TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @RealSLokhova
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The treasonous conspiracy against Donald Trump and the American people. I told you last year that it has been going on for 10 years, and it was run by Obama/Brennan and co out of England, then on-shored back to the US, culminating in the Mar-a-Lago Raid and beyond. I witnessed it. See my thread below. Now new documents confirm my eyewitness account. https://t.co/2xYOjsR2AV
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
In late summer 2015, a man arrived at Cambridge University to join a summer course in intelligence studies, ran by my professor Chris Andrew. His name was Alan Kohler and he was an FBI liaison with London. He previously been to Cambridge and gave presentations about FBI counter-intelligence work /1
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The Hillary Clinton Plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian intelligence, aka the Russiagate Hoax https://t.co/k939K5DVzB
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
That’s why they had to come up with the “Clinton Plan” to distract from her email scandal. Comey cleared Hillary on July 5, 2016. Her polling tanked. Election only 4 months away. Soros got concerned about his investment. July 26 Hillary approved the plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian Intelligence. July 31 Comey ordered to open Crossfire Hurricane
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
That’s why they had to come up with the “Clinton Plan” to distract from her email scandal. Comey cleared Hillary on July 5, 2016. Her polling tanked. Election only 4 months away. Soros got concerned about his investment. July 26 Hillary approved the plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian Intelligence. July 31 Comey ordered to open Crossfire Hurricane
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The FBI paid British spy Chris Steele in British pounds to run ops against Donald Trump How considerate of them
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
-Christopher Steele's FBI codename was CROWN (see payment receipt) -Steele's boss was Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6 (British intelligence) -Dearlove and his co-conspirator Professor Chris Andrew visit the Duke of York (Prince Andrew) at the Buckingham Palace in June 2015, the start of Russsiagate -Did the Palace authorize the British off-the-books op to help Hillary in the 2016 election?
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
So the mystery appears to be solved. It’s highly likely that the reason that Epstein KNEW Stef Halper was running anti-Trump operations for both the CIA and British intelligence (see post below) is because his friend Price Andrew (Duke of York) told him. Andrew was deeply https://t.co/mJd8r5qQ3Q
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The next media cover up They won't tell you that Obama lawyer Ruemmler was friends with CIA Director John Brennan, and was organizing a meeting between Brennan and Epstein in the middle of Russiagate Conspiracy against President Trump. https://t.co/UEu9CoE4vl
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The media are so desperate to protect Obama, they are not telling you that: -Epstein was consulting his best buddy, Obama lawyer, Kathy Ruemmler, on negotiation with Obama about possible AG position -Epstein's personal lawyer Reid Weingarten was a close friend of Obama's wingman Eric Holder -Lisa Monaco was planning to visit the Epstein island with Kathy Ruemmler -Obama lawyer and Epstein buddy Ruemmler represented Susan Rice during Russiagate, and discussed it with Epstein Picture: Kathy Ruemmler, Barack Obama, Lisa Monaco, Susan Rice
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
One of biggest scandal the media is hiding from you: Obama's top lawyer Kathy Ruemmler was also Epstein's lawyer and had a long affair with his personal lawyer. She defended Epstein even after he was convicted, and was one of the executors of his estate. Ruemmler consulted
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
So Epstein knew back in 2018 Stefan Halper simultaneously worked for British intelligence, MI5, as well for US intelligence when he ran operations against President Trump, which is illegal. The emails show Halper spied not only on the Trump campaign, but the Trump Administration as well. Epstein implies in the emails with his lawyer that Obama knew this. It's also implied that both British AND American intel services paid Halper. I know this to be true from the Durham investigation, and other impeccable sources, but I didn't find this out until 2020--and I knew Halper at the University of Cambridge. I reported Halper to the DoJ, and worked with prosecutors to try to indict him. The DoJ were going to charge him, until "Friends In High Places" interfered. How would Epstein know about Halper's "work" against the Trump campaign and the administration on behalf of both British and US intelligence services? There are three possible explanations, it's likely to be a combination of the three. 1) Epstein was in close contact with Steve Bannon when Stef Halper was exposed. There are numerous 2018 iMessages between Epstein and Bannon discussing Halper, and how the White House was focused on Halper's role in Russiagate. That would explain "Donald focused on this bigtime" comment. 2) Epstein was close friends with Obama's top lawyer Kathy Ruemmler--did she tell him? 3) Prince Andrew had close ties with the Cambridge University group that Halper (and Christopher Steele) are part of. What did Andrew tell Epstein? The DoJ and Congress needs to subpoena Bannon, Halper, Ruemmler, Andrew, Richard Dearlove etc. about this. cc: @PamBondi @TulsiGabbard @realannapaulina
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
WHOA Eptein emailed his lawyer when CIA/British intelligence operative Stefan Halper was exposed as a spy on the Trump campaign and Administration. "Halper is the fbi informant. mi5 [British intelligence], CIA. a us citizen working for MI5 calls trump campaign insiders and tries to get info for mi5 and fbi. including after trump takes office. 1. did obama know? if a us citizen working for Britain spies. can they spy on Americans? who pays. paid. wild. Donald focused on this big time.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Susan Rice's attempted cover up of the Benghazi disaster Sep 16, 2012 https://t.co/PvYTHzLUPW
Video Transcript AI Summary
Bob: Madame Ambassador, he says that this is something that has been in the planning stages for months. I understand you have been saying that you think it was spontaneous. Are we not on the same page here?
Madame Ambassador: Well, Bob, let me tell you what we understand to be the assessment at present. First of all, very importantly, as you discussed with the president, there is an investigation that the United States government will launch led by the FBI that has begun.
Bob: But they are not there.
Madame Ambassador: They are not on the ground yet, but they already begun looking at all sorts of evidence of various sorts already available to them and to us, and they will get on the ground and continue the investigation. So we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is, in fact, what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals joined in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are unfortunately readily now available in Libya post revolution, and that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.
Bob: But you do not agree with him that this was something that had been plotted out We several months do
Madame Ambassador: not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Madame Ambassador, he says that this is something that has been in the planning stages for months. I understand you have been saying that you think it was spontaneous. Are we not on the same page here?
Speaker 1: Well, Bob, let me tell you what we understand to be the assessment at present. First of all, very importantly, as you discussed with the president, there is an investigation that the United States government will launch led by the FBI that has begun.
Speaker 0: But they are not there.
Speaker 1: They are not on the ground yet, but they already begun looking at all sorts of evidence of various sorts already available to them and to us, and they will get on the ground and continue the investigation. So we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is, in fact, what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals joined in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are unfortunately readily now available in Libya post revolution, and that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.
Speaker 0: But you do not agree with him that this was something that had been plotted out We several months do
Speaker 1: not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Why Obama's lackeys are attacking @TulsiGabbard:
@DNIGabbard - DNI Tulsi Gabbard
On January 6, 2017, just days before President Trump took office, DNI Clapper unveiled the Obama-directed politicized assessment, a gross weaponization of intelligence that laid the groundwork for a years-long coup intended to subvert President Trump’s entire presidency. According to whistleblower emails shared with us today, we know Clapper and Brennan used the baseless discredited Steele Dossier as a source to push this false narrative in the intelligence assessment.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m told Dana Bash’s ex-husband is Jeremy Bash, Obama’s CIA Chief of Staff, labeled one of the Dirty 51 Spies Who Lied; I hear CIA operatives always work in pairs, and Tulsi Gabbard removed his security clearance for signing the Biden laptop letter, among other things.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Dana Bash’s former husband is Jeremy Bash, Obama’s CIA Chief of Staff. He is one of the Dirty 51 Spies Who Lied. Dana kept his surname. And CIA operatives always work in pairs. Tulsi Gabbard removed Jeremy Bash’s security clearance because he signed Biden laptop letter among other things.
Video Transcript AI Summary
A journalist asks about a recent FBI action at the Fulton County, Georgia elections office, where twenty twenty ballots, voter rolls, and scanner images were seized. The journalist notes that the president claimed, “they got into the votes. You're going to see some interesting things happening,” and asks why the president was so involved in an FBI and DOJ raid. A spokesperson responds that the president’s statements do not imply his involvement. He emphasizes that this is a criminal grand jury investigation, and clarifies that there was a search warrant authorized by a federal judge, a magistrate judge in Atlanta, which allowed the FBI to seize the records. The spokesperson notes that the records have been seized by the FBI as part of the ongoing investigation.
The journalist presses on what the investigation is about. The spokesperson reiterates that he cannot discuss specifics of any grand jury investigation, but previously stated that election integrity is of the highest importance to the American people, and that the efforts are aimed at ensuring free and fair elections for everyone in the country, Democrats and Republicans alike. The spokesperson adds that they are doing everything possible to uphold election integrity.
The journalist mentions that in Georgia, claims of voter fraud related to the twenty twenty ballots have been debunked repeatedly and that there were multiple recounts. The transcript ends without further elaboration on those claims.
Key points conveyed:
- The FBI seized twenty twenty ballots, voter rolls, and scanner images from the Fulton County elections office.
- The president suggested that “interesting things” would occur, prompting questions about his involvement.
- A spokesperson denies the president’s involvement and describes the actions as part of a criminal grand jury investigation.
- A federal magistrate judge in Atlanta issued the search warrant permitting the seizure; the FBI conducted the seizure.
- The investigation’s specifics cannot be discussed, but officials assert a commitment to election integrity and ensuring free and fair elections for all Americans.
- The dialogue references prior debunking of voter fraud claims in Georgia and multiple recounts, without presenting new specifics.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Earlier this week, the FBI went into the elections office in Fulton County, Georgia to seize twenty twenty ballots, voter rolls, scanner images. And the president told reporters, quote, they got into the votes. You're going to see some interesting things happening. What interesting things is he talking about, and why was he so involved in an FBI and DOJ raid?
Speaker 1: Well, just because he said that doesn't mean that he's involved. I don't believe he was involved. This is a a criminal grand jury investigation, and, and I can't comment on it beyond what what you just said, which is that that there was a a search warrant that was authorized by a federal judge, by a magistrate judge in Atlanta that allowed us to go and and seize those records, and they they have been seized by the FBI as part of an ongoing criminal investigation.
Speaker 0: He said interesting things are happening, so it sounds like he was briefed on it.
Speaker 1: I mean, I I don't know. I'm not around when the president's briefed or not briefed. What I've said is that this is a criminal investigation, so it's it's a tightly held as it must be under the law. It's a grand jury investigation, and and and that's how we're proceeding.
Speaker 0: What what are they investigating?
Speaker 1: I as as you know, we can't talk about about specifics of any grand jury investigation. I will tell you, as I said on Friday, as the president said, election integrity is of the highest importance to the American people, hopefully, everybody in this country, Democrats and Republicans alike. And so we we are doing everything we can to make sure that we have free and fair elections.
Speaker 0: Okay. And as you well know that when it comes to Georgia, claims of voter fraud there because they got the twenty twenty ballots have been debunked over and over again. There were multiple recounts.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
These are the files Chris Wray, Lisa Monaco, Alan Kohler, Avril Haines and co later retroactively reclassified and raided President Trump’s home for. Steele and Halper both operated out of Cambridge, England, they ran anti-Trump offshore operations for Brennan and Comey, on Obama’s orders
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
I am not kidding Here is an FBI document showing that Schiff was promised head of the CIA job by Hillary. As revenge, Schiff worked to “take out” President Trump, which included leaking fake stories that President Trump’s National Security Advisor General Flynn had an affair with me and that I was a Russian Spy.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Please share widely! This 3-hour-long interview, based on 10 years of research, the documentary evidence and witness accounts, proves beyond a reasonable doubt the seditious conspiracy against President Trump by President Obama, Soros, and the highest echelons of the US intelligence community.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
WILL WE FINALLY SEE ACCOUNTABILITY? 3 MIN SUMMARY Full 3 hour interview about the seditious conspiracy against President Trump in comments https://t.co/9cj2C1MkCQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Svetlana Lekova, described as an encyclopedia on accountability, has spent about ten years studying the subject and working with the Durham investigation. She says she has read every document, every note in every annex, including documents that were declassified by President Trump, then reclassified by Joe Biden after he “stole the election,” and then declassified again by Trump when he came into office. She rejects the claim that President Trump gave her classified documents. Despite ongoing accusations, she notes that they have not stopped pursuing her and she has not stopped fighting.
Lekova requests the audience to consider the Florida case she views as significant and to explain what it is about. She asserts that accountability is finally, hopefully, happening, but she remains cautious because of what she has seen in other high-profile cases, such as Jim Comey, where she believes the judiciary, juries, and prosecutors have been compromised. After ten years of involvement with the Durham investigation, she had been told there would be prosecutions. She recalls that prosecutors had Hillary Clinton under oath and John Brennan under oath, and that it was a criminal investigation. Then, according to her, it “disappeared,” and nothing happened.
