If he truly was more concerned about defending the national interest than with throwing obstacles in the path of the new president, Mr. Brennan might have told him something like this: "Mr. President-elect, I want you to be aware that the Russians are making all sorts of false, wild and extremely obscene charges about you. The story obviously is false, but we want you to be aware that we believe this dishonest story must have been approved at the highest levels of the Russian government, and we hope you conduct policy toward Russia with that in mind. Do not trust Vladimir Putin, no matter how much he may pretend to be working with us."
A statement of that nature, made privately, could have been tremendously effective, and, by not giving credence to the story, would not have furthered the Russian cause. But no, Mr. Brennan "went public," promoting the lie – a lie that he knows is a lie - and weakening the incoming President.
And imagine what the reaction would have been if the CIA director in a departing Republican administration had publicly warned an incoming Democrat not to be soft on Russia? Not to worry - It didn’t happen, even on those occasions when the incoming President clearly was going to be soft on Russia (see Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama). No, the Republican CIA directors kept their mouths shut, and if they warned the incoming President, it was done privately. That was a great example to follow – too bad Mr. Brennan didn’t follow it.