Docs: Democrat Special Counsel Jack Smith Spied On, Lied To Congress
An executive agent spying on members of a legislature not only violates the Constitution but is a hallmark of authoritarian states.An executive agent spying on members of a legislature not only violates the Constitution but is a hallmark of authoritarian states.The Atlantic Fantasizes About Military Treason Against Trump
These are not idle musings. It is dangerous to encourage trained and weaponized warfighters to turn on the commander and chief.Dem whistleblower went to FBI about Schiff's alleged 'treasonous' role in Russia hoax — but DOJ ignored him: Report
The newly declassified Durham annex released by CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed last month that the intelligence community was aware in 2016 of an alleged Clinton campaign plan to smear Trump, falsely link him to Russia, then have the deep state carry the ball down the field.
The newly declassified House Intelligence Committee majority staff report released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revealed that the consequential January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment appeared to be a work of fiction drawn up by the Obama administration that served to give the Clinton campaign's narrative a patina of legitimacy and set the stage for years of attacks and two congressional impeachments.
While these documents made clear that the intelligence community and the liberal media played critical roles in the hoax, newly released FBI memos highlight they had a helping hand from Congress.
'SCHIFF stated the information would be used to Indict President Trump.'
FBI 302 interview reports provided to Congress by FBI Director Kash Patel and obtained by Just the News detail allegations that beginning in 2017, then-Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) approved leaking classified information to undermine President Donald Trump and push the Russia hoax.
The whistleblower — a Democratic career intelligence officer who worked for the Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for over a decade and considered Schiff a friend — raised concerns about the Democratic lawmaker's actions as early as 2017.
While working with the committee, the whistleblower attended a February 2017 meeting where Schiff "stated the group would leak classified information which was derogatory to President of the United States Donald J. TRUMP. SCHIFF stated the information would be used to Indict President Trump," said the FBI interview report.
RELATED: Durham annex proves Russiagate was a coordinated smear
"[Redacted] stated this would be illegal and, upon hearing his concerns, unnamed members of the meeting reassured [redacted] that they would not be caught leaking classified information," continued the document.
The whistleblower alleged that this was "not a one-time thing" but "rampant" and that damaging notes would be floated to Schiff "after which a decision was made as to who would leak the information," said an FBI memo.
'SWALWELL previously had been warned to be careful because he had a reputation for leaking classified information.'
When the information was leaked to the media, it was apparently flagged "on background," meaning that the information would be published without a reference to the source. The interview report singles out NBC News as one of the outlets in contact with the committee offices.
There was one particular leak that struck the whistleblower as particularly egregious. He told the FBI that in early 2017, "a particularly sensitive document" was viewed by a small contingent of staff along with Schiff and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.).
"Within 24 hours, the information appeared in the news almost verbatim and [redacted] officials descended upon HPSCI's offices, threatening to stop providing information unless the leaking ended," said the report. "[Redacted] suspected that SWALWELL played a role in the leak and noted that SWALWELL previously had been warned to be careful because he had a reputation for leaking classified information."
RELATED: Liberal media is dead silent about the damning revelations in the declassified Durham annex
The whistleblower suggested that this alleged leaking operation was energized by Schiff's fury over Trump's win "as he believed he would have been appointed as Director of CIA had HILLARY CLINTON won the election," said the interview report.
Schiff was allegedly desperate to push the "Russian involvement" narrative into something akin to the 9/11 Commission, and the purpose of the classified information leaks was apparently to "compel public opinion."
Schiff — who also pushed bogus claims from the Steele dossier in Congress around the time of this alleged leak campaign — was long suspected of leaking classified information.
Ex-CIA Director Mike Pompeo publicly accused Schiff in 2023 of doing so, noting that when information was provided to the then-Democratic congressman and his staff, that information found its way into places where it did not belong "with alarming regularity."
After determining that this activity was "unethical and treasonous," the whistleblower reportedly went to the FBI to raise his concerns.