Lekova describes a sequence where authorities raided the president’s home, and he was “almost assassinated,” with attempts to jail him. She says the result appeared to be that not only would the “bad guys” not go to jail, but the “good guy” trying to bring them to account would end up jailed for the rest of his life, at least in their perception of the situation. She notes that President Trump, through what she calls “amazing” grace, managed to come back and that “you guys somehow managed to vote him in” in such large numbers that there was no alternative for the election. She asserts that the first thing he did upon returning was to promise accountability.
Speaker 0 clarifies the context by noting that the Florida case is “so significant” and asks Lekova to describe what it is really about. Speaker 1 reiterates that accountability is being pursued, acknowledging historical concerns about the judicial system, including the perception of brainwashed juries and corrupt prosecutors, and explains that, after a long period of inertia in the justice process, President Trump’s reelection framed the possibility of accountability and that he, as president, has the responsibility to hold the bad guys accountable because he is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So many of us are wondering about accountability, but the one woman who's like an encyclopedia as a professor, you know, she didn't become a professor by being dumb, but Svetlana Lekova has spent the better part of ten years now studying this. She worked with the Durham investigation. She has read every single document, everything in the annex, every note in every annex. She has, documents that were declassified by president Trump, then reclassified by Joe Biden after he stole the election, and then declassified again by president Trump when he came into office. They tried to say that president Trump gave her classified documents.
That was a lie. They haven't stopped going after her, and she hasn't stopped fighting. So Svetlana, can you take us through this case in Florida that you think is so significant and just explain what it's really about?
Speaker 1: First of all, you're right that we're finally finally seeing, hopefully, accountability. We obviously don't know because you know, we've unfortunately seen in the cases where for example, they indicted Jim Comey, that unfortunately the judicial system is in a very bad place. We have access to judges, have this completely brainwashed juries, and we have corrupt prosecutors and everything in between. So usually I would say having dealt with this whole thing for about ten years and having hoped for accountability for ten years, I initially, to be honest, gave up on hoping that there will be any accountability because when I worked closely with the DIRUM investigation, I was told and I had the prosecutor assigned to this Russia gay case who was speaking to me. I knew there was going to be prosecutions.
They've gone as far as putting Hillary Clinton under oath and John Brannon under oath. It was a criminal investigation. And then boom, it just disappeared. Nothing happened. So I frankly did not expect anything to happen.
Then of course, they almost, you know, they raided the president's home. Then obviously, he was almost assassinated. Then they were trying to jail him. So the end result was that, you know, not only they were never going to be accountability, it looked like, you know, we had the mugshot, you know, being paraded around of the president of The United States. So it looks like not only the bad guys will never go to jail, but in fact, the good guy who was trying to bring them to account is instead going to go to jail for the rest of his life.
So that was that. And then only through some amazing, I suppose grace, I don't know how else to call it, president Trump somehow managed to come back and you guys somehow managed to vote him in. And I suppose you're right in such droves to vote him in that they couldn't do anything about this particular election and he came back. And the first thing he did is he promised, you know, among other things, he promised accountability.
Speaker 0: That's
Speaker 1: correct. He promised it for two reasons. One is obviously because, you know, those who committed crimes need to be held accountable. He is a chief law enforcement of The United States. Sorry, chief law enforcement officer of The United States.
So, as a president, he actually has the responsibility to hold the bad guys accountable. It's his job.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
reSee.it AI Summary
I allege Warner conspired with Christopher Steele; covered for CIA operative Stefan Halper and hid his identity; Warner's link to ex-FBI Asst. Dir. Alan Kohler; Kohler organized the raid on President Trump's home to seize Russiagate-related evidence by Halper and Steele.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Receipts: -Warner conspiring with British spy Christopher Steele -Warner covering up for CIA operative and Steele's Russiagate co-conspirator, liar Stefan Halper, and Warner protecting his identity -Warner's relationship with disgraced former FBI Assistant Director Alan Kohler -Kohler organizing the raid on President Trump's home to steal evidence of Russiagate crimes by Halper, Steele and co.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Mark, speaking of FBI agents, can you explain your friendship with former FBI Assistant Director Alan Kohler, who managed Christopher Steele and Stefan Halper and organized the Mar-a-Lago Raid of President Trump's home?
@MarkWarner - Mark Warner
FBI agents are notoriously tight-lipped and media-shy. The fact that they’re coming forward in scores to raise the alarm about Patel’s horrible leadership should scare the hell out of all of us.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
John Brennan's visit follows Obama's numerous visits to London in September 2025. This comes after the DOJ opened a Grand Jury investigation into the treasonous conspiracy against President Trump in August 2025. https://t.co/69IJvpfXCC
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
When Pres Trump declassified the Crossfire Hurricane files, he said that “gives the media the right to go in and check it. You probably won't bother because you're not going to like what you see”. He was right. MSM not reporting on the release. https://t.co/40lhITMsaM
reSee.it AI Summary
I denounce Goodlander as a dangerous Deep State foe and leader of the Seditious Six. I claim her wedding to Jake Sullivan drew the Clintons and other elites. I say she helped Norm Eisen craft Trump’s 2019 impeachment and, in 2021, became a top adviser to Merrick Garland, allegedly overseeing Durham. I assert I worked on Durham and know they probed Clinton, Sullivan, Halper, Steele, and others. I urge a DoJ probe into her conduct over the last decade, especially impeachment and Durham interference.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Despite her innocent looks and little girl’s voice, Goodlander is one of the most dangerous Deep State villains. She is the leader of the Seditious Six. Her wedding to Hillary Clinton’s top aide, Jake Sullivan, was attended by the Clintons, future CIA Director Bill Burns, Tony Blinken, Merrick Garland, and others. Goodlander worked with Norm Eisen to devise the first impeachment of President Trump in 2019. In 2021, Goodlander became a top advisor to Attorney General Merrick Garland and “oversaw” the Durham investigation into oblivion. I worked with the Durham Inquiry and I know that they were investigating Hillary Clinton, Jake Sullivan (Goodlander’s husband), CIA operative Stefan Halper, British intelligence operative Christopher Steele and others. I suggest that the DoJ investigates Goodlander’s conduct for the last 10 years, and specifically her role in the Trump impeachment and in interfering with the Durham investigation. @AGPamBondi @EdMartinDOJ @DAGToddBlanche @USAttyPirro
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
My interview with @laralogan on the 10-year Grand Conspiracy Against President Trump, ordered by Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Soros; executed by Brennan's CIA, Comey's FBI, and British intelligence. https://t.co/XjIh0XROmQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Svetlana Lekova describes how she became a central figure in the Russia collusion narratives targeting Donald Trump, portraying it as a manufactured story built around a false perception of her as a Russian spy and as someone who had an affair with General Michael Flynn.
She identifies herself as a British academic, born in the Soviet Union, who studied at the University of Cambridge and taught there. In 2014 she attended a dinner at Cambridge connected to Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) head General Michael Flynn. The invitation came from Sergei Dyilov, former head of MI6, and her longtime professor Christopher Andrew. She was at Cambridge as a postgraduate student, writing a PhD on 1930s Soviet history, and teaching undergraduate courses. The dinner was part of a small group including Flynn, Dyilov, Andrew, and another colleague. Lekova recalls she was the only woman at the table, and the seating arrangement placed Flynn opposite her with other attendees between them; she did not sit next to him, and she did not initiate conversation with him beyond a brief exchange. She did pass a scanned document from the Stalin era to Dyilov, via Flynn’s chair, which impressed him; the document concerned Stalin’s letters to fellow revolutionaries. After the dinner, she photographed the event; Flynn left with his aides, and she stayed with colleagues, returning to a Cambridge hotel with her husband.
Lekova explains that, nine months later in December 2016, as preparations for an intelligence assessment were underway, reporters began pressing her about the 2014 dinner and a supposed affair with Flynn. She emphasizes she was nine months pregnant at the time and had not thought of Flynn since the dinner. The media quickly circulated a narrative portraying her as a Russian spy who had an affair with Flynn, using her birthplace and academic specialty as a pretext to link her to Flynn and to Russia. She states that reporters from The Times (UK), The Guardian, The Times, The Financial Times, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post all had her contact information and pursued the story.
Lekova says she and her husband responded through lawyers, initially resisting publication, then sending formal denials to the outlets when a propagandistic line—especially involving Stefan Halper, a Cambridge academic who allegedly acted as a source for the stories—emerged. She asserts that Halper was an FBI/ CIA operative who claimed the Cambridge seminar had been penetrated by the Kremlin and that Cambridge had to be protested; Halper later denied being at the Cambridge dinner. She notes her professor Andrew published an article in The Times arguing that Flynn showed attentions to her; Lekova says she confronted him, who refused to withdraw the piece, citing pressure. She claims he was an MI5 officer at the time and close to David Ignatius; Ignatius later met her in England, which she found extraordinary given her recent childbirth.
Lekova asserts that the media’s persistence transformed a private dinner into a public indictment, aided by a broader campaign financed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and Fusion GPS, with funding from George Soros and Reid Hoffman. She says the narrative relied on the credibility of prominent officials and media figures to create a perception of truth. She recounts personal threats, attempts to force her to disappear, and attempts to pressure her to retract or stay silent. The police advised her to move; she explains this was framed as a safety measure because the operation sought to erase her capacity to speak.
She connects these events to a larger scheme she calls the Hillary plan: demonize Trump in the media by tying him to Putin, and then have the FBI start an investigation to fuel the narrative. She cites dates: Hillary Clinton allegedly approved the plan on July 26, 2016, and Brennan briefed Obama on July 27; Comey opened Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, 2016. She contends Downer, an Australian ambassador who attended the Cambridge dinner, provided the crucial tip that launched the investigation, and that Gina Haspel, then with the CIA and later director, was involved via Five Eyes channels.
Lekova asserts that the Cambridge gathering in July 2016—attended by Downer, Halper, and others, including Carter Page and Alexander Downer’s cohort—helped craft the so-called Hillary plan for a Russia trap. She insists that Halper and Steele, both tied to FBI and CIA networks, were working on the dossier used to target Trump, with Christopher Steele’s name attached to a report that was actually Hillary-advised. She alleges that journalists Rosenberg (NYT) and Goldman (WSJ) published a version of events that claimed she sought Flynn’s Moscow trip and that Flynn was compromised; she says Halper did not attend the dinner, undermining those reports.
Lekova emphasizes that the operation extended beyond the United States, using Five Eyes channels to bypass congressional oversight and keep the investigation out of formal channels. She notes that this was coordinated with media outlets and high-ranking intelligence figures who publicly attacked Flynn and misrepresented her; she argues the purpose was to destroy a man seen as a threat to the political status quo and to influence the 2016 election narrative.
She concludes by recalling ongoing investigations and trials that might reveal more about the Hillary plan and its proponents, insisting that the operation—financed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, Soros, and Hoffman—was broader than the Russia story, and that the media and political elite were part of a concerted effort to neutralize Trump and his allies.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So now we can put all of these people in the same place. Right? So what they're doing is they're all implementing the Hillary Soares plan to tie, Donald Trump to Russian intelligence. And the plan consists of two items. One is to demonize him and his campaign in the media by tying him to Putin.
And secondly, is to start a formal FBI investigation.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to going rogue with Lara Logan, and my guest this week is sincerely one of the most one of the bravest women that I have known. This is a woman who was thrust into the spotlight for absolutely no reason whatsoever, except that she was the perfect mark, and she was needed by very bad people who were creating a false narrative to overthrow an American president. They were going after the most powerful people in the world and unfortunately for Svetlana Lekova, she was standing in the way. And we owe her truly, as a nation, we owe her a debt of gratitude because in spite of the fact that she was falsely targeted, that she was thrust into the headlines as being a Russian spy, which was not true, that she was exploited and battered by this massive disinformation machine worldwide, This brave woman who is also a mom and a wife and an incredibly compassionate and smart and lovely person, she has not taken a knee. In spite of everything they have done to her, she has stood strong, she has maintained her position on the battlefield, she has been consistent, I have been following her for years.
And the one there is one marker that I consider carries more weight than most when you try to evaluate and understand the integrity and the character of a person, the true nature of a person, and that is consistency. And I have to say that Svetlana Lekova has been consistent in telling the truth, in being bold, in being brave, in acting in spite of the cost, and without any further ado, I would like to introduce this incredible woman so that you can hear her story. Her story would be known by everyone all over the world if our media were not part of this operation and were not so corrupt and so dishonest. And we really do owe her an apology for what we've put her through, but she's not asking for one. She just wants justice.
