polymeropoulos.

The article attacked Trump’s plans to drain the swamp of the “intelligence community” — a “community” that has long since squandered its credibility when it comes to domestic politics—and likened Trump’s well-founded antipathy toward the nation’s intelligence services to former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s purge of the Ba’ath party in 1979.

Really! Why not Hitler’s “Night of the  Long Knives” while we’re at it?

And further:

For Americans who’ve never heard of Just Security—which is probably everyone reading this—it’s based at New York University’s School of Law and bills itself as ‘an online forum for the rigorous analysis of security, democracy, foreign policy, and rights.’

That sounds fine until a look at the front page shows it’s editorial stance might as well come from CNN. This link is to the Jan. 2 edition, but it’s a good bet any day will show the same bias. These things are certainly predictable.

It might seem unimportant that two former intelligence operatives decided to author a character assassination of Donald Trump on a website no normal person would read, but it’s not.

Americans might not trust “government” as a whole, but there tends to be an instinctive deference to “government intelligence” when it comes to the FBI and CIA.

Those agencies and social media giants and the establishment media relied on that deference to spike the Hunter Biden laptop story when it could have swung the 2020 presidential election.

It’s worth noting that Gentry, according to Fox:

[P]laced much of the blame for the overt politicization of American intelligence services on the leftist obsession with “diversity, equity and inclusion” — a DEI mantra that has staffed the agencies with zealots chosen more for skin color and ideological purity than actual merit or integrity.

That same commitment to progressive politics has destroyed the credibility of the establishment media and has even infected the country’s military.

The left uses its claims of “diversity, equity and inclusion” to pretend a moral superiority that does not exist, but could appeal to a range of potential supporters who do not look too far beneath the surface (the uneducated, the young, other low-information voters).

The intelligence agencies, likewise, use their presumed inside knowledge and the default opinion that they care about the future of the country to abuse the trust of the American people and skew the political conversation about the presidential election.

They did it for the 2016 election. They did it for the 2020 election. And they have already begun doing it for this year’s election, too.