Despite the bureau briefly humoring his concerns, the whistleblower was ultimately informed that "the issue would not be investigated further by the DOJ, as Congressmen have immunity to all speech and actions made on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives."
Under new leadership, the Justice Department may take greater interest even though the alleged leaks likely fall outside the statute of limitations for prosecution.
"We found it. We declassified it," Patel noted on X with regards to the FBI interview memos. "Now Congress can see how classified info was leaked to shape political narratives — and decide if our institutions were weaponized against the American people."
"For years, certain officials used their positions to selectively leak classified information to shape political narratives," Patel told Just the News. "It was all done with one purpose: to weaponize intelligence and law enforcement for political gain."
"The FBI will now lead the charge, with our partners at DOJ, and Congress will have the chance to uncover how political power may have been weaponized and to restore accountability," added Patel.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
‘Paperwork Americans’ are not your countrymen
At a recent Panamerican Congress in Mexico City, Rep. Delia Ramirez of Illinois stood before attendees and declared in Spanish, “I’m a proud Guatemalan before I’m an American.” Ramirez, who sits on the House Homeland Security Committee, helps shape policies vital to the nation’s safety. Yet she openly and proudly identifies with another country, and in a foreign language, no less.
Ramirez isn’t alone. She’s part of a growing class of politicians who treat their American citizenship as a formality. Many are first-generation immigrants. Ramirez isn’t even that. She was born to an illegal immigrant mother who crossed the border while pregnant and secured birthright citizenship for her daughter. On paper, Ramirez is American. In every other way, she is not.
What does it mean to be American?
The immigration debate has forced Americans to confront the deeper question of national identity. Nearly everyone agrees the southern border should be closed to illegal aliens. But views on legal immigration vary widely, and those differences often rest on whether people believe the United States is a “propositional nation.”
The idea that a sitting congresswoman can say she belongs to Guatemala before she belongs to America — and face no consequences — is insane.
That idea holds that America is defined not by a shared heritage or culture, but by a set of abstract principles. According to this view, anyone who completes the paperwork and swears an oath is just as American as someone whose ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War.
The problem is, no one is ever denaturalized and deported for rejecting the proposition. New citizens can — and often do — criticize or outright deny basic American values. They can declare loyalty to foreign governments while holding office in the United States. And because citizenship confers First Amendment protections, they face no consequences for doing so.
This turns the entire idea of a “propositional nation” into a joke.
Paperwork without allegiance
Ramirez herself is not an immigrant. She was born under current understanding of the 14th Amendment. Her mother, in violation of U.S. law, crossed the border while pregnant. No agreement to any American proposition was required. Ramirez acquired the legal status of an American and the constitutional right to reject the nation that gave it to her.
There is no ideological connection, cultural tie, or apparent love of country. Only the paperwork remains.
Immigration skeptics have long warned that newcomers often bring with them foreign loyalties. Critics dismissed such concerns as racist, even when examples piled up. Today, those examples speak for themselves.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) has described Somalia as her “real homeland” and addressed Somali crowds in their native language, pledging to fight for their interests. Omar Fateh, likely the next mayor of Minneapolis, speaks the same way. These are not the words of people assimilating. These are declarations of divided loyalty.
During the Los Angeles anti-ICE riots in June, protesters waved Mexican flags, burned cars, and attacked police. Many were illegal immigrants. But many others were citizens, some born in the United States, who openly called for the “reconquest” of California in the name of Mexico.
RELATED: Judicial activism strikes again in 14th Amendment decision
President Claudia Sheinbaum of Mexico even claimed the rioters as her own, describing them as fellow Mexicans and calling on them to pressure the U.S. government to change laws that affected Mexico’s economy.
The president of Mexico sees through the paperwork. She knows who her people are. Americans, for some reason, continue to pretend the paperwork alone tells the whole story.
We need to talk about allegiance
The debate over American identity will continue for a long time to come. But the modern definition clearly isn’t working, and something new will require some tough conversations. If we can’t candidly discuss who belongs in the nation and why, we’ll never resolve the issue.