So, Svetlana Lekova, I know it's the middle of the night there, 03:30 in the morning. It's very kind of you to do this interview for us from the other side of the world. I know you've been to hell and back a number of times, and I just let's start. Can we start by you explaining who you are so people understand how did this woman become one of the central figures in the Russia collusion hoax targeting president Trump and general Michael Flynn?
Speaker 0: Well, hi, Lara. Thank you so much for having me on. And you, of course, have been following this nightmare, this conspiracy of Russiagate for many, many years. And, of course, I followed you for a long time. And you also, of course, exposed a lot of other abuses of government power.
And I'm very, very honored to be here with you and also for your audience to hear, my story, but also the story that affects, all of us. Mhmm. So thank you so much for having me on. So, who am I? Well, actually, nobody, and that's kind of the whole point of of the story, which is that I I'm not an operative.
I'm not a politician. I'm just a mom. I'm British. I was born in Soviet Union. I immigrated as a kid to England, and I'm a relatively unknown academic.
I was blessed to be able to study and later, do my PhD and teach at University of Cambridge, one of the top universities in the world. And it's relatively, you know, obscure subject, So very important for me academically, but something you kind of most likely never heard of, which is nineteen thirties, you know, Soviet history. And I was, there at Cambridge, and in 2014, head of defense intelligence agency then under president Obama visited Cambridge, general Flynn, and attended a dinner, and I was one of the people at the dinner. And that was it. That was the main dinner.
Speaker 1: Svetlana, sorry to interrupt you, but so that we put it in context for people. That was the famous dinner hosted by the former head of MI six, which is really kinda like the CIA in The UK. And and this gentleman had this dinner at his home, Michael Flynn, who was then head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the DIA, under president Obama, was one of the guests. And they fabricated, they used that occasion where the two of you were at the table among many others, and they fabricated this narrative that you were somehow the honeypot. Right?
That you left the dinner with General Flynn, that you went on the train together, and they tried and when they were building this false narrative that somehow Trump was a Russian spy and Putin was his handler and that Russia had installed him as president, what they did was they destroyed you and your life in going after Trump and General Flynn and creating this false narrative that somehow you were having an affair with General Flynn, and I've known General Flynn and his beautiful wife Lori for many, many years. They are they are high school sweethearts who dated all through college and got married very young and have a beautiful family, and General Flynn has never looked sideways. I mean, you know that man, you know as I did when I saw the the stories, when I saw the fake headlines and the false narrative being propagated, I knew it was a lie. I knew it was a lie. I just didn't know you.
That's right.
Speaker 0: And that's why as somebody who was completely apolitical and especially obviously had no business knowing much about American politics. The first time I realized that the whole Russia collusion story was a lie because I was the centrepiece in this Russia collusion. Yeah. And it was all based on a very simple, horrible story that I somehow had an affair with general Flynn and that I was a Russian spy. But I knew two things, and this is back in 2017.
I knew two things. Actually, probably even late twenty sixteen or 2017. One is that I'm not a Russian spy. And two, that I did not sleep with general Flynn. What that then meant for me is I then realized that the whole thing, the the whole Russia collusion narrative, which is simply not true.
And now, of course, you know, there had been a number of investigations and now people have, you know, found out what I knew from the very beginning. And, yes, I mean, I'm academically very accomplished, but you don't have to be a genius to know the whole story was a lie. And there was a lie, designed to legitimize, a democratically elected president to, get American people to believe, that he wasn't actually elected by them, but he was installed by a foreign power. And therefore, it's okay to unleash the whole national security apparatus, against him.
Speaker 1: And can you take us through that dinner? What rarely happened versus what they said?
Speaker 0: So there's an interesting prehistory to this dinner because, again, I specialize in rather obscure subjects. I specialize in nineteen thirties history, and I wasn't particularly sure why I was invited to this in 2014. And I was personally invited by, as you mentioned, Sergey Sergey Dyilov. He used to be a former head of m I six, as you say British AA, and he became a master of a Cambridge College, masters like a principal. And he invited me along with other people.
And the second person who was involved in this invitation was professor Christopher Indrew, and he was at my history professor, somebody I've known since I was a kid, so since I was 18. And he was also involved in inviting me to his dinner. And, you know, we because University of Cambridge is a, you know, is a prestigious organization Yes. You know, people do come and visit it. So on its on its face to me at the time, it wasn't particularly suspicious.
But looking back at it now, I mean, I didn't actually know, you know, obviously, you know, heard of Donald Trump, heard of, say, in the FBI, but I haven't even heard of the defense intelligence agency. I mean, it exists. Right? But it's not not something I've been familiar with. Sure.
I haven't heard my name Michael Flynn, so it wasn't particularly clear to me why would I be needed, you know, to attend this dinner.
Speaker 1: Like how are you relevant? Here you are this Yeah. This person at Cambridge, right? You're teaching Soviet 1930 Soviet history and now the principal of the school, so Richard Diela, former head of MI six and your friend, your history professor who you've known all your life, they're like, you know, Svetlana come on over to this really this highly prestigious dinner, right, with an American figure who is running the Defense Intelligence Agency of the United States. I mean, that's a that's not the average invitation.
Speaker 0: No. And and it mean, one is obviously he's very high ranking person, but on but but the second thing, it just wasn't in my particular field of, you know, expertise. Right? There was not much I could add to the conversation. The way it was explained to me is they were inviting sort of, you know, their best and brightest to show off to the DIA.
But, anyway, that that what was the invitation was. Mhmm. I later heard, and this is something that perhaps, you know, needs to be investigated or maybe has been already, but needs to be made public, that perhaps this was being used in 2014 when general Flynn was railroaded out of the Defense Intelligence Agency. That was one of the things. That's what's something Devin Nunes who investigated this, he suggested that was used by people like John Brennan, the former shea director, by people like Jim Clapper, who was general Flynn's boss at the time.
Perhaps they already used that story back in 2014, the manufactured story about me and general Flynn, in order to railroad him out of the Defense Intelligence Agency. And as it happened, he retired voluntarily. And so, obviously, the story sort of died there then,
Speaker 1: but pres They forced him out.
Speaker 0: Right. Right. But presumably, it stayed in the files. Mhmm. And it looks from just what what people who investigated it are saying openly is that they just recycled that much later.
They took a preexisting story about General Flynn and me, and then from 2014, and they recycled it in 2016 in order to because it was already in the files Right. In order to make it look and, like, we've had you know, again, like, we had an affair, but this time, it became even more significant because they were alleging that president Trump or rather candidate Trump at that point was colluding with Russia. But there was no Trump Russia collusion, so they had to manufacture that. And you will recall that the whole Trump Russia collusion story was based on contacts between senior people in the Trump campaign and members of Russian intelligence. Mhmm.
So in order for their story to work, they had to who was the most senior person in the Trump campaign? General Flynn. So they had to make him into the Russian spy for their story to work out.
Speaker 1: Yes. That's right. And so and so they resurrected this this old hit job, right, that somehow at this dinner and presumably the link with you is that you're you came from the former Soviet Union, that's where you were born as and, you know, you you came to Britain from there, and that also you have this specialty in your academic studies of nineteen thirties Soviet history. So they use this circumstantial, information to create a false tie. And then they what did they say happened at the dinner?
Speaker 0: Yes. So what happened was well, first of all, it kind of didn't really matter. You know how they say in Agatha Christie detective stories, it's not who she is, it's who she is. So who I actually was, it didn't matter. The fact that I they took my name.
They they they took my identity. It's like identity theft. Right? Mhmm. And attached a completely different story, completely manufactured story.
So all they needed is the fact that I was born in Russia. I was a woman, and I was by their own invitation in the same at the same event as Jennifer. That's all they needed. And, you know, there's a very famous novel by John La Carrere, who is himself former m s six guy who is a famous spy writer. And in a novel called The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, they set up their own operative.
And one of the things they do is they create this notional affair with this woman. And she's asking, like, how did they know that we were gonna meet? How they don't did they know that we're going to have to fall in love? And he said the operation didn't depend on it. So as it happened, those people in the novel had a relationship.
It didn't matter because he said they just needed to put us into room the room together. And then they can make up any story they like that there was a fair, was in infatuation. The very presence of me and Jennifer in the same room was enough for your intelligence services and our intelligence services, The UK Intelligence Services, to manufacture whatever they like. And then what they did is they classified the files. So that way, they can then put into the media whatever they like.
Speaker 1: So can you take me through exactly what happened at that dinner?
Speaker 0: Yes. And I think that's very important because this was actually a subject of investigation by special counsel Durham. And they went through with me all the steps. So I had to go through all my emails of the night and just, you know, ask people who were there, you know, for their recollections. We have a relatively good picture.
It's all the events happened in 2014, but because it's so important for historic purposes and hopefully for investigatory, purposes, we were able to reconstruct events. So what happened is, as I mentioned, I received this invitation for this dinner. It took place on February 2834. And, Jennifer Flynn gave a talk, first at Corpus Christi College, which is a college of my university, professor Christopher Andrew. And he gave a very, very good talk about, you know, the future, challenges that are facing Defense Intelligence Agency.
And after the talk, we moved on to this, dinner where, you know, only a dozen of us were united. Now my husband accompanied me my then fiance accompanied me, to the talk with Jennifer Flynn, and then he also walked with me to to the talk within one of the colleges. And then the dinner was in another college as you as you mentioned, which should deal off private, accommodation.
Speaker 1: And all of this is at Cambridge University. Correct?
Speaker 0: That's right. That's right. And it's a very small, I mean, maybe, like, sort of like MIT perhaps. Mhmm. But it's just MIT is, like, one university, whereas, Cambridge although it's also one university, it's a bit it consists of a bunch of colleges.
And all of them are usually between the central ones are between five to ten minute walk from each other, and then you have some sort of, you know, like, twenty minutes walk. But it's basically all very small. And so we all walked from we, meaning myself, my husband, and, another member of the seminar, we walked from the location of the talk by Jane O'Flynn, to the location of this dinner, which was about fifteen you know, five, ten minutes walk. But then there is another five minutes because it's quite big, you know, big grounds. And you'll you'll see why it matters later because remember all this information or other misinformation is up in API files.
And so the total walking time was probably about fifteen minutes. It was very dark, cold, you know, February in in England. It's not a nice time. Yeah. And yes.
And here we are. We we arrived. And the so my husband left me with my fellow person from our seminar, from our Cambridge seminar that I was a member of, which was hosting the fluent event. And me and this gentleman, we went upstairs, and there was a very nice sort of layout. It was all in a very, very beautiful, you know, wood, candles, you know, very sort of medieval Cambridge type look.
And there was some drinks be be before dinner. Mhmm. And I think I was just introduced to general Flynn, like, just by name, and then I think he just, like, did rounds. And remember, I'm I was a very junior person. So majority of the time, of course, you spend speaking to Sarvich Djelov, who is, you know, the head of m I six, former, but, you know, they're never former.
And then also my professor, Christopher Ranger. So he was talking to them. And another thing to add is that in Cambridge, we have this about forty minutes from Cambridge, we have a NATO slash DIA joint base, which for NATO operations in Europe called Malzwarf. It used to be an old Royal Air Force Base. Joint
Speaker 1: base Molesworth.
Speaker 0: Gen mhmm. Molesworth. That's it. RAF Molesworth. And General Flynn actually, just from reports, visited the base because that's where a lot of DIA people are stationed in Europe.
And some of those people were actually doing PhD in Cambridge. So some of those people attended that dinner, so he obviously was chatting to them, you know, and Richard did love that. That's pretty much with who he was interested in. The one, obviously, person he wasn't interested was me because I had nothing very little to nothing to do. So he was polite, but he wasn't you know, we didn't have a particular discussion.
And then we sat at the dinner. So I was the only woman in the room, And I was set, so the table was, like, really, really big, you know, with candles and bottles and plates and cutlery. So it was all very, very pretty, but also very big. So Jeno Flynn was on the opposite side of me, and I sat in between Richard Delav and another person who I said as I said, was a colleague of ours. And then Jeno Flynn was on opposite side, and he was next to Christopher Andrew and another person between the two of them.
So, actually, we had a quite a long distance between us. Imagine it's it's it's a really, big table. Right? The reason why this detail is important is because later in the media, they said that I came up to him, at at at the drinks, and chatted him up, and I was just come came up to him by know, took everyone by surprise despite the fact that, know, I was actually invited, and I didn't come up to him. He was introduced to me.
Then the report said that I sat next to him, but I didn't sit next to him. I was very far away from him. And, majority of the dinner conversation revolved around politics, and they were the men the the senior men were talking. I frankly wasn't particularly listening because it was a very long day for me. I had to teach that morning.
And so I had to get up very early. I had to mark up the papers. Then I had a bunch of other things to do. So I what was Svetlana, just to
Speaker 1: be clear, what was your position at Cambridge at the time?
Speaker 0: So I was a postgraduate student. I was writing my PhD. And at the same time, I was teaching undergraduate students on subjects such as Russian revolution or, you know, first or second world war, you know, basically things quite, you know, removed from, you know, the current political events. So I then and I was writing my PhD on on the on on nineteen thirties. And then at some point during the dinner, I remember that Richard Dearlauf and and general Flynn, they had some sort of, you know, heated debates about some things.
I don't remember whether it was Ukraine or Middle East because there were quite a few things happening at that point. I wasn't particularly paying attention, to be honest. And then my professor Christopher Andrews said suddenly interrupted them perhaps to, you know, calm down the atmosphere and said, oh, and Svetlana now will show you this document she found in the Stalin archive. And I was kind of a bit annoyed because I didn't want to start sort of looking for documents. I I usually carry an iPad with me and I have my documents scanned, But it was sort of in the middle of dinner, but because my professor told me to do it, I did.
So I found the document. I showed him. And in fact, I didn't actually pass even the iPad to General Flynn. I passed it to Richard Dieloff, and he got up and passed it to General Flynn. Again, I'm trying to point out how little contact we even had with each other.
Right? Yes. And it was a document from 1912, and general Flynn was, you know, impressed that I found this document because at that stage, you know, Joseph Stalin, who later became very well known, you know, dictator, He was in fact himself a revolutionary on the run of of the terrorist secret police. And he was writing this letter to tell his fellow revolutionaries that he got somewhere safely, that he escaped safely because they were trying to jail him. And it was just it was a cool document.
I found it. It's a great document. And then he and other people at the table asked me to email other Americans, asked asked me to email them their documents, which I did. And that's kind of the extent of that. And then what happened after the dinner is I took some photographs.
So I'm a junior person, so I usually try and like, if I can, I also took some photographs earlier when General Flynn did the speech? I usually do that if we have visitors. And then, again, Geno Flynn and his so he was he was accompanied by his assistant. I think it was at least one, maybe two. And they will ask me, oh, can you just email us the photos as well?
So so I did that. And that was really that. And then the next thing that happened is General Flynn left first with those who you know, he's a very senior figure, so he had quite a few people accompanying him. Yeah. So he left, and that was it.
And I stayed behind with, you know, my colleagues at university. And at some point, you know, we had the discussion about how great it was, how we managed to impress, you know, the head of defense intelligence agency, which was a big deal because, you know, as I said, we had this link with Died Molesorf. And then my husband was waiting for me. So a colleague of mine who sat next to me, he walked me through the the college grounds, which is about five to ten minute walk. And then I met my husband, and we then went we were staying in a hotel in Cambridge.
So we went to the hotel in Cambridge with my husband, and that was it. That's that's the whole thing. Now imagine my surprise when in December so I'm nine months pregnant. I start getting calls in December 2016. So this is what we now know about the context is this is when they were preparing the intelligence community assessment, which is something which currently is subject to lots of news coverage because this is something now subject to criminal investigation by the Department of Justice, is that president Obama gave order he's now the outgoing president in December 2016, so we fast forward.
He gave an order to make a finding that Russia interfered Mhmm. To help, you know, install president Trump. And it was based on the assessment by people like Brennan Comey and Clapper that there were contacts between senior, Trump intelligence, Trump campaign officials and Russian intelligence. So it later transpired that my story was needed when, because after the election, they wanted to overthrow the incoming president before he even started. Mhmm.
And they needed this contact, this manufacturer's contact between me, who they portrayed as Russian intelligence, and general Flynn. So they started all calling me the operatives in the media, and that's why I've been so vocal about the role of the media because I don't consider them journalists. I consider them operatives. They started calling me, and all of them had my number that so the Washington Post, David Ignatius, The New York Times, so this is Adam Goldman, Matthew Rosenberg, The Wall Street Journal, and also newspapers in England, so it's The Guardian, The Times. All of them had my contact details.
Again, I was a nobody. Right? Nobody knew who I was other than people interested in nineteen thirty's Soviet stuff. Right? And suddenly, they asked me about a dinner in 2014, and my relationship this is this is December 2016.
Right? Yeah. My relationship I mean,
Speaker 1: and let's just let's just recap that. So you go from February 2014 when you attend the dinner, February 28, all the way Right. To 2016, so it's what more than two and a half years later?
Speaker 0: Right. Almost three because it's '16.
Speaker 1: Almost three years later. You have since you've you've you're married, you have you're pregnant how many months pregnant? Nine. Nine. You're nine months pregnant.
You're living happily with your husband, you've never probably never thought about General Flynn again other than occasionally when it might be in the news or something like that, And suddenly you have this slew of reporters from these major publications who all have your contact information, your name, who all know about this and now they want to press you on the details of your affair with general Michael Flynn, is completely and utterly fabricated.
Speaker 0: That's right. And they start in December 16. I had no idea what was going on. I was very naive. And remember, I I'm not even known in The United Kingdom.
Right? Let alone in The United States. Yes. Yes. So who, you know, who gave who, you know, who who who was able to organize all of this?
This is a huge operation. Right? And so in The UK, we have quite strict so for the first people who came was the chief reporter of the Times of London, and the Times of London is our, you know, paper record. It's very serious stuff. And I initially thought it's just some sort of joke, then it wasn't very funny.
Right? Because I'm nine months pregnant, and I don't particularly want to be known as a Russian spy, you know, who goes around having affairs with, you know, US top adviser to the to the to the incoming president. So we threatened with litigation, and they wouldn't publish the story. Then the Feet, the Financial Times, in in London published the story, and this is somebody who's gonna come into the picture, know, in a in a very big way. Somebody called Stefan Halper, who is this American professor.
Stefan Halper. Appeared on the record. Right? And and I will tell you in a minute And the trade. Yes.
He's going to become he he's actually a CIA and FBI operative. And he appeared on the record saying that the seminar that general Flynn attended was penetrated by Cambridge so Cambridge seminar was penetrated by by the Kremlin and that he helped or resigned from a seminar in protest, and now our parliament was gonna investigate this. None of that none of that's true, but they put that story out on December 1536, which is precisely the date when they changed the intelligence community assessment. Right? Like I said, you know, president Obama ordered it to change to say that basically nothing happens, that the elections were fine and legitimate, into that, president Trump was installed by Russia and that there were this contacts between Russian intelligence and Trump campaign advises.
And then the next thing that happens is I get more and more of these approaches and especially when Geno Flynn is forced to leave, the Trump administration. Yes. I and my own professor, this is professor Andrew who I've known since I was 18. So this is for, like, twenty years. He writes an article in The Times Sunday Times saying that general Flynn showed attentions to me.
Wow. Saying that he invited me to go to Moscow with him. None of it is true. And and I contacted him, and I asked, like, why why did you do that? And can you would withdraw this, please?
He he was at the dinner. He knows nothing happened. And he refused, and he said that someone would have pressurized him. But we now found out, and I had posted about that recently, we now find out that, in fact, he wasn't so although he's a history professor Yes. In fact, at the time when he wrote this article, he was a serving MI five officer.
MI five is our version of FBI in The UK. And there are not that many it's a very senior position. So my history professor is somebody I've known since I was a teenager,
Speaker 1: and Yes.
Speaker 0: I know his family. Right? I stayed over at his place with his you know, I know his wife. I know his grandkids, kids, and everyone. He came to visit me, and he knows my husband.
He knows my whole family. So somebody I've known for many, many years was actually serving within the, you know, UK intelligence community. And so he wrote that article as part of this, and then this and then it transpired that he's a close friend of David Ignatius. And David Ignatius was the man who leaked, as you will recall, famously this this conversation that Geno Flynn had with Russian ambassador. And then David Ignatius flew to England, to meet me, and I've just had a baby.
And my professor is trying to get me to meet David Ignatius to discuss my relationship with Geno Flynn. And I said, you know, are you out of your mind? And, you know, people knew at the time I had a very difficult childbirth. I lost a lot of blood, and I was you know, it was it was horrible. And, you know, I survived, but, you know, I I wasn't in a good, you know, state at all.
Yes. And I found even I didn't know that at that point, right, that there was some kind of operation. Right? I didn't know that. I was very naive at the time.
I I wasn't aware of American politics. But what I did know, it was completely inappropriate and wrong Sure. That suddenly all these people were trying to imply these really bad things.
Speaker 1: And so my husband Let me let me stop you there for one moment. What were you telling these reporters when they were calling you to ask about this? What were you saying to them?
Speaker 0: So what happened is we consulted lawyers because initially, we're just gonna ignore them. Yeah. And the lawyers suggested that we can't just ignore them. Again, remember, we didn't know it was an operation, but we knew that this is very dangerous. Right?
Because I'm basically being accused of being a traitor. I'm accused of, you know, performing basically, you know, having affairs on, you know, in on behalf of a foreign power with senior US intelligence officials. Right? So there was a very serious accusation. And so the lawyers recommended that we respond.
Mhmm. But I wasn't in a position to respond because my doctors were telling me I shouldn't, right, because I was recuperating. And all of this is with a new baby. Is my only child. Right?
She was, like, two weeks old. So my husband wrote to each of those reports, starting with David Ignatius and to The New York Times and to Wall Street Journal, basically saying that your source is acting maliciously. So we knew Halper was a source. Stefan Halper was a source Mhmm. For these accusations, but we didn't know that he was an FBI or CAA operative at that point.
Right? Yes. We just knew that he was this Cambridge academic, this American guy, and we knew he was, like, a bad guy. And because he he also, gave information to Financial Times that, you know, there was this this Kremlin penetration of the Cambridge seminar. So we figured he he and people confirmed to us.
The journalists confirmed to us that he was the source for the stories. So we said that, you know, I never met General Flynn. Sorry. I only met General Flynn once. I've never had an affair with General Flynn.
I never met General Flynn after this one dinner to which I was invited to, and that I've never been alone with him at all. And that this is and, obviously, I'm not a Russian spy, and that, you know, their source is acting maliciously. And we sent all of this response to all of the publications. And what was very interesting is I think they didn't expect the pushback. Right?
And then we threatened litigation. So although it's very difficult to sue in The United States, as you know, but at least we said, look. If you're gonna continue spreading this, you're gonna face consequences. And so I think that helped a lot to blow up. I think that one of the reasons why later, you know, was attacked even more is I think I helped to blow up this Russia collusion story.
Mhmm. Because here, they had on the record a statement from me saying that their whole story was a lie. And that's at the time when Cormy, Brennan, Yates, all these people were on TV every day, you know, chief telling American people that there is an investigation into Trump campaign context of Russia and Russian intelligence. And I, who was supposed to be the chief Russian intelligence person who was in contact with head of Evangelina Flynn, was saying, no. No.
No. These are these are lies, and we're going to take legal action.
Speaker 1: Wow. It's quite incredible because I remember that time very well and I knew that it was a lie, but, you know, there was just a barrage, right? It was it was constant. It was just never ending from every day you were waking up to another detail and another detail and another detail and ordinarily these details wouldn't even be significant. But when you have all of the media acting together as operatives, what did they do?
They take they take every little detail and they act like, this is a huge breaking story. You know, one more set, you know, more proof that Trump is a Russian spy, more proof that General Flynn was, you know, having, contacts with Russia, more proof that that Russia collusion, is true when, of course, it was completely and utterly fabricated and paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign through Fusion GPS, the FBI, the White House, Obama, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, Stroke, Page, all of these people were a 100% involved and they were not the only ones. And I can only imagine, I mean as a mother and as know as a woman and just as a fellow human being, for you to be going through all of that with your baby and then just you know, we have the benefit of hindsight now and the benefit of knowledge and the benefit of the truth that's come out. And so it's easier to look back on all of this and make an assessment and understand it better. But at the time, when you I've been targeted like this, and when you're in the middle of that, it's like it's like being at the center of a of a hailstorm, right, or a tsunami.
It's coming at you from every direction, and it I felt so powerless because they have all the levers of power. They have the voice. They have this giant media apparatus worldwide, then they have people with, you know, titles and positions of credibility behind their names like professor emeritus at Cambridge University. Right? You know, the former head of MI six who's now, you know, running Cambridge University.
When they start weighing in publicly, when the clappers and the Brandons and the Schiffs, know, Adam Schiffs, head of the intel committee. Right? So surely, they must be telling the truth. And people that have known you all your life, people that love you are looking at you like you've lost your mind. You know?
And so there's a huge personal cost, and my heart goes out to you Svetlana. I can only imagine how difficult was it for you personally during that time.
Speaker 0: Well, you're you're spot on, and there's some very specific points you make made, which we now know from, you know, research and the documents that come out, you know, how spot on you are on on on on these things. So for example, one of the things is this, you know, haunting you and, you know, a switch hunt. Right? That's deliberate. It's an operation.
Right? So for example, in my case, what they did is they sent reporters to my house and to my neighborhood with my with my portrait. So they found, like, a picture of me when I was much younger, very good looking, and they printed it, and I didn't even look like that. Right? Like, I'm a lady, pregnant lady, and then, you know, just with the with the with the first kid.
Right? But they found a picture. I was young. They printed it out, and they went and knocked on the doors of my neighbors and said and said, like, she she's a Russian spy. Right?
So, of course, the neighbors were, like, asking questions. Then we started receiving credible, you know, threats to our address home address, and the Metropolitan Police had to be involved. And the advice of the Metropolitan Police was we can't do anything unless something happens to you. And, of course, we don't want that to happen, so they advised us to move. So we had to change locations, like, numerous times because, basically, I realized at that point that I'm on my own.
Nobody's gonna help me. Wow. The authorities are not going to help me because they needed me to disappear. They needed me to basically, they needed something bad to happen to me.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Right? So that's because I was shouting. So imagine Call Me Bran and all these people on TV Yes. Saying that Flynn was compromised. He's a traitor.
Because they had to take somebody who's completely squeaky Flynn, part of the hero Mhmm. Right, who never took any money, who was not engaged in drugs, sex, or anything like that, And they had to construct a narrative, rewrite his whole life in order to make people believe that indeed he betrayed his country. So do you remember when famous judge said, you were sitting there, you know, in the in the American flag behind you whilst you betraying your country. Mhmm. They had to you know, I'm a historian.
I know what they needed to do. They needed to write his history, the false history of how he became a traitor. Right? Because otherwise, people couldn't believe, you know, somebody who was prepared to give his life for his country. Why would why would he go work for the Russians?
Right? So they needed to persuade people, of that. So it was a very complicated and sophisticated operation.
Speaker 1: Yes. Because otherwise, they wouldn't believe it. Right? I mean, they just wouldn't believe it because it doesn't make sense.
Speaker 0: Right. And that's why I had to I had to I had to be this Russian spy. We had to have this affair because then then they can say, okay. And this is what Brennan said. Brennan said at his testimony to congress that, that Flynn, unwittingly became a traitor.
So he might have not realized that he became a traitor.
Speaker 1: Which is how you explain that someone who has the profile of a heroic figure, someone who threw himself off a cliff as a young soldier to save two Navy SEALs that were being swept out. Right? And and who did that on his own. Someone who served his country with distinction, who had been honored on the battlefield, who had risen to the ranks as someone who was known for his integrity and his loyalty and his commitment to this country. Now if you're going to turn that person into a traitor, you have to show, oh look he cheated on his wife.
He's not really the good guy. Right? He's actually a bad guy. Oh, and by the way, you know, how do you explain away all those contact with the Russians? Because really as the head of the DIA, it was his job to have contacts with the intelligence services in every country on earth.
Well, how do you turn those into something? Could that go from something logical and reasonable into something that is believable? You you create you take somebody like you and you absolutely destroy that person in building this completely false narrative.
Speaker 0: And that's why, you know, that's why the media is so complacent in this because they needed to, verify each other. They needed to re for this fake story to suddenly be embedded in the public consciousness. Right? Like, one day, he's a war hero who went and, you know, killed all the terrorists and, you know, got rid of all the bad guys and and did anything, you know, everything he could for his country, and now he's a traitor. Right?
You had to keep repeating it. It has to come as what you you made a very important point. The all the people that they they presented, you know, who am I? Right? I'm a nobody.
Nobody nobody was believing what I was saying. I'm some girl from England. Right? With with was born in in in Soviet Union. On the other hand, as you say, you have director of the CIA.
You have head of MI six, you have director of and they all repeat and repeat, and you have New York Times, and you have and they repeat the same story over and over again That's right. Until it becomes true. This is Gables. Right? This is a classic
Speaker 1: It's Casa Gables. Yes. If you just keep telling the lie over and over again, eventually people will believe it.
Speaker 0: Right. And it's also the figures and authority, the figures of respect. This is what's so scary about it. I think you made a very important point. It had it could only work if it would be figures, of respectability.
And so it's their word against mine. Mhmm. Right? And so that's why but even then, my voice was still getting through, and that's why they needed to attack me so badly. You know?
That's why they needed to, you know, to, you know, cause for me to receive all these threats. They wanted me to go into hiding and shut up because I kept you know, I joined social media and, you know, we're very lucky even on back back when Twitter was still something, you know, in 2017. I was able to go on social media and say, this this lies. And people said, listen to me. Right?
I was able to start telling my story. And so they escalated all these operations against me, not because I'm somebody important, but because they need to silence me. Right? As as you pointed out what happened to you, people start listening to the truth. People can the American people, they they know the truth when they hear it.
Speaker 1: That's right.
Speaker 0: And then the doubts about the government propaganda starts, you know, feeding into their heads thinking, hang on a second. That that I should trust this person. You know? Listen to what they have to say. So they need to destroy that person, and
Speaker 1: they need to destroy me. So for They want to break you so that you will go away, and their false narrative will be the only narrative that exists.
Speaker 0: Right. Right. And that's why I had everything from, you know, very bad threats, you know, that the police took seriously into things like, you know, like, for example, even David Ignatius was saying, oh, we can perhaps if you, you know, if you basically, you know, say something about General Flynn, maybe we can help you with your book career, you know, as an author. So they were driving. Right?
Then we had other person Are you serious? Rosenb yeah. Yeah. He put me in contact with his publisher and said, let's see what we can do. And but I I I have to tell the truth.
You know, I'm not particularly sort of brave person, but but I could only tell the truth. I couldn't shut up. It's just not my character. Right? And then also so Matt Rosenberg, and, so he admitted that that he worked for John Brennan.
He he he told it to people.
Speaker 1: Are you serious? I'm sorry. I need you to say that again one more time. Matt Rosenberg, the journalist.
Speaker 0: The New York Times journalist, yes. He admitted that the hit on Jenna Flynn was on direct orders of John Brad. He told you that? He told this to Matt Aibi. To Matt Aibi?
Because Matt Aibi was investigating the story and then it got shut down.
Speaker 1: Wow. That's And Yeah. That makes me nauseous.
Speaker 0: And we have emails about that because and and funnily enough, so late not funnily, but it it's also proven by the fact that Rosenberg also got caught by project Veritas Mhmm. Where he said that he's receiving leaks from very senior people in the CIA. So he repeated it. But he specifically said that he was awarded by John Brennan. And the specific context of that is the New York Times, Adam Goldman and Rosenberg published an article in 2018, when it transpired that Stefan Halper, who was a fellow academic at Cambridge, that he was responsible for this fake story about me and Jen Flynn having an affair.
And he was actually an FBI informant, and also CA operative. Right? He wasn't actually at the dinner. Right? He he did not attend.
And I started the lawsuits and against Halper and the newspapers about this, including New York Times, including Wall Street Journal, including Washington Post. And one of the things I said, it was they it was knowing you know, it was a known provable lie because the person who was the source for the fake story wasn't actually at the dinner. Yes. And Halper admitted that he wasn't at the dinner. The story that Rosenberg and and Goldman and and specifically the story that they wrote is that I approached Flynn that I sat next to him, all the journalists were dead.
Right? And I left dinner together. Mhmm. Right. And that the concerns were strong enough that it caused another person, says the article, I.
E. Them trying to imply, to report the incident to The US authorities. And the point was, well, the caliper wasn't at the dinner, why didn't he report it himself given that he was there by informants?
Speaker 1: Mhmm.
Speaker 0: So my Ibi was investigating that because I've I've posted about that. Right? Like, the whole story, not just it's a lie, but it's a provable lie. And he got in touch with Rosenberg, and Rosenberg said to him, what could we have done? This was an orders of Brennan.
And then I have some emails with Tayyip proving that as well. And the second thing Rosenberg said that if I don't shut up, like, their target is Flynn, not me. So they kind of don't mean to cause me harm. And I'm like, well, but you have. Right?
But they said they're really interested in Flynn, not me. However, if I'm going to continue attacking them because I've been quite, you know, vocal exposing them as operatives, they will start, you know, exposing me in the media and and find things about my past and and and and and post it or print it. And I, of course, know there's nothing about my past. I said, carry on. I said, plea you know, be my guest because, of course, I knew that this is not true.
But this is to give you an idea that they use intimidation. They use threats. And okay, I'm lucky in a sense that, you know, I just knew that what the truth is. Right? And I just kept telling it and repeating it, and that's what you said in the very beginning.
Speaker 1: I need to remind everybody, this is a journalist. This is supposedly a journalist calling you. This is not somebody from the intelligence services. This is not somebody representing themselves as law enforcement. This is a journalist who's calling you up and threatening you.
Speaker 0: And and, Lara, this is why what you said, you know, what you said in the beginning where we talked about how it was financed. And as you rightly point out that, you know, it was financed by Fusion GPS and Hillary campaign. Yeah. But also remember that both, Fusion GPS and Hillary campaign were also financed by George Soros and Reid Hoffman. Of course.
And then when he released the election, right, they came back worthless person. Financed the huge you know, twenty seventeen efforts against president, Trump as well because Fusion GPS and Christopher still got rehired by Ritz Hoffman and by George Soros. So this is I'm telling you what it's like to be on the receiving end, right, as a mom, as a regular girl, living in Cambridge, you know, just in a complete shock. But we, of course, now know that this is a serious serious Soros run Hoffman operation in in involving the intelligence community, and that has been continuing for the last nine years, more ten years. And I was just at the beginning.
You know? I was just the first target, but they kept repeating it exactly in the same way. And that is why it's so important to deal with the media, not to treat them as journalists. Right? They're not journalists.
They're actually paid operatives. So for example, one of the things that David Nunes and Kash Patel have discovered early on is when they were trying to find out about who financed the steel dossier, they came across the bank records of Fusion GPS with their with their bank. Yeah. And Fusion GPS then admitted that it was actually Hillary campaign that financed steel dossier, but what they managed to keep redacted and is still unredacted is their payments to the journalists. So Fusion GPS received money from Hillary and from Soros, and then they paid journalists.
We don't know the names because they're redacted, but, you know, you can guess that there were probably people like Tom Hamburger from Washington Post, people like Ken D'Lanion. These people were through this dark money of which, you know, Fusion GPS is one of those groups, they were being financed. And also vice versa, the newspapers were actually paying Fusion GPS for stories as well. So this is not some thing that happened because, I don't know, people hated Flynn, for example. Right?
This is a highly sophisticated serious operation because president Trump then, candidate Trump represented the risk to these globalist elites. And they organized, you know, this color revolution that you and I post about so much that's happening in front of our eyes today. Well, it started back back in 1516. Even when he was still a candidate, they were doing exactly the same things. They just we didn't know then.
And that's where, you know, the Darwin investigation found this Hillary plan, and it's going to be in the news quite a bit, where they needed to stop Trump. The globalist needed to stop Trump Mhmm. From coming into power. They organized, devised a plan, and Jake Sullivan was involved in this plan, whose wife is Maggie Goodlander, is one of the people in the media.
Speaker 1: So to Maggie Goodlander, just just to remind people, she's one of the seditious six, right, who's who made that video, that is really an affront. I mean, it's really ordering every military person to defy the UCMJ, the United States Military Code of and to commit a crime. That's what they're doing, and they're committing a crime and doing it. Yeah. But
Speaker 0: but all of that exactly. But but this is why this story is so important that, you know, what happened to me is horrible and personally devastating. But the reason why everyone needs to study this story is because these are exactly the same people, and they did exactly the same things. It's just that they're escalating and escalating because they know that perhaps maybe maybe there's going to be justice finally because, obviously, there's, you know, currently in the news that there might be, you know, trials in Florida, and these people are panicking. That's why they're behaving this way.
But they started it. You know, they just could not allow these globalist elites. They all united. You know, they they this it was this horrible combination of, you know, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, anti Trump Republicans like John McCain. You had the media.
You had the SIG project there.
Speaker 1: Midas Touch. All these organizations that are just created to basically to assassinate Trump on a daily basis.
Speaker 0: Right. Right. And they're just continuing, but they're just escalating what they've been doing for the last decade. So so that's why the story never ended. This this color revolution It's
Speaker 1: also why the conspiracy never ended. I mean, talk about statute of limitations, but all of these actions, if you look if, you know, at a RICO case, right, which looks at all the different elements of this, this is unrestricted warfare. And if you look at all those different elements, none of this has ended. First of all, legally for a conspiracy to end, the conspirators have to acknowledge the conspiracy. That has not happened.
The conspirators have to end the conspiracy. Like, they actually have to stop participating in that. That also hasn't happened. And so you have an ongoing seditious conspiracy. There this is treason and sedition is ongoing because none of the people that were originally involved have been held to account.
They're all still free to operate, and they're still operating as we keep saying. Exactly.
Speaker 0: Because, you know, when we talk about Soros, when we talk about Hoffmann, that's not some, you know, abstract thing. Right? It's every newspaper article, including the ones you read about me and General Flynn, including the ones you read about president Trump from it it it's not it wasn't organic. Right? Somebody paid for it.
Somebody ordered it. Unbelievable. And what has happened is, you know, I've, helped the Durham investigation for for for four years. And the key document they found, and this is going to be the document that that you will hear a lot more about as as these trials get underway, was the Hillary Clinton plan. So what was happening is Hillary was in a lot of trouble.
She was gonna lose the election. And Soros and Hoffman, people like that, they've invested a lot of money into her election campaign. But she had these two problems which is health. Remember, she famously collapsed on 09:11 Oh, you know, few weeks just before the election.
Speaker 1: That famous shot of her going to the car where her legs buckle and she's held up by the
Speaker 0: Right. By the security. Yeah. And then the second big problem she had was the the email scandal because she was subpoenaed by the Benghazi committee and she deleted 33,000 emails Yeah. Which which was usually private server.
Speaker 1: Let's be clear. She she broke the law by destroying classified information. She broke the law by having classified and unclassified information on one server when their by law is supposed to be kept different, separate. She broke the law by having classified information on private server that wasn't protected. She broke the law by putting that in the hands of her law firm who were not legally allowed to hold and store that.
I mean, I could go on and on and on and they lied about it, which was another crime. They covered it up. That was another crime. And they and they lied about how information is classified. They said, this was over classified and, you know, it was subsequently declassified and that was only pertaining to state department information because information is classified at source in the United States government.
So she had information from the, you know, people like the NSA and the National Reconnaissance Organization and the National Geospatial Agency and the DIA and the CA. They're the issuing authority of that information. They're the only ones who have the authority to declassify it outside of the president of The United States Of America who with the act of just speaking can be an act of classification. But what they did, they she was caught and they lied and they lied and they lied and the operatives in the media that helped them lie about Russia collusion and create that false narrative helped them lie about the email scandal. And so she was she knew she was in real trouble, and how was she gonna get out of it?
That's what this document you're talking about
Speaker 0: Well, that's right. That's right. And that's why why is it, you know, for numerous reasons, of course, they went after general Flynn, But specifically, how does he relate to this Hillary plan? Well, he was the first person because, of course, remember, he was he was working for the Obama administration. He gave evidence at the Benghazi committee and other other things saying that obviously, not only it was completely mishandled, so that that the whole thing was was horrible, but also he was very vocal in saying that she's not fit to be president of United States and she should be resigning.
And he was saying that from very early on and she should, you know, withdraw her candidacy because she was using this unsecured private server Mhmm. And that on this unsec this this server could have ended up in a in in in the hands of anyone, whether it's friend, whether it's foe, and and, you know, it could be around China, Russia, whatever. It doesn't matter. The whole point was that she was not to be trusted with nation's secrets. Correct.
Example, at the moment, as you know, John Bolton, national security former national security adviser, is probably facing a very long time in jail Yeah. But exactly the same thing. And well deserved. He stored classified information at home. Mhmm.
And then he was hacked by Iran. Right? Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And
Speaker 0: that's what Jennifer Flynn was talking about. And he said that if it's found out that she stored classified information on her server and that information ended up in the wrong hands, not only it's the end of her presidential campaign, she's gonna go to prison. Oh, not just her, but, of course, Obama was on these emails. A bunch of other people were in these emails.
Speaker 1: Oh,
Speaker 0: yes. And so Soros was very concerned, and we have the emails. Right? Like, that his investments they remember, he backed her once already against Obama, and she lost Obama. And he was gonna lose the money again.
Right? And this time, at least Obama, they managed to domesticate. But, obviously, president Trump, they they couldn't take the risk. And, of course, general Flynn now changed sides and went to join, you know, candidate Donald Trump. And they and the email scandal was representing this fundamental threat because although they were telling people during the election campaign summer twenty sixteen that Hillary is going to win, they actually had internal poll, polls, which was showing that the email scandal and the, health scandal were costing her.
Right? She she was that's right. It was a fifty fifty chance. And so what happened is we're going back to now Cambridge University is in July 2016. A group gathered at Cambridge University.
So the whole university is on holidays, but you probably because you've been covering it for a while that all these operatives, they use conferences, they use university as a cover.
Speaker 1: They use academia itself as a cover. Right? Think tanks and, you know, all of these institutes and policy institutes and universities, they're all a cover for their operations.
Speaker 0: Yes. Because they need to meet all these senior people, m I six, whatever, all these operatives, they need to meet up, and they have to pretend, oh, we're just at the conference together. Right? Because they can't, like, say, oh, I'm gonna go and, you know, devise a conspiracy against, you you know They can't tell the truth. The Right?
So they they need to cover
Speaker 1: breaking the law. They can't tell the
Speaker 0: truth. Right. Right. They can't say that. So that's why they they create this conf that that's why, you know, there's always a conference.
And so what happens is that Amadie Lauberght, who was a proxy for Hillary Clinton, she was at came in in Cambridge. This is early July twenty sixteen, And so was Stefan Halper. So he was masquerading as a Cambridge professor, but he was the CIA and FBI officer. And so was Richard Zielov, you know, the head of MI six, and crucially, the boss of Christopher Steele. Right?
Speaker 1: The author of Christopher Steele's Yeah. Christopher Steele, the the British spy that they held up as this, you know, great person who actually worked for sir Richard Dyilov when he was head of MI six.
Speaker 0: And and so remember that Halper and Steele, they were working together because they were both on the FBI books of as informants, and they were corroborating each other's lies. That was the purpose then of them. Because remember that the Dossier was written by Hillary's people, people like Stropp Talbot, is the president of Brookings. He was Bill Clinton's roommate at college. And he's the man from Jake Sullivan.
Speaker 1: And Nelly Obersore's wife. Right?
Speaker 0: Right. Exactly. And Weiner and all these people, they wrote the dossier the so called dossier then to Trump manufactured dirt. But they even the corrupt FBI could not have accepted from them because it's obvious it's from Hillary. Right?
It has the name of Hillary in the chronology.
Speaker 1: It's too obvious.
Speaker 0: So they rancid they rancid the name of that's why they called it the the FBI called it the Crown material as if it came from the UK government to make it look like like it's it's legit. It's apolitical. Right? Why would British government be interested in, you know, interfering in US politics? Right?
But in fact, it was it was all written by Hillary people, and they just put Christopher Still's name on it. So all these people gathered in in in this conference together in July, as I said, in in Cambridge, and they invited Carter Page, who was a minor, you know, Trump campaign adviser, who was in fact the CAE officer. Remember we keep talking about how they're blowing up their own people.
Speaker 1: Yeah. That was another setup. Another person who was setup.
Speaker 0: Another patriot. Moscow on an operation. Mhmm. And then on the way back from Moscow, he went to Cambridge. He went to this conference with Martin Olbradt, with Richard Ziela, with Stefan Halper, possibly Christopher Still was there.
And what they discussed, they discussed what be this is what Ivan covered, and and it later became known as as the Hillary plan. And another person who was in the audience was Alexander Downer. You would remember, he was also Oh, famously
Speaker 1: met with George Papandopoulos, who was also a a sort of relatively minor campaign person for Trump. And, they met at a bar and of course he leaked information to him. Right? And then that was how Papadopoulos was set up. So Carter Page, who went to Annapolis, the Naval Academy, who was a Russia specialist who spoke Russian, who actually helped the FBI prosecute Russian spies, who was on the payroll of the CIA.
He was the other Svetlana Lykova who was set up, and then the other one who was set up with George Papadopoulos. These were all the links, right, that was supposed to prove
Speaker 0: That's right.
Speaker 1: That Trump was a Russian asset.
Speaker 0: To Hub, but the only difference between me and them is people like Carter Page couldn't speak up and wouldn't speak up because they felt because, obviously, he felt he was doing things for the country and the information was classified. So he kept defending the CAE's role in this. Right? I, on the other hand, because I have zero I don't work for any intelligence agency. I'm not controlled by anyone.
That's why they made a huge mistake. That's why they couldn't shut me up because they could shut up somebody like Harte Page. Right? Because they would remind him that this this is classified and, know, you you can't reveal, for example, his relationship with Halper. Right?
So they were very close. But they couldn't shut me up. And this is what was their huge mistake. Right? Because the rest of the people they set up were their own operatives, and I was the only one who wasn't.
Speaker 1: Who was the mouse guy?
Speaker 0: They miscalculated. Interesting. But going back to this conference, so here they are together on July in Cambridge. So we have Alexander Downer. We have Richard Dieloff.
We have Stefan Halper. We have Stephen Schrag. Stephen Stephen Schrag is a friend of Carter Page. Madeline Allbright, she's friends with all these people. And they're plotting because and and we have a speech, a copy of Stefan Halper's speech.
So remember Stefan Halper is this FBI and former CA operative Mhmm. Who was also at Cambridge with Richard d l love and Christopher Andrew. And by the way, just to very quickly explain, the reason why they need to run from the outside of The United States is because legally, the CIA cannot operate, of course, against US citizens.
Speaker 1: That's right. They're a title specialty organization, and their job is intelligence abroad. And only the National Resources Division has the the the legal authority to operate on US soil under specific conditions, but it also, Svetlana, puts them outside the reach of congress and oversight. Part of the reason they have these foreigners involved is that congress can't subpoena Christopher Steele, can they?
Speaker 0: That's right. That's right. And so and and also remember that, you know, as you said, it's it puts them out of reach of the oversight, and they also had to this is why they were always obsessed about this date, you know, this July 31 date when the Crossfire Hurricane operation, investigation, as they call it, the investigation officially started because and only FBI has the right to investigate a political complaint. Right? If we take it seriously as if there was a risk to national security, it's the FBI's job.
So they couldn't allow any information to come out that there was anything that happened before July 31. Right?
Speaker 1: Yes. Because they had to they had to make out, like, oh, this was such a serious thing. It came to the FBI and these these, you know, hardworking, right, sincere FBI agents were so, were forced, compelled by the strength of the evidence to open an investigation, which we know Right.
Speaker 0: None of which should reaction. Exactly. It had to be a reaction of something Russians have done or Russians hacked the DNC. And then there was this, report from, this Australian ambassador, and then this happened and this happened. So no matter what we did, maybe we all reacted here or or there, but it had to be a reaction to something Russians have done and the Trump campaign have done.
So what they couldn't allow, again, why, you know, my evidence was so dangerous, is anything to happen before that. Right? Because then it's not a reaction. They then themselves are setting the fire. Right?
And then they go, oh my god, there's a fire, and get in the cars and say,
Speaker 1: oh, you need to make fire. Sure And then when the fire breaks out, they say, oh, no. There's a fire.
Speaker 0: Right. And this is very interesting when we come back to the Hillary plan, that's exactly the language that's used in in his documents. So so so we have a script from the speech that Stefan Halford gave, and he said that the US election is you know, this is in the presence of Martin Albright, who in a few days is going to introduce Hillary Clinton at her coronation. And he said that the election is too close to call, And Sure. Donald Trump is enjoying huge amounts of media coverage, and that Hillary campaign has its deficits.
Deficit meaning the, you know, the health issue and, of course, the email issue. And if the media is gonna continue focus focusing, you know, positive in on on Donald Trump, then he will win the election. Halper says that in in presence of dear love, all bright, downer, all these people on July 11. Right? So this is this is, what is it, July, August, September, October.
So it's, like, five months before the election. But Yeah. She's gonna lose the election unless we do something, unless the media turns negatively on on on on on on on candidate Trump. And that is becomes the origin of the Hillary plan. Because what happens next, hold the thought about July 11, only two weeks later, we Yeah.
We now have an email of correspondence between Soros' sidekick and Julie Smith. So Julie Smith was her mentor was Madeline Albright. So Julie Smith was Hillary Clinton foreign policy adviser, and she worked for and with Martin Albright and Jake Sullivan. Right? Wow.
And Jake Sullivan was covering up for Hillary Clinton, you know, through the Benghazi, through the email
Speaker 1: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 0: Scandal, through every possible scandal. He was her her her foremost aide. Right? And he was hoping that Hillary wins the election and, you know, he gave interviews about that, that he was gonna be the next president. Right?
Because obviously, she was old and sick and he he wanted to become the next president. Right? Like, he's like a CIA deep state candidate. So what was happening is that Judith Smith writes an email to Soros' people because Soros is concerned. And they said, don't worry.
We're gonna fix it. Hillary has approved the plan. This is July 26. Hillary approved the plan to distract from her email scandal. And the way we're going to do it is first, we're going to demonize Donald Trump in the media and link him to Putin.
Right? That's the first step. And the second part of the plan is and then the FBI will pour the oil on the fire, I e, by starting the investigation. Now she those boards were written to source by the Hillary people on July 26. Brennan briefs Obama and, Comey on so Obama, sorry, on this the next day.
Then after Brennan's meeting with Obama, on the July 28, he meets with Comey and Clapper. And on July 31, Comey opens Crossfire Hurricane. So Crossfire Hurricane is the implementation of the Hillary Clinton plan to link Donald Trump to Russia to distract from her email scandal. And it's based they opened this investigation based on the word of Alexander Downer, who was present at this Cambridge meeting. This is how sophisticated the operation is, but they wrote it all down.
And he goes to see a Clinton person in London, not not the FBI, but Clinton person in London, on July 26 on the same day that Hillary Clinton approves and signs off on this plan with Soros. They they approve the plan and the financing of the plan. July 26, Downer goes to the US embassy in London. Who's running The US Embassy in London in the religious community? Gina Haspel.
Wow. Gina Haspel works from Brannan. And then it's out of the London station. Now you have Gina Haspel, Alexander Downer, and the Hillary state department person in the same place on July 26 on the day that they approved the plan.
Speaker 1: And then And and let's just remind people that Gina Haspel later became the the director of the CIA And told
Speaker 0: by Pompeo.
Speaker 1: Mhmm. And told by Pompeo.
Speaker 0: Right. And and they were running these operations against Donald Trump from at least July 2016, probably even earlier. Right?
Speaker 1: So let's go through that list again for people. So at present at the embassy in London, Regina Haspel, who later becomes head of the CIA, and Alexander Downer, the former ambassador to Australia.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So he's an Australian ambassador,
Speaker 1: but I mean, not to Australia. The Australian ambassador to
Speaker 0: The US. Yeah. So he's I forget the word. It's it's it's it's another word for ambassador. But anyway, so he's Australian ambassador, but he was also deputy prime minister.
And what he's what's very important is he has access to Five Eyes intelligence. Right? So he's an intelligence guy. Right? Both as deputy prime minister and also as as ambassador.
He he he he can read the Five Eyes intelligence, but he
Speaker 1: not record explain. Five Eyes intelligence is very significant. For people who don't know, it goes back to the second world war with The US and its allies, were Australia, New Zealand, the The UK, and Canada, along with The United States. These five nations have an agreement to share intelligence at a special level. And this is absolutely critical to everything that happened to Trump because they used all of these listening stations and all of these the physical infrastructure that was set up for Five Eyes intelligence was turned against the American people and against Donald Trump.
And it played the Five Eyes intelligence sharing played a critical role in this entire operation.
Speaker 0: That's right. But another very interesting point you previously made, you know how they were trying to avoid congressional oversight? Mhmm. So although all these people, these foreigners, so this is England, Australia, and other countries who participated in these operations against Donald Trump, they're from Five Eyes countries, and they know the proper formal channels of if their concerns were genuine, they were supposed to go for the formal channels. So for example, Downer was not supposed to go and see Elizabeth Dibble, who was a state department friend of Hillary Clinton.
He was supposed to go and report it through the correct, channels in Australia, and then Australians were supposed to report it to the US government. Right? But they didn't do it that way. Why didn't they do it this way? Is to avoid this is what Devin Nunes found, is that to avoid congressional oversight.
Because had there been a formal five I referral, then five i's referral, he would get a document which would have a five I stamp on it. So also it's the people who were involved in the five eyes, but they did everything through the back channels. You know how we were talking about all
reSee.it AI Summary
Please release the documents still hidden. I warned about the Durham Annex; priority: unredacted Brennan notes of the Aug 3, 2016 meeting with Obama and Comey on the Hillary plan; Obama’s full response and Comey’s response. All items listed are unclassified. Prioritized: 1) Brennan/Obama/Comey notes; 2) Crossfire Hurricane Inspection Report; 3) 14 missing Durham Appendix pages; 4) interviews; 5) Durham referrals; 6) NYT/WSJ with Fusion GPS and Hillary campaign emails; 7) Dearlove/Halper/Steele emails; 8) Flynn staff interviews.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Dear Director @DNIGabbard please can you release these documents, someone is still hiding them. I was right about the importance of the Durham Annex, so trust me to know what I am talking about. We must have these documents, the most important one, Brennan notes of briefing Obama and Comey on the Hillary Plan is 9 years old. Obama's full response re Hillary plan is still redacted. Comey's response is completely redacted, I believe they are talking about opening FBI cases on Trump advisors based on what Comey told IG Horowitz. The documents I list are all unclassified or declassified so they cant do their sources and methods bs excuses. I arranged them by priority, we MUST have the first lot now. Please please. -unredacted notes of the Brennan meeting with Obama and Comey, Aug 3, 2016 -Inspection Division Report criticizing the FBI for Crossfire Hurricane -14 missing pages of the Durham Appendix -Hillary Clinton, John Brennan, Stefan Halper, Alexander Downer, Jake Sullivan, Podesta, Mook et al. interviews with Durham -Durham referrals incl. to the Department of Defense etc -Emails between the New York Times, Washington Post, etc and Fusion GPS, and Fusion GPS with Hillary Campaign -Emails/communications between head of British Intelligence Richard Dearlove, US intelligence and Halper and Steele -Interviews of members of staff who accompanied Gen Flynn on the trip to England and witness the op against him
reSee.it AI Summary
I say the Mar-a-Lago Raid was illegal and that the FBI knowingly carried it out to seize Crossfire Hurricane documents implicating Obama, Hillary, the CIA and FBI. I’ve long claimed Alan Kohler organized the raid for Wray and Monaco, with Avril Haines, Steele and Halper, to hide the evidence. The aim, I insist, was to cover up anti-Trump ops and retroactively reclassify the documents.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Mike @mrddmia: A good article pointing out that the Mar-a-Lago Raid was illegal. But it's a lot worse. The FBI knowingly did the illegal Raid to snatch Crossfire Hurricane documents which directly implicate Obama, Hillary, the CIA and the FBI. I have been saying for years, based on my own evidence, that the FBI Assistant Director for Counter-Intelligence Alan Kohler organized the Raid. It has now been confirmed (see attached). Kohler did the Raid on the orders of Christopher Wray and Lisa Monaco, an Obama crony who effectively ran the Biden DOJ with Maggie Goodlander, Jake Sullivan's wife (a top Hillary advisor). Also involved was Avril Haines, Brennan's former Deputy Director at the CIA, who was made Director of National Intelligence under Biden. The purpose of the Raid was to seize and hide the Crossfire Hurricane documents showing that the CIA, the FBI, and British intelligence coordinated anti-Trump ops out of England. President Trump declassified the documents, but Wray's FBI, Monaco (Obama), and Haines (Brennan) had them retroactively reclassified before the Raid, and then falsely accused President Trump of holding and distributing classified documents endangering spies and operations. In fact, the documents endangered the Deep State, showing that Stefan Halper and Christopher Steele, on Obama's orders, falsified "intelligence" about Donald Trump and his team to stop him from becoming President and then in an attempt to overthrow him. Alan Kohler, the man who organized the Raid, was previously the head of FBI London Station, working with Gina Haspel, the head of the CIA London Station. Kohler ran Christopher Steele and Stefan Halper, the two "Confidential Human Sources" on the Crossfire Hurricane anti-Trump FBI op. Steele worked for Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6 (British CIA), and Dearlove is friends and business partners with Halper, a CIA operative who worked for Brennan and Haspel, as well as for the FBI. Halper is MITCH in Comey's notes, the guy in charge of the Hillary Clinton Plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian intelligence. Obama ordered this operation, and both Halper and Steele were paid a lot of money by the Obama administration. The CIA, the FBI, and British intelligence implemented it. That's why Kohler, Monaco, and Haines had to remove and hide the evidence.
@mrddmia - 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸
My latest piece in @FoxNews MIKE DAVIS: FBI knew Mar-a-Lago raid was illegal, but Biden DOJ made them do it https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mike-davis-fbi-knew-mar-a-lago-raid-illegal-biden-doj-made-them-do
MIKE DAVIS: FBI knew Mar-a-Lago raid was illegal, but Biden DOJ made them do it
President Trump Mar-a-Lago FBI raid lacked probable cause according to Senate documents. FBI agents allegedly did not believe sufficient grounds existed for the search.
foxnews.com
reSee.it AI Summary
I present notes from Brennan's Aug 3, 2016 meeting with Obama and Comey as key evidence of a Grand Conspiracy, showing Hillary's plan to link Trump's campaign to Russian intelligence. Yet Comey's response re Trump-Russia collusion remains redacted.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
DECLASSIFY NOW please! These notes from John Brennan's meeting with Obama and Comey on Aug 3, 2016, discussing Hillary's plan to tie Trump's campaign to Russian intelligence, are the key evidence of the Grand Conspiracy. Yet Comey's response to Obama about collaboration between Trump Campaign and Russia is STILL redacted. @DNIGabbard @FBIDirectorKash @DAGToddBlanche @AGPamBondi
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The same people who did Russiagate raided Mar-a-Lago to seize and hide evidence of their crimes, which they secretly re-classified, and then falsely accused President Trump of storing and distributing classified documents.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
🚨🚨🚨It is confirmed that Alan Kohler, Comey's FBI LEGAT (Representative) in London, England, and later Chris Wray's Assistant Director for Counter-Intelligence, was in charge of the Mar-a-Lago Raid of President Trump's home and personally briefed AG Garland and Lisa Monaco. Kohler ran Christopher Steele and Stefan Halper, two key FBI Confidential Human Sources on Crossfire Hurricane. Steele was a British MI6 asset and Halper worked for the CIA, MI6 and FBI. The Raid was to protect Halper, the FBI, the CIA, and MI6. That's why seized the Halper and Steele papers.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Andy McCabe sent Peter Strzok to London to meet with his British counterpart to kick off Crossfire Hurricane. https://t.co/Y378u7ex8m
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Dearlove, the boss of Christopher Steele, promoted the false idea that Russia had "leverage" over President Trump. Steele met with Dearlove in December 2016, just weeks after President Trump won the election, and the two plotted. This was at the time that the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that found that President Trump was installed by Putin was being fabricated by Brennan, Comey and Clapper on Obama's orders. The ICA was based on the fabricated Steele Dossier.
reSee.it AI Summary
Russiagate co-conspirators are still plotting away. I note Dearlove and McCabe appear on a joint podcast, using it as a pretext to communicate during the Grand Conspiracy investigation. The Florida grand jury convenes in 11 days. Dearlove leads Steele, and is a friend and partner of Halper. Steele and Halper were the FBI CHS on Crossfire Hurricane, the investigation of the Trump campaign.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Russiagate co-conspirators are still plotting away. Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, and Andrew McCabe, former FBI Deputy Director and Acting Director, appear in a joint podcast titled “Ex-Spy Chiefs on What to Watch for in 2026.” They are using the podcast as a pretext to communicate with each other in the background during the Grand Conspiracy investigation. The Florida grand jury convenes in 11 days. Dearlove is the boss of Christopher Steele (author of the dossier), and a friend and business partner of CIA operative Stefan Halper. Steele and Halper were the two FBI Confidential Human Sources on the Crossfire Hurricane “investigation” of the Trump campaign, run by Comey and McCabe.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI and acting director, discusses on the One Decision podcast plans to examine the matrix of threats that are globally problematic, with a focus on challenges facing their countries and a comparative look from a European perspective and a United States perspective.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI and acting director for a period. Well, to the One Decision podcast and I thought that today what we could do is try to examine the matrix of threats that are problematic globally, but particularly in our countries and maybe look at a bit from a European perspective and from a United States perspective.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Two weeks before Madeline Albright announced at the DNC convention on July 26, 2016, that Russia interfered to help Donald Trump, Albright was in England with Dearlove, Halper, Downer and other international intelligence operatives, hatching what we now know as the Hillary Plan. https://t.co/Hjgs87YHw0
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Same day as Hillary approved the plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian intel, Madeline Albright set the tone for the DNC convention saying that Russia is interfering in the election to help Trump. Two weeks earlier, Albright was in England with Halper (CIA, FBI), Dearlove (British intel), Downer (Australia) where Halper voiced the plan.
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that three months after Biden’s DOJ under Monaco and Wray’s FBI retroactively reclassified Crossfire Hurricane documents Trump had declassified, and the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago on Aug 8, 2022. Kohler organized the raid and briefed Monaco and Garland the next day. Kohler, former London head, worked with Halper and Steele. Kohler warned Monaco of a national security danger. In truth, Monaco and Kohler allegedly covered for Halper, a CIA spy paid by Obama to oppose Trump.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Source Document Four: Three months after Biden’s DOJ, effectively headed by Obama’s minion Lisa Monaco, and Wray’s FBI secretly and retroactively reclassified the Crossfire Hurricane documents that President Trump had declassified, the FBI raided the President’s home, Mar-a-Lago, on August 8, 2022. The person who organized the raid, FBI Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Alan Kohler, briefed Monaco and Garland the next day. Kohler was previously based in England as the head of the FBI’s London station, working with Gina Haspel who was then the head of the CIA’s London station. During the early days of Russiagate, Kohler oversaw the “work” of Stef Halper and Christopher Steele. Following the Mar-a-Lago Raid, Kohler briefed Monaco on the “danger to national security”, that the documents President Trump had at Mar-a-Lago represented, and how he “imperilled spies and covert operations. In fact and in truth, Obama’s minion Monaco and Kohler were covering up for Russiagate architect Stefan Halper, John Brennan’s CIA spy who was paid millions by Obama to run ops against President Trump. The specific documents showing that Halper lied about me and President Trump’s National Security Advisor (Source Document Two)—as well as others on the Trump campaign, in conjunction with Christopher Steele—would have blown up the whole Russiagate Hoax against President Trump. https://www.ms.now/news/trump-arrest-classified-documents-probe-maralago-rcna241155
‘If it was anybody else, we’d arrest him tomorrow,' Justice Department aide said of Trump
Carol Leonnig's new book reveals that one senior Justice Department official believed they had enough evidence to arrest Donald Trump for holding classified documents at Mar-a-Lago
ms.now
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Source Document Three: The Biden FBI/DoJ retroactively and secretly reclassified the previously declassified Crossfire Hurricane documents on May 25, 2022. They were classified for nearly 70 years (until December 31, 2091)—effectively forever—using “harm to national security” as the justification. https://vault.fbi.gov/crossfire-hurricane-part-01/Crossfire%20Hurricane%20Part%2001/view Classification Authority (NSICC): National Security Information Classification Guide. Reason 1.4(c): Under Executive Order 13526, this provision specifies that the classification is due to information involving intelligence activities, sources, methods, or cryptology, the disclosure of which could harm national security. Declassify On: December 31, 2091. This sets a specific date for automatic declassification approximately 69.5 years after the document’s classification in 2022. FOIA Redaction Codes (b6, b7C): These mark withheld portions in released FBI files under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Exemption b6 protects personal privacy in personnel or similar files, while b7C safeguards personal privacy in law enforcement records.
Crossfire Hurricane
vault.fbi.gov
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Source Document Two: Crossfire Hurricane documents that President Trump declassified are posted on Just the News website in February 2021. The key document shows that CIA/FBI/British Intelligence Operative Stef Halper lied to the FBI that I had an affair with President Trump's https://t.co/7WQnBV8H0N
reSee.it AI Summary
This was during the Durham investigation, so Durham could not use the classified documents or indict. I testified to Durham and assumed indictments would follow, but the documents proving I was set up were raided and vanished. The Crossfire Hurricane informants ran out of London. Halper and Steele lied that I was a Russian spy who had an affair with Trump’s National Security Advisor. Declassified documents show Halper and Steele were paid large sums; Halper worked for Brennan’s CIA and British intel and helped kickstart Russiagate.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
This was in the middle of the Durham investigation, so Durham could not use the classified documents and therefore could not indict. I know this because I was giving evidence to Durham, and my understanding was there were going to be indictments. Then one day, the documents that prove that I was set up, were raided and gone. The Crossfire Hurricane “informers” ran out of London. Stefan Halper and Christopher Steele, lied that I had was a Russian spy who had an affair with President Trump’s National Security Advisor. The documents, finally declassified again by President Trump this year, show that Halper and Steele were paid huge amounts of money, and that Halper worked for Brennan’s CIA and British intelligence and was used by Comey to kickstart Russiagate.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
What they did is they retroactively re-classified the Crossfire Hurricane documents President Trump declassified in his first term. They reclassified in May 2022, three months before the Mar-a-Lago Raid, classifying for National Security reasons until 2091 ie forever. See dates in the top left corner. They then raided President Trump’s home, took the documents that he already declassified but they secretly classified again, and then accused him of possessing and distributing classified documents endangering National Security. Then they charged him under Espionage Act. They are evil.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Here is Rob Reiner conspiring w. John Brennan and Jim Clapper to overthrow the democratically-elected President Trump as part of the Russiagate Conspiracy. What was Reiner's connection to the CIA? Who financed this op? https://t.co/rHCeXwuXkJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speakers discuss the severity and novelty of threats to the United States’ political system, focusing on Russian interference and the digital domain.
- All acknowledge that the country faced a cataclysmic disruption to its political system that is unlike prior experiences. Speaker 2 notes, as a Vietnam veteran, that fundamental institutions were jeopardized then but proved resilient, and expresses hope for a similar outcome now.
- Speaker 1 emphasizes two points: (1) Vladimir Putin’s determination to shape political landscapes inside Russia and abroad, and (2) the consequential role of the digital domain, which allowed Russian intelligence to exploit and manipulate more effectively, culminating in the twenty sixteen election.
- They note that Russian interference historically involved exploiting elections, but never with such aggression, directness, or multidimensional methods. The Internet and modern technology serve as a huge enabler for influencing opinion and undermining fundamental systems.
- There is a discussion of whether this manipulation was unforeseen. Speaker 2 indicates it goes back to the Soviet era with attempts to influence elections, but the magnitude in twenty sixteen was unprecedented. The digital environment provides malefactors with more opportunities to attack and influence.
- The panel explains active measures as fabricating or propagating stories (even patently false ones) to advance a narrative, color perceptions, and lend legitimacy to political actors. They note that the Russians focused on specific voter blocks in states like Wisconsin and Michigan, with estimates that 70,000–80,000 votes could have swung the election.
- They discuss methods beyond information operations, including collecting information (e.g., DNC and DCCC email breaches) and money-related tactics: money laundering, disguising funding sources for political actions, and potential extortion or blackmail. They stress that collusion is a tool in the Russians’ kit and that they recruit or exploit individuals where openings exist.
- Following the money is highlighted as essential across national security domains; FBI financial investigators and intelligence analysts play key roles, and there is confidence that Mueller and others will trace financial pathways to uncover motivations.
- The distinction between cyber warfare and conventional warfare is acknowledged: there are no tanks or planes, but the cyber realm constitutes a war for democracy. A robust response is needed to strengthen the cyber environment, including proposals for a congressional independent commission to assess and strategize future protections, involving engineers, technologists, scientists, and private sector input.
- They reflect on why the nation did not respond with the immediacy seen after physical attacks (e.g., 9/11). The lack of a physical rubble-like trigger makes cyber threats harder to mobilize a national response. Leadership issues are cited: when the White House diminishes the CIA, FBI, NSA, or intelligence and law enforcement, it undermines efforts to address the threat.
- They recount briefings to the president-elect in January, noting high confidence levels in assessments that did not rely on the dossier; the bigger concern is a perceived indifference to the Russian threat and the denigration of security institutions.
- They stress the importance of institutional integrity: the press, law enforcement, and intelligence are pillars of democracy, and denigration of these institutions undermines U.S. credibility abroad. They advocate for stronger checks and balances and reiterate their commitment to truthful reporting and protecting the country.
- The speakers, experienced and apolitical, emphasize loyalty to the Constitution and the need for decisive leadership and sustained commitment to democratic institutions, despite political challenges. They conclude with a solemn commitment to safeguard the country and its democratic framework.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Either person can sit at either place. Either place. Whatever's good for you.
Speaker 1: I don't think we either one of us has a good side.
Speaker 0: You don't have a good side. It doesn't We're
Speaker 2: both bad sides.
Speaker 0: Alright. Me too. We're both of the follicly challenged. So thank you for coming. I really appreciate it.
And the thing that to me is so frustrating is that this cataclysmic thing happened to our country and people don't seem to understand it, understand the gravity of it. And, you know, you guys were talking about how, you know, it's unusual for people who have been how many years of experience do you have between you would you say?
Speaker 1: Jim has several hundred, I think.
Speaker 2: Probably eighty or ninety
Speaker 0: between the So two of here you are with all that experience. Have you ever seen anything like this happen in this country? I mean, like this kind of attack on our political system?
Speaker 2: Well, no. Not not, at least to me, as disturbing as this. I mean, I'm a Vietnam war veteran. I went through all the stresses that in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, but I never, felt, even then that, our fundamental institutions were, jeopardized. In fact, our fundamental institutions proved themselves resilient then, and we actually came out of all that a better country.
And, hopefully, we'll have the same experience now.
Speaker 1: To me, it underscores two points. One is how determined mister Putin is to shape the political landscape both inside of Russia as well as outside of Russia. Whether it be in Europe or The United States or The Middle East or other places, he seeks ways to manipulate and exploit the environments. But secondly, it really does underscore just how consequential that digital domain is. And as Jim noted, we've seen these things being done by the Russians over the course of many years, but the fact now that this digital environment, this cyber sphere, gives the Russian intelligence security services so much more opportunity to manipulate and to exploit, and they took full advantage of that in the twenty sixteen election.
That's why we saw things of much greater concern and intensity than we'd ever seen before, and I think Americans really need to understand just how vulnerable we are to exploitation of the environment by mal malign actors around the globe.
Speaker 0: Is it something that we did not see happening that we couldn't foresee? I mean, because, you know, we talked about, you know, nine eleven, nobody you know, the planes hitting a building. It seems like they found a huge seam in the in the the And Russians
Speaker 2: and this goes back to the Soviet era. There's a long history of of them interview intervening and influencing elections, theirs and other people's. And there's historical records that, they've attempted to interfere in virtually all of our national elections since the sixties. But never, never this aggressive, direct, or multidimensional. And of course, as John indicated, they're taking advantage of a huge enabler.
You know, the Internet and all the technology that that gives you and the ability to influence opinion. A way they've found to attack us is to undermine our fundamental system.
Speaker 0: I don't think from my standpoint, I don't think that we in all of the technological revolution that we've seen over the years, I don't think we have fully understood the power of what it could do. I mean we certainly understood spreading information, getting word out, being able to cross boundaries with information, but I don't think we ever thought, I mean I don't know if you hadn't thought, how it could be weaponized to this extent. I mean, was that something that occurred to you or did you see that
Speaker 2: as something that happened? Probably not. That's why when this all began to unfold in '15 and '16, And it was kind of insidious as we became more aware of what they were doing. Then I think in the late summer, '16, when you really saw the magnitude of what they were doing. And for me, I've seen a lot of bad stuff in my fifty years in intelligence, but nothing I don't recall anything that gave me viscerally in the pit of my stomach a more uncomfortable, uneasy feeling than when I realized what, the Russians were doing.
Speaker 1: Right. The Russians have conducted active measures for many, many years. And in the physical domain, you have certain indicators and signatures that you can forensically then, you know, connect so that you can trace it back then to the ultimate perpetrator or who directed it. But now, just like with terrorists and organized criminals and others, intelligence services can do things in that cyber domain that they can really camouflage and mask their steps. I think we always anticipated that the Russians will continue to try to exploit certain situations but now with this digital environment it's become much more challenging for intelligence, security and law enforcement services to understand exactly who is behind some of these activities that really, make it very challenging for us to understand who is who is actually directing these actions.
Speaker 0: You guys were there during when you saw the initial attack and you know, you hear this term all the time, you know, you know, collusion, conspiracy, coordination. I mean, these things are thrown around all over the place. But the idea of active measures that these that the Russians have, you know, trafficked in for forever, what does that look like? I mean, what is what what would like, in a political campaign like this, what does an active measure look like?
Speaker 1: Well, think a lot of times what the Russians, well as others do, is to either fabricate a story or to take a story that may be patently false, but yet advances one's narrative and argument and push it out and propagate it and lends legitimacy to it. It's a way to color people's perceptions and impressions of individuals.
Speaker 0: I know understand that the Saint Petersburg is pushing out, you know, trolls and bots and getting, you know, messages out and and piggybacking on messages that, you know, the Trump campaign is. Is there any, