Over target: Panicked liberal media attacks Gabbard's 'treasonous conspiracy' claim
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard published a report on Wednesday that appeared to confirm the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian election interference was a work of fiction comprising misquotes, unreliable reports, lies of omissions, and straight-out falsehoods.
Rather than admit fault or come to terms with the role it played in perpetuating an apparent hoax on the American people — one that set the stage for years of Russian-collusion smears, two congressional impeachments, multiple arrests, and greater tensions with a pre-eminent nuclear power — the liberal media is now desperately trying to both downplay the gravity of the newly declassified House Intelligence Committee majority staff report and spin the conclusions therein.
Refresher
The House Intelligence Committee report is a product of congressional investigators spending over 2,300 hours reviewing the ICA and its source reports, conducting dozens of interviews, and comparing the ICA analytic tradecraft against well-established intelligence reports.
According to the report, the intelligence community had no credible evidence of Russia working to help Trump win.
What's more, the report — which Gabbard indicated provides evidence of a "treasonous conspiracy" — claimed that the ICA, which was released by the Obama administration just weeks before President Donald Trump's inauguration in 2017:
- incorporated dubious claims despite high-level protest within the intelligence community;
- leaned on the bogus Steele dossier while failing to mention it was produced in part for the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and had Russian links;
- omitted narrative-killing evidence such as Moscow's withholding of damning information about Hillary Clinton's health issues, which if released could have helped Trump; and
- propped the narrative that Russian President Vladimir Putin "aspired" to help Trump win on "one scant, unclear, and unverifiable fragment of a sentence" from a "substandard report" that CIA officers initially omitted but were ordered by then-CIA Director John Brennan to include despite protest.
The report also indicates that the Obama administration leaked falsehoods from the ICA to the media, which publications like the Washington Post dutifully printed.
Liberal media turns on another gaslight
CNN's Kaitlan Collins did her apparent best on Wednesday to distract from the damning contents of the report by making its release about an imagined interpersonal drama between the president and his director of national intelligence.
'Who was saying that?'
Photo (left): Kevin Dietsch/Getty Image; Photo (right): Ethan Miller/Getty Images
Collins suggested in question form that Gabbard was "only releasing these documents now to improve [her] standing with the president after he said that [her] intelligence assessments were wrong," referencing Trump's assertion last month that Gabbard was wrong in suggesting there was no evidence that Iran was constructing a nuclear weapon.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt asked Collins, "Who was saying that?"
Leavitt later added, "The only people who are suggesting that the director of national intelligence would release evidence to try to boost her standing with the president are the people in this room, who constantly try to sow distrust and chaos amongst the president’s Cabinet, and it is not working."
The Washington Post, one of the chief proponents of the Russian collusion narrative, appears to have adopted a different strategy in attacking the report and its credibility.
Earlier in the week, the Post pushed an article asserting that Gabbard's "seditious conspiracy" claim is "based on thin gruel."
The article strategically assigned greater weight to the conclusions of previous investigations, including the Senate Intelligence Committee's multi-volume report on the ICA, which "found the ICA presents a coherent and well-constructed intelligence basis for the case of unprecedented Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election," and that "Moscow’s intent was to harm the Clinton campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the U.S. democratic process."
Sarah Bedford of the Washington Examiner noted that the problem with Democrats and the media using conclusions of the Senate Intelligence Committee report to contradict the newly declassified House report and Gabbard's corresponding claims is "it's not clear that the Senate had the same level of access to source material" that CIA Director [John Ratcliffe] now has."
"The conclusions about the Steele dossier not being a significant source for the ICA and about the CIA not wanting it included, for example, appear to come from interviews," continued Bedford. "Brennan just denied again that he wanted it in the ICA when the committee interviewed him in 2018. But Ratcliffe's memo is based on actual emails from 2016, which tell a completely different story."
Bedford was referencing the declassified memo released last month by Ratcliffe, which criticized the 2017 ICA and identified "multiple procedural anomalies" in its preparation.
— (@)
The Associated Press effectively told its readers not to believe their lying eyes in an article titled "Gabbard's claims of an anti-Trump conspiracy are not supported by declassified documents."
RELATED: If no one goes to jail, the coup was a success
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Like the Post, the AP leaned on the Senate Intelligence Committee's report to suggest there were no politically motivated aspects in the Obama administration's assessments, but it also refuted arguments that Gabbard did not appear to be making.