In the meantime, we should at least agree on one thing: No one who openly declares loyalty to another country should hold public office in the United States.
The idea that a sitting congresswoman can say she belongs to Guatemala before she belongs to America — and face no consequences — is insane. A nation that tolerates this cannot endure. A nation that refuses to expel such people, not just from office but from its borders, is already dying.
We treat this behavior as acceptable. In reality, it is a form of treason.
Paperwork alone does not make someone American. The people exploiting our system understand this. They aren’t confused. They’re mocking us. And unless we find the courage to act, they will keep doing it.
Send them back. Every last one.
The cold civil war is real — and only one side is fighting to win
Don’t threaten me with a good time, Texas.
If you are going to issue arrest warrants for the Democrat traitors, then somebody better get arrested. Get busy living, or get busy dying.
If we don’t fight for the good, the true, and the beautiful, we risk far more than elections
We’re not just living through political dysfunction — we’re slogging through a cold civil war. And it’s time we started acting like it. Just war theory demands it.
Living ‘not of’ this world
Augustine developed the theory for a Christianized Roman empire that needed to distinguish the rules of the “City of God” from those of the city of man. Today, America must reclaim that tradition — not to excuse evil for the sake of good, but to return to our foundational, God-ordained principles.
To what degree can we become the shining city on a hill that the founders intended while being mere sinners? Since the values that defined such a city existed long before the American experiment was ever tried, we were clearly meant to rely on the rigorous application of self-evident truths — not to reinvent the wheel.
We have a duty to defend the integrity of our worldview — contrary to what your sweater-vested beta-male pastor may have told you. When the laws of nature and nature’s God are under attack, we are biblically called to offer up reasons for the hope that is in us.
When we don’t, we don’t just forfeit hope; we invite its opposite — despair — which has so often been the case in recent years. We must choose: the way of men or the way of cowards.
Yes, Trump won in 2024, and life is indeed better than it was a very short while ago. But make no mistake: We are still under attack.
A new ‘just war’ theory
That’s why we need a renewed just war theory for America’s current plight.
Whereas the spirit of the age — via its primary political vehicle, the Democratic Party — has willfully broken the social compact that once bound us together as a people;
And whereas that same spirit has made clear through both policy and rhetoric that it has no interest in restoring that compact;
Therefore, we no longer owe deference to any tradition, legal fiction, or gesture toward comity that no longer binds us. To pretend otherwise is to either lose the cold civil war or start a hot one that our children will be forced to fight.
We won’t do that to them. We will do the hard things now so that they may live free.
Therefore, our new rules of engagement are as follows: We will do everything it takes to win, other than what the ultimate judge of our fates explicitly forbids in his word. But short of that, we will do everything else to the greatest degree and with maximum prejudice when necessary.
We prefer cold civil wars when our side wins and the other side loses.
No more furrowed-brow “nicer-than-God” poses from the Mike Pence school of surrender. No more ackshuallys. No more arguing like the earth is flat.
Our domestic enemies hate us. They want to enslave our children. We must defeat them — without apology.
Our enemies are prowling
Remember that iconic line from “Independence Day”?
You will once again be fighting for our freedom, not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution — but from annihilation. We're fighting for our right to live, to exist. … We will not go quietly into the night!
If the fictional American president played by Bill Pullman in “Independence Day” could get us out of our seats with such a message, maybe it’s time we recommit ourselves to such a message possibility in real life.
That’s the prime directive. And after taking a bullet to the face and rising to shout “Fight, fight, fight!” it’s one that Donald Trump has recommitted to — body and soul.
Every tactic and strategy must now be filtered through that lens.
Because if we don’t fight for the good, the true, and the beautiful, we risk far more than elections. We risk our eternal souls.
RELATED: What Texas Dems are now saying after arrest warrants were issued for fleeing the state
Our enemies are deadly wolves, and they know what they are doing. Elizabeth Warren didn’t just accidentally find herself next to a foreign-born, communist, Islamic rainbow jihadist in New York and decide to brand him as the new face of her party.
She did it because she is making plans for your destruction.
So yes, we need to start arresting traitors in Texas. And that should only be the beginning of what we’re prepared to do because we love God, our children, and our future.
Ratcliffe Signals It’s Not Too Late To Prosecute Ongoing Russia Collusion Conspiracy
CIA Director John Ratcliffe indicated that it may not be too late to prosecute players in the Russia collusion hoax on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. “There is no doubt in my mind that the people that we just talked about conspired. They conspired against President Trump, they conspired against the American people. … […]Trump's CIA director has bad news for Hillary Clinton regarding alleged 'treasonous conspiracy'
President Donald Trump acknowledged on Friday that former President Barack Obama is likely to dodge accountability for his role in the Russian collusion hoax on account of the U.S. Supreme Court's July 1, 2024, immunity for official acts ruling in Trump v. United States.
Trump suggested, however, that the high court's ruling "doesn't help the people around him at all" — an allusion to those Obama cabalists who hatched, then perpetuated the Russian collusion hoax on the American people.
The FBI has, for instance, launched a criminal investigation into ex-CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey for perjury and potentially other crimes related to the Trump-Russia hoax. Former DNI James Clapper indicated he would "lawyer up" after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard referred damning documents detailing the genesis of the hoax's manufacture under Obama to the Department of Justice.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe hinted Sunday that twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton might also face the music over her apparent hand in what Gabbard has referred to as an alleged "treasonous conspiracy."
Quick recap
Ratcliffe ordered a review in May of the "procedures and analytic tradecraft employed" when drafting the January 2017 intelligence Community Assessment, a document created at Obama's urging that served as the cornerstone of the Russian collusion hoax and set the stage for arrests, impeachments, and years of politically expedient smears.
Late last month, Ratcliffe released the findings of that review, noting that there were "multiple procedural anomalies" in the production of the January 2017 ICA, including "a highly compressed production timeline, stringent compartmentation, and excessive involvement of agency heads."
RELATED: Declassified report: Obama’s FBI failed to search key evidence in Clinton email probe
The memo noted further that the Obama administration sacrificed analytical soundness in the interest of "narrative consistency."
More has since been revealed about the genesis of the hoax thanks in part to Gabbard's publication of a damning House Intelligence Committee majority staff report.
The previously classified House report confirmed that: the ICA was a work of fiction drawn up by the Obama administration with the aim of kneecapping the democratically elected Republican president; credible evidence available in January 2017 contradicted the narrative advanced in the ICA; and that contrary to Brennan's suggestion in public and sworn testimonies, the Steele dossier — a political opposition research report paid for in part by the Clinton campaign — was included in the ICA.
Clinton might take another tumble
Ratcliffe suggested on Sunday that additional documents link Clinton to the development of the Russian collusion hoax.
"Part of what came out last week was about how John Brennan, Clapper, Comey, they all pushed the known-fake Steele dossier into intelligence community assessments and as the basis for Crossfire Hurricane and all that," he told Fox News' Maria Bartiromo. "But what hasn't come out yet, and what's going to come out, is the underlying intelligence that I have spent the last few months making recommendations about final declassification — and sent that to the Department of Justice. That will come out in the John Durham report classified annex."
'US intelligence intercepted Russian intelligence talking about a Hillary Clinton plan.'
The first Trump DOJ authorized federal prosecutor John Durham in 2019 to explore the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI's investigation into the supposed Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
RELATED: If no one goes to jail, the coup was a success
Durham, who was elevated to special counsel in December 2020, found that:
- the FBI utilized "raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence" to open the investigation into the Trump campaign but did not follow the same standard when approaching alleged election interference in relation to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign;
- the FBI “did not and could not corroborate any of the substantive allegations" made in the Steele dossier of lurid accusations against then-candidate Donald Trump;
- "neither U.S. nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation"; and
- the FBI used the unvetted and unverified Steele reports just days after their receipt "to support probable cause in the FBI’s FISA applications targeting [Carter] Page, a U.S. citizen who, for a period of time, had been an adviser to Trump."
While a 306-page unclassified report detailing these and other conclusions was released in May 2023, there was a 29-page classified appendix that the public never saw.
A White House source confirmed to Blaze News that "the CIA is declassifying that report in the name of transparency."
The CIA director told Bartiromo, "In the summer of 2016, U.S. intelligence intercepted Russian intelligence talking about a Hillary Clinton plan — a Hillary Clinton plan to falsely accuse Donald Trump of Russia collusion; to vilify and smear him with what would become known infamously as the Steele dossier."
'They conspired against the American people.'
"This intelligence was so explosive that John Brennan briefed President Obama, Vice President Biden, Jim Clapper, James Comey, the entire national security team, telling them about this Hillary Clinton plan," said Ratcliffe. "That was in August of 2016 and yet it wasn't until more than four years later, in October of 2020, when I found after an exhaustive search John Brennan's handwritten notes and the underlying intelligence behind it that revealed exactly what happened."
Rather than expose the "Clinton plan," which is taken up at length in the Durham report, the Obama administration apparently used it as a framework.
RELATED: Over target: Panicked liberal media attacks Gabbard's 'treasonous conspiracy' claim
Citing notes from Brennan, which Ratcliffe declassified in 2020 while serving as DNI, the Durham report indicated that intelligence agencies "obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee."
The report emphasized the Clinton plan intelligence was relevant for two reasons:
- "first, the Clinton plan intelligence itself and on its face arguably suggested that private actors affiliated with the Clinton campaign were seeking in 2016 to promote a false or exaggerated narrative to the public and to U.S. government agencies about Trump's possible ties to Russia"; and
- second, "the Clinton plan intelligence had potential bearing on the reliability and credibility" on the materials provided and funded by the Clinton campaign and/or the DNC used by the FBI when seeking FISA warrants and taking other investigative steps.
According to the Durham report, there was no evidence that the FBI disclosed the contents of the Clinton plan intelligence to the attorneys working on the FISA matters related to Crossfire Hurricane, to the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or to numerous individuals working on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
Ratcliffe indicated on Sunday that the declassified Durham report appendix will show that "part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan but part of it was an FBI plan to be an accelerant to that fake Steele dossier, to those fake Russia collusion claims by pouring oil on the fire, by amplifying the lie and burying the truth of what Hillary Clinton was up to."
The CIA director noted on Sunday that Clinton, like Brennan and Comey, testified on the subject under oath in recent years, and that "much of that testimony is, frankly, completely inconsistent with what our underlying intelligence that is about to be declassified in the Durham Annex, what that reflects."
Ratcliffe hinted at legal consequences for Clinton, noting, "Pam Bondi does have a strike force. It is a different Department of Justice, a different FBI, and an opportunity to look at how these people really did conspire to run a hoax, a fraud on the American people and against Donald Trump’s presidency."
The Department of Justice declined to comment.
"There is no doubt in my mind that the people that we just talked about conspired. They conspired against President Trump. They conspired against the American people," added Ratcliffe.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Hang ’em high? Gabbard’s docs could rock DC to the core
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard — one of the few people in Washington who still seems to believe public service means serving the public — has ignited a political firestorm with her latest move. In a stunning act of transparency and defiance, Gabbard declassified over 100 pages of intelligence documents she claims expose a “treasonous conspiracy” orchestrated by senior Obama-era officials to fabricate the false appearance that Russia helped elect Donald Trump in 2016.
Not only did she release these documents publicly, but she also referred the matter to the FBI and Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution. Her list of alleged conspirators includes former President Barack Obama, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice.
If the Justice Department doesn’t act, the deep state will be confirmed — not as a 'conspiracy theory,' but as a fact.
Gabbard says the documents prove what many Americans have suspected for years: The entire Russia collusion narrative was not only false but knowingly manufactured and politically weaponized. She claims the declassified assessments directly contradict the official narrative, showing analysts concluded Russia had neither intent nor capability to sway the election.
Instead, Gabbard says Obama and his top advisers cherry-picked and distorted intelligence to craft a narrative that could undermine Trump’s presidency before it began. That narrative, of course, fueled the Mueller probe, impeachments, FISA warrants, and years of media hysteria.
The significance of Gabbard’s referral can’t be overstated. It’s not just a political gesture — she’s handing real evidence to prosecutors and demanding real consequences. While most of D.C. hides behind process and posturing, Gabbard is doing what Congress refused to do: treat treason like treason.
She’s one of the only officials in Washington doing her job, regardless of party or personality. In Gabbard’s eyes, the rule of law applies to everyone.
Whether the Justice Department takes up the referral remains to be seen. The agency has confirmed receipt and reportedly assembled an internal strike force to assess the claims. That’s a notable development. But considering the department’s track record, expectations remain low. Many believe the department prioritizes preserving the status quo over seeking justice. If past trends hold, the smart money says they’ll delay, deflect, and ultimately decline to prosecute — and that outcome, by itself, would be a great shame.
‘People want hangings’
I stopped by the Morning Glory Café in Indian Harbour Beach, Florida, on Thursday morning and struck up a conversation with the breakfast-counter regulars. Their reactions tell you everything you need to know about where the American people stand.
Betty K., retired schoolteacher: “Tulsi’s actually standing up to the swamp — for once. Americans deserve real justice, not cover-ups.”
Bob H., small-business owner: “If Hillary, Obama, Brennan really did conspire, then yes — charge them. No one can be above the law.”
Cindy M., nurse: “This is gut-wrenching. ... Our intelligence agencies turned on us. Gabbard is the first one who seems to want justice.”
A woman eating beside her husband, who asked to remain unnamed: “People want hangings.”
She didn’t flinch — and neither did anyone else.
RELATED: If no one goes to jail, the coup was a success
If this referral results in prosecutions, the consequences would be seismic: potential prison time, disgrace, and the end of political legacies. More importantly, it would send a chilling message to every bureaucrat and agency head: Abuse of state power and election interference will not be tolerated. It could begin to restore the fractured trust between the American people and their government — with one critical truth: No one, not even a president, is above the law.
If the Justice Department does nothing, then the opposite truth becomes undeniable: that intelligence agencies have become untouchable; that the deep state protects its own; that the law applies only to the powerless.
Our government would be confirmed as a hollow shell, run by unelected bureaucrats and political fixers. We wouldn’t just be losing faith in the republic. We’d be living in a managed illusion, where facts are fungible and truth belongs to whoever controls the narrative.
Justice, not theater
Americans are fed up. They don’t want another committee. They don’t want another special counsel. They don’t want another round of political theater. They want justice — and they’re not wrong.
The Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. It does not say, “unless your name is Obama.” And yet, here we are, watching the slow-motion erosion of our legal system while those entrusted to defend it look the other way.
Tulsi Gabbard just threw down the gauntlet. Now, we get to see who in this government still has a spine. If the Department of Justice acts, it’s the beginning of a reckoning. If it doesn’t, the deep state will be confirmed — not as a “conspiracy theory,” but as a fact.
And the people? They’ll take that truth with them — to the ballot box, to the streets, and to every café counter in America.
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?'
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
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!
If no one goes to jail, the coup was a success
Last week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revealed evidence that the entire Russiagate hoax — a scheme to derail President Donald Trump’s first term — was manufactured by the outgoing Obama administration. At a press gaggle on Tuesday, Trump followed up by accusing Obama of “treason” for trying to rig the 2016 election and calling for severe consequences.
These revelations matter. But unless someone actually goes to jail, they won’t change anything.
MAGA supporters were furious over how the Epstein case was handled because they’re sick of elites skating free.
Democrats have shown they’re willing to jail political opponents — up to and including the president himself. Republicans, on the other hand, have proven utterly incapable of holding lawbreaking leftists accountable. Exposing treasonous acts is helpful, but if no one is punished, the corruption only deepens.
“Lock her up!” wasn’t just a chant at Trump rallies. MAGA supporters understood that the Clintons were deeply corrupt. They saw in Trump a candidate who might finally deliver justice. Elites gasped at the slogan, warning about the dangers of weaponizing the justice system. Then, with no sense of irony, they weaponized that very system against Trump to stop his re-election.
The lesson should have been obvious: Either cross the Rubicon, or don’t approach it at all. But don’t go fishing in it.
Americans are tired of watching the powerful get away with everything. In 2008, bankers crashed the economy and got bailed out. In 2020, Anthony Fauci and the biomedical regime imposed tyranny under the guise of public health. In 2020 and 2024, Joe Biden was propped up by a Democratic cabal that subverted the Constitution and jailed dissidents. The southern border was thrown open to reshape the electorate and lock in leftist power.
Kamala Harris nearly extended that reign — had she not turned out to be the dumbest, most tone-deaf, and most unlikable candidate ever smuggled onto a national ticket.
Yet through all of it, no one in power has paid a serious price for their crimes.
Major revelations come and go. But with no accountability, they become little more than distractions. There may have been a time when shame alone could bring a public reckoning — but our current ruling class is incapable of shame. They don’t resign in disgrace. They don’t retreat. They wait for the news cycle to move on.
The scandals pile up like grains of sand in a desert, each one indistinguishable from the next.
RELATED: Rule by the people? Not anymore in the Western world
In this environment, exposing corruption becomes just another way to tranquilize the public. People think, “At least the truth is out there — maybe voters will care.” But what if the scandal is about rigging the vote in the first place? If Democrats can open the border, fabricate intelligence, and collude with media to tip elections, then what good is the ballot box?
Exposure, without punishment, doesn’t deter. It emboldens.
The left doesn’t hesitate to jail its enemies. January 6 protesters were locked up for years — including some who never entered the Capitol. Trump officials like Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro were arrested and imprisoned. Pro-life activists got comically inflated sentences for silent protests. The FBI threatened parents who challenged school boards. Douglass Mackey was convicted for making memes. Trump himself faced fabricated charges that could’ve put him behind bars for life — all to stop his return.
So why are Republicans so cowardly?
If what Gabbard alleges is true, then Barack Obama, James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, and Andrew McCabe conspired to destroy the American electoral system. They manufactured intelligence for the express purpose of overturning a legitimate election.
That is treason, plain and simple.
If these people are allowed to walk, they’ll know they’re untouchable. And they’ll act like it. Again.
Trump seemed genuinely surprised and angered by the backlash to Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the Epstein files. Some speculated it was because Trump himself was implicated, but that was always unlikely. If real dirt on Trump existed, the people fabricating charges against him would’ve used it. Instead, Trump kept comparing Epstein to Russiagate — and now it’s obvious why.
RELATED: Why the Epstein story cannot be buried
He knew the Russiagate disclosures were about to drop and didn’t want them overshadowed by Epstein.
Still, the connection matters.
MAGA supporters were furious over how the Epstein case was handled because they’re sick of elites skating free. They’re sick of being ruled by people who break the law with impunity. Fauci. Epstein. The Clintons. Americans know they’re governed by some of the worst people on the planet, and they’re done pretending otherwise.
The country is crying out for justice.
But frankly, I don’t think the Trump administration will deliver it. I hope I’m wrong. But I doubt there will be any serious action taken against Obama or the rest of his old guard. Republicans talk tough but never follow through. Even after the left tried to jail and then attempted to assassinate the president, the GOP still wrings its hands over setting a bad precedent.
It’s a bad joke. And everyone knows it.
Revelations are fine. But none of this will matter until the Trump administration grows a spine and puts these people in prison where they belong.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com