John Brennan is not happy about Christopher Wray resigning from the FBI and confides in an MSNBC actress (pictured on the left) who empathizes with him gently.
Years ago, I read a book that taught the reader that people are often confessing and how to detect it. If you look at and listen to their word choices, you can sometimes find what it is they did in the past, what they fear will happen in the future, and clues about whether or not they are capable of remorse. Many of you who watched my youtube or read my blog before I got on substack know how much I like to do a communication analysis, and delineate a) what’s literally being said, b) what the person really meant, and c) the third and most important/revealing part, what’s being left unsaid. If you’d like to watch my 4 minute video communication analysis of John Brennan’s MSNBC interview, (with me inserted into the frame using tiktok’s green screen feature as Brennan talks and no one tells him to put down the shovel), you can watch the embedded video above or watch on X here, or Truth Social here or tiktok here.
Or read on for a more detailed thorough analysis.
Now, John Brennan hasn't worked for the CIA (ostensibly) in eight years. He had, prior to that, worked for the CIA since the time he was in college, his career culminating in working under Obama as the Director of the CIA. In 2017, upon finding himself unceremoniously no longer employed, he became a consultant for cable news.
The clip we’re analyzing cuts off the anchor’s question and starts right at John Brennan’s answer:
“I think it’s going to be very difficult, and I’m very disappointed that Director Wray has decided to resign.”
Oh, no, you guys. John Brennan is disappointed. Christopher Wray disappointed John Brennan. How terrible. How dare he.
But seriously. There is something tragic and terrible here. It’s the use of shame language. The type a parent might use on a naughty child or wayward teenager, not a boss on a subordinate — and certainly not by a peer in reference to a peer. The use of shame to cajole someone for an existing behavior or to prevent a future action is one indicator of an extremely manipulative (to the point of amoral) personality. The Shame/Praise double edged sword is an astoundingly powerful behavior modifier. For example, you and I both poop and piss in a bowl on command and on demand (Go potty! Good girl! Good boy!!) because of a mom-n-dad weilded golden ratio of Shame to Praise. Too much shame and you’d still be wetting the bed. Not enough and you just wouldn’t care if you’d completely wiped clean. Not enough praise, and you wouldn’t take good pride in finishing what you start. Too much praise, and you end up being easily manipulated by someone who tells you are good instead of praising/rewarding specific actions which were completed in a good way or which led to a superlative outcome. Too much praise from the original sculptors of our personality clay makes us vulnerable to people who withhold praise as well, especially malevolent CIA handler type personalities who seek to exploit the weaknesses in a submissive personality. (To be clear here, I posit that everyone has a degree of submissiveness in their personality; and thank God we do or force and violence — or the threat of them — would be the only way to train anyone to do anything.)
Now, we can’t be disappointed by people we didn’t have an expectation of trying to please us or of being obligated to do what we’ve told them to. Otherwise they’re just people with free will who didn’t do what we wanted. The outcome is disappointing, not the person who caused it. But John Brennan’s unconscious choice to use the phrase “I’m very disappointed” is the indicator that he, Brennan, is the dominant person in the power dynamic with Wray, that Brennan is the one with the authority and Wray is the compliant one.
He’s not telling us the viewer or the MSNBC host that he’s disappointed about Christopher Wray’s resignation; he’s telling us and her that he’s disappointed in Christopher Wray.
And, he’s really talking directly to Christopher Wray, and he's saying, I'm disappointed in you.
This is not what we talked about.
Brennan continues:
“I think Director Wray has carried out his responsibilities with integrity and professionalism during very difficult and challenging times over the last seven years.”
My first thought is, what is this, an annual job performance review? So condescending and patronizing to bestow that kind of praise.
Unless that’s exactly what it is — and Brennan is playing the role of Wray’s boss for better or for worse.
Plus, the adjectives “professionalism” and “integrity” are nonsense LinkedIn pseudo-compliments. They were nonsense says-nothing means-nothing words in the ’90’s too. Oh, he has integrity? Yay, I’m glad he has an intact moral compass. He should. That’s the bare minimum. You know some sociopath in Human Resources in the 80’s was leading a Resumé Enhancement seminar and thought, “honest” is overused — let’s say “has integrity.” Well, how about neither? “Honest” doesn’t need a thesaurus, “honest” goes without saying! If you do say it, we have to wonder why you felt compelled to point that out. Of course you have integrity — we assumed that, right along with “follows directions” and “shows up on time.”
Same with professionalism. Ok, we are glad you’re not an amateur. We assumed you were going to hold yourself to the high standards of your chosen profession. We are so grateful. We are — again — concerned that you felt the need to point it out because we were over here taking your word for it that you really do have the credentials you claim to. (What is happening? And who put the social contract through a paper shredder? Good grief.)
So, fine then, Wray is definitely going to qualify for a merit raise. Good for him. The next thing Brennan says is, “He was appointed to a 10-year term and he accepted a 10-year term.”
On the word accepted, John Brennan's voice goes up in pitch.
He could almost cry.
This is not going according to plan.
A lot of people on X said they heard fear in Brennan’s voice. Perhaps (and I mean ok, it stands to reason) but hear more — really listen, and on the word accepted, you will hear the similarity to a young child pleading, on the verge of tears, saying, “but you said you would, you said.” A whimper. Desperate. Disbelief that he has utterly lost control of the situation. (The sound of disbelief in his voice is mitigating the sound of fear — he’s still in denial that Trump really is getting back into office in a month.)
Brennan continues: “And right now, his decision to leave tends to legitimize what Donald Trump is doing in terms of appointing someone else.”
First things first, speaking of legitimizing, John Brennan does not refer to Trump as President Trump because that would legitimize Trump as having been president in the past and imply the legitimacy of his current President-elect status. Astute with-the-program readers know that it has always been customary to use a person’s title even after they are out of office; for example, Trump in 2016 referred to Hillary as Secretary Clinton even though she was no longer Secretary of State. (If I were a betting woman, I would bet “the former guy” psy-op came straight from John Brennan’s diabolical heart. That’s Sir, Mr. President Former Guy to you now.)
But what’s really astonishing is that in this moment, Brennan’s response to Christopher Wray essentially saying, “I'm going to leave because I'm obviously being replaced. So why would I stay?” is “No, no! Why wouldn’t you stay? Resigning validates this whole process where people go to the polls and they vote and the electoral college kicks in and we get a president who gets to appoint whoever he wants. Why would you acknowledge that as a valid process here?”
Cuckoo.
Brennan continues (insanely), “I don't think it would be any problem if he stayed in place and had Donald Trump remove him. I mean, that certainly is a president's prerogative, even though there is a 10-year term on the FBI director role.”
John Brennan doesn't really think there'd be no problem if Wray stayed in place — he's telling him that's what he was supposed to do (grasping for a second time at the 10-year term straw and hanging on for dear life). Stay. In. Place.
Brennan goes on to speculate, “But by doing this, I do think it's going to leave the men and women of the FBI sort of wondering what their future is going to look like, particularly if somebody like Kash Patel, a real sycophant to Donald Trump, is actually going to get through the confirmation process.”
And there it is.
**Actually** get through the confirmation process. The backup plan has now been both confessed and revealed: keep Christopher Wray in place as the FBI director, sabotage the confirmation process so that Kash Patel would never actually get sworn in, and have Wray finish the 10 year term.
So by resigning now, Christopher Wray is saying, No, John, I'm throwing in the towel, I'm done. Our plan is not working, and it's not going to work. I'm resigning and I've accepted that Trump won — he beat us.
Brennan then says, “Now although I respect Director Wray, and I'm sure that his decision was based on how he —” again Brennan’s voice creeps up in pitch on HE “— evaluated the impact on the Bureau and the workforce. I just think that was a decision that should not have been made at this point, and he should have stayed through the transition to the new administration.”
He says “the transition to the new administration,” meaning whoever gets in there next. Whoever that might be. Why is everyone so sure it's going to be Trump? And now silly Christopher Wray is jumping the gun, preemptively resigning!
Yes, Director Wray is waving a white flag — thee white flag, of surrender. Good for him. Christopher Wray is going to be free.
He's going to be out from under the thumb of John Brennan.
When I’ve finished my communication analysis of Director Wray’s announcement at FBI HQ, I will link it here.
Thank you for reading, dear substack subscribers! I look forward to your comments; they mean a lot to me.
Tip Jar: https://ko-fi.com/sarahreynolds
Remember, if you’re going through hell, keep going!
A tiny bit of housekeeping: sending emails from substack straight to spam or junkmail is the new censorship/shadowban by yahoo/gmail. So if you add sarahreynolds@substack.com to your contacts, you will always get the emails when a new post is up in your regular inbox.
My tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@sarah__reynolds
Please follow me on X: https://twitter.com/Sarah__Reynolds
Protect yourself from EMF’s (remember the study Huberman talked about that showed EMF radiation from cellphones on your testicles affects fertility? Now imagine what it does to your brain). I wear and recommend Lambs brand gear: you get 10% off and I get a small commission if you purchase through my link
Share this post