Gabbard told Fox News that there "was a shift, a 180-degree shift, from the intelligence community’s assessment leading up to the election to the one that President Obama directed be produced after Donald Trump won the election that completely contradicted those assessments that had come previously."
Gabbard was referencing how the ICA concluded in early January 2017 that Russia was trying to boost Trump — yet just weeks earlier, the FBI's director of counterintelligence and the DNI's national intelligence officer made no such claim in their briefing to Congress on Vladimir Putin's supposed leak operations.
The AP insinuated, however, that Gabbard was alternatively referring to the intelligence community's consistent view that there were Russian efforts to manipulate the vote count and concluded "there was no shift."
Despite the article's framing, the AP acknowledged that "the material declassified this week reveals some dissent within the intelligence community about whether Putin wanted to help Trump or simply inflame the U.S."; however, the AP suggested that the dissent detailed in the House report was business as usual and glossed over the fact that the debate concerned violations of analytic tradecraft standards and the inclusion of unreliable or false information.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The Intelligence Community Needs To Be Dismantled
Trump confirms he's sending Patriot missiles to Ukraine — but with one major caveat
President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed frustration with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy over his apparent reluctance to negotiate a lasting peace with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It appears, however, that this frustration has now been eclipsed by his displeasure with Putin's bellicosity.
Days after suggesting that Putin deals in "bulls**t" that sounds nice but "turns out to be meaningless," Trump confirmed Monday that his administration is going to send some serious military hardware to Ukraine — as he suggested he would in talks with the Ukrainian leader earlier this month — despite Pentagon concerns that U.S. weapon stockpiles have fallen dangerously low.
On again, off again
Days after his disastrous Feb. 28 meeting at the White House, Zelenskyy — whose term officially ended in May 2024 — suggested that a deal to end the war between Kyiv and Moscow was "still very, very far away" and that continued aid from the U.S. was a certainty.
'America will not put up with it for much longer!'
Zelenskyy's presumption of guaranteed aid at American taxpayers' expense evidently angered Trump, who was already peeved that the foreign leader was "not ready for Peace if America is involved" and had "disrespected the United States of America."
Trump ordered a pause on all military aid being sent to Ukraine, writing, "America will not put up with it for much longer!"
When, days later, Kyiv signaled an openness to a 30-day ceasefire with Russia, Trump reversed course on military aid.
Zelenskyy indirectly moved the needle further on military aid weeks later by signing the April 30 Ukraine-United States Mineral Resources Agreement. Before the ink on the deal was dry, the Trump administration approved the sale of F-16 fighter jet parts, training, and maintenance to Ukraine.
The flow of weapons to Ukraine once again came to an abrupt halt earlier this month when the Pentagon determined that the U.S. was running low on Patriot missile interceptors and 155mm artillery shells.
White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly noted that the decision "was made to put America's interests first following a DOD review of our nation's military support and assistance to other countries across the globe."
Politico reported that the decision to halt shipments followed a review of Pentagon munitions stockpiles and was driven by Elbridge Colby — a Pentagon policy chief who understands that China, not Russia or Middle Eastern rogue states, "presents a real, concrete peril to Americans and especially to the realization of the goals that the New Right seeks."
RELATED: Why the right turned anti-war — and should stay that way
Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images
Colby said in statement obtained by CNN at the time of the pause, "The Department of Defense continues to provide the president with robust options to continue military aid to Ukraine, consistent with his goal of bringing this tragic war to an end. At the same time, the Department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach to achieving this objective while also preserving U.S. forces' readiness for administration defense priorities."
'They should be in actually for more than us.'
Colby's apparent desire to ensure America was not handing away weapons at the expense of its own war-making ability was condemned by the usual suspects, including Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, who claimed Colby was "taking action that will surely result in the imminent death of many Ukrainian military and civilians."
To the satisfaction of Kaptur and others keen on sending more armaments to Ukraine, Trump vacated the order to pause shipments and said he would send even more to Ukraine.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell noted on July 7 that "at President Trump's direction, the Department of Defense is sending additional defensive weapons to Ukraine to ensure the Ukrainians can defend themselves while we work to secure a lasting peace and ensure the killing stops."
Patriot batteries and more
Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews on Sunday that his administration is going to supply Ukraine with "various pieces of very sophisticated military" equipment, including Patriot air defense batteries, and European nations will foot the bill.
"We're in for about $350 billion. Europe is in for $100 billion. That's a lot of money, 100, but they should be in actually for more than us," Trump said. "So as we send equipment, they are going to reimburse us for that equipment."
'We want everlasting peace.'
While Trump did not indicate how many Patriot batteries his administration will send to Ukraine, he emphasized that they are desperately needed because "Putin really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice, and then he bombs everybody in the evening. So there's a little bit of a problem there. I don't like it."
During his meeting on Monday with Trump, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte confirmed the plan to ship American weapons to Ukraine at European expense and indicated that "speed was of the essence."
RELATED: 'Hugely successful': Trump triumphs at NATO summit, winning over allies after years of resistance
— (@)
Trump expressed hope that the weapons help chasten Moscow without emboldening Kyiv to the point of seeking to prolong the war.
"We want everlasting peace," Trump stressed.
In addition to lamenting the war, suggesting his predecessor should have stopped it at the outset, and indicating that the new weapons would be "quickly distributed to the battlefield," Trump threatened to impose "very severe tariffs" of 100% on Russia if a deal to end the war in Ukraine is not brokered.
Blaze News has reached out to the White House for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Putin congratulates 47th president, says Russia ready for peace talks with Trump team
Top officials from around the globe reached out to congratulate President Donald Trump on his return to office Monday, in many cases sneaking in their respective asks to the leader of the world's pre-eminent superpower. Among them was Russian President Vladimir Putin, who indicated that Russia was open to discussing "long-term peace" in Eastern Europe.
During a September town hall interview, Trump warned that "we're heading into World War III territory" because of the war in Ukraine, adding that unlike the "clowns" in power, he would "heal the world."
Trump was ridiculed then and on numerous other occasions for suggesting that he would bring Ukraine and Russia to the negotiating table and the war to an end.
"This is a war that should have never happened. It should have never happened. ... It's a shame," Trump said after meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in September. "We'll get it solved. It's a very complicated puzzle, very complicated puzzle, but we'll get it solved, and people [will] get on with their lives. Too many people dead."
Although reportedly poised to pour 8% of GDP and 40% of total federal expenditure into continued defense and security spending, Putin appears ready for an end to the fighting.
'The peace through strength policy he announced provides an opportunity to strengthen American leadership and achieve a long-term and just peace.'
"We see statements by the newly elected US President and members of his team about the desire to restore direct contacts with Russia, interrupted through no fault of ours by the outgoing Administration," Putin said in a meeting Monday with elements of his security council. "We also hear his statements about the need to do everything to prevent a third world war. Of course, we welcome this attitude and congratulate the elected President of the United States of America on taking office."
After claiming an openness to establishing "smooth relations of cooperation" with the U.S., Putin noted, "We are also open to dialogue with the new US Administration on the Ukrainian conflict."
Putin stated the goal of such talks "should not be a short truce, not some kind of respite for regrouping forces and rearmament with the aim of subsequently continuing the conflict, but a long-term peace based on respect for the legitimate interests of all people, all nations living in this region."
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy similarly congratulated Trump on his inauguration and noted in a statement that the 47th president "is always decisive, and the peace through strength policy he announced provides an opportunity to strengthen American leadership and achieve a long-term and just peace, which is the top priority."
Following President Joe Biden's suggestion that Putin "does not want any full-blown war," Russian forces stormed into Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022. After 1,061 days of fighting, which has brought death to hundreds of thousands and displacement to millions of people — Russia now occupies roughly 18% of the country.
'Politics is the art of compromise.'
While both nations reportedly came close to negotiating an end to the conflict in early 2022 — where Russia's primary requirement was that Ukraine stay indefinitely out of NATO — the talks fell apart. The New York Times indicated that Russians killed the negotiations with a toxic clause that would have given Moscow a veto on military interventions by the U.S. and other nations on Ukraine's behalf. The Kremlin alternatively suggested that former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was responsible for killing the talks.
In the years and months since, Kyiv and Moscow have worked to maximize battlefield advantage and territorial coverage at least in part to negotiate ultimately from relative positions of strength. Zelenskyy, however, told the French paper Le Parisien last month that Ukraine does not have the military wherewithal to retake the territory presently occupied by Russia.
"If today we don't have the strength to win back all of our territory, maybe the West will find the strength to put Putin in his place ... at the [negotiating] table and diplomatically deal with this war," said Zelenskyy.
Putin told reporters in December that "politics is the art of compromise. And we have always said that we are ready for both negotiations and compromise."
He previously noted, however, that while amenable to "reasonable compromises," the "outcome should be in favor of Russia."
The Times noted that negotiations will likely require consensus not only on territorial recognition, troop withdrawals, and on Ukraine's potential international affiliations, but also on a host of secondary questions regarding, for instance, the matter of reparations and who will rebuild Ukraine's toppled cities; what will happen to the International Criminal Court's arrest warrants for Putin; and whether the U.S. will lift its sanctions on Russia.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
FACT CHECK: X Video Does Not Show Bashar Al-Assad Visiting His Aunt In Moscow
A video shared on X purports to show former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad visiting his aunt’s home in Moscow, Russia. وتلك الأيام نداولها بين الناس، حقيقة الدنيا دوارة، فهل من مدكر؟. بشار الأسد في زيارة لعمته ببيتها المتواضع في موسكو بجمهورية روسيا التي لجأ إليها. pic.twitter.com/bQTqLoA1pm — Hassan Bahar (@HassanB16621695) December 22, 2024 Verdict: False […]
Putin signals opening for Trump to make good on major campaign promise about Ukraine
President-elect Donald Trump repeatedly suggested on the campaign trail that if elected, he would resolve the war between Russia and Ukraine. Critics, including so-called fact-checkers, suggested that it couldn't be done or that doing so would require unthinkable concessions on Kyiv's part.
Notwithstanding the nay-saying from the so-called experts, it appears that Trump might be able to make good on this major campaign promise after all. Putin, whose economy is apparently "overheating," told reporters Thursday that he was "ready to meet [Trump] if he wants it" and that he was open to making compromises at the negotiating table.
After meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump told reporters in September, "I think I haven't changed from the standpoint that we both want to see it end and a fair deal made. It's gonna be fair. I think it will happen at the right time. I think it is going to happen."
"This is a war that should have never happened. It should have never happened, and it wouldn't have happened. It's a shame," said Trump. "We'll get it solved. It's a very complicated puzzle, very complicated puzzle, but we'll get it solved, and people [will] get on with their lives. Too many people dead."
Reuters indicated in late November — around the time President Joe Biden authorized Ukraine's use of American-made long-range missile systems against targets in Russia — that Putin was keen to discuss a ceasefire in Ukraine with Trump, especially since he would be negotiating from a place of strength, having made significant advances in Ukraine at a pace unparalleled since the early days of his invasion.
'Too many lives are being so needlessly wasted.'
Five current and former Russian officials with "knowledge of Kremlin thinking" specifically told Reuters that Putin was open to freezing the conflict along the front lines. Three insiders speaking on the condition of anonymity suggested there was room for negotiation over what to do with the eastern regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, where occupying Russian forces are largely in control, and that Moscow would consider withdrawing from territorial footholds in the Kharkiv and Mykolaiv regions.
Following the toppling of President Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria by a U.S.-designated terrorist organization and Turkish-backed Islamic militants, Trump noted in a Dec. 8 Truth Social post,
Assad is gone. He has fled his country. His protector, Russia, Russia, Russia, led by Vladimir Putin, was not interested in protecting him any longer. There was no reason for Russia to be there in the first place. They lost all interest in Syria because of Ukraine, where close to 600,000 Russian soldiers lay wounded or dead, in a war that should never have started, and could go on forever. Russia and Iran are in a weakened state right now, one because of Ukraine and a bad economy, the other because of Israel and its fighting success. Likewise, Zelenskyy and Ukraine would like to make a deal and stop the madness. They have ridiculously lost 400,000 soldiers, and many more civilians. There should be an immediate ceasefire and negotiations should begin. Too many lives are being so needlessly wasted, too many families destroyed, and if it keeps going, it can turn into something much bigger, and far worse. I know Vladimir well. This is his time to act. China can help. The World is waiting!
"If a meeting takes place at some point with the newly elected president, Mr. Trump, I am sure we will have plenty to talk about," Putin said Thursday at his over four-hour long press briefing.
"Politics is the art of compromise. And we have always said that we are ready for both negotiations and compromises," said Putin. "It is just that the opposite side, in the literal and figurative sense of the word, refused to negotiate. And we are always ready for this. The result of these negotiations is always compromise."
Putin previously suggested in October that Russia was willing to make "reasonable compromises" but stressed "the outcome should be in favor of Russia."
"After all, we reached an agreement, essentially, in Istanbul at the end of 2022. And, I repeat for the 100th time, the Ukrainian side initialed this document, which means they generally agreed with it, and then for some reason they refused," Putin continued in his remarks Thursday. "It is clear why."
The New York Times reported in June that documents from the negotiating sessions held from February to April 2022 in Turkey show negotiators produced multiple drafts of a treaty that would have apparently seen Ukraine's security guaranteed while also satisfying a number of Putin's demands.
'Mr. Johnson, a man with a nice haircut, came and said that they need to fight to the last Ukrainian.'
Russia initially wanted Ukraine to recognize Crimea as part of Russia, but by April 15, both sides reportedly agreed to exclude Crimea from the treaty such that Ukraine would not formally cede the territory though Crimea would nevertheless remain under Russian occupation.
Negotiators also apparently agreed that Ukraine would declare itself permanently neutral, forgoing ever joining NATO but keeping open the possibility of membership in the European Union. They disagreed, however, over proposed limits on the firing range of Ukraine's missiles and on withdrawal of Ukrainian troops on their own territory. There was similarly pushback over Russia's demand for a removal of restrictions on the use of the Russian language in Ukraine.
While there appeared to be some agreement about numerous points in the drafts or at the very least the possibility for compromise, the Times indicated Russians effectively killed the talks with a toxic clause.
The Times indicated that in Istanbul, Ukrainian negotiators proposed a requirement that guarantor states, namely the U.S., Britain, France, China, and Russia, would have to defend Ukraine in the event of a subsequent armed attack. Moscow, however, allegedly pushed in a subsequent draft for all guarantor states to have a veto, meaning Russia could invade then block a military intervention on Ukraine's behalf.
A member of the Ukrainian negotiating team suggested that following this change, "We had no interest in continuing the talks."
Putin instead suggested in his remarks this week that former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was responsible for killing the talks.
"Mr. Johnson, a man with a nice haircut, came and said that they need to fight to the last Ukrainian. So they are fighting. Soon, these Ukrainians who want to fight will run out," said Putin. "In my opinion, soon there will be no one left who wants to fight. And we are ready [to negotiate] but the other side needs to be ready for both negotiations and compromises."
Zelenskyy appeared more interested in a different comment from Putin's press conference, namely the Russian president's suggestion that he was prepared to continue testing the Oreshnik hypersonic missile on Ukrainian targets, calling it an "interesting" experiment.
"People are dying, and he thinks it's 'interesting,'" wrote Zelenskyy. "Dumb***."
Zelenskyy also suggested that bringing Ukraine into NATO, "clear progress on Ukraine's EU membership," and more weapon deliveries would help make Russia recognize the need for peace.
Putin's remarks about compromises came a day after NATO chief Mark Rutte indicated that Ukraine's Western backers would continue furnishing Ukraine with weapons following a meeting with Zelenskyy in Brussels, reported Politico.
Rutte suggested that the objective is to ensure that Ukraine is in the "best possible position one day, when they decide so, to start the peace talks" with Moscow.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
FACT CHECK: No, Bashar al-Assad Did Not Announce He Is Starting His Own Podcast
A post on X claims that exiled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad announced the launch of his own podcast. Bashar al-Assad took to social media Wednesday evening to announce the launch of his own podcast. pic.twitter.com/OnOfnf56ks — RT America (@RTNewsAmerica) December 12, 2024 Verdict: False There are no official social media accounts attributed to al-Assad, announcing […]
FACT CHECK: No, Image Doesn’t Show Assad In Moscow
An image shared on Facebook claims to show deposed Syrian leader Bashar Al-Assad in Moscow, Russia. Verdict: False The image is from 2023 and shows him in Aleppo, Syria, after an earthquake. Fact Check: Al-Assad, the longtime leader of the Syrian Arab Republic, was granted asylum in Moscow after his regime collapsed following a rebel offensive, according to […]
Hillary Clinton Wants To Jail Americans For ‘Misinformation.’ Let’s Start With Her
Get the Conservative Review delivered right to your inbox.
We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.
Today's top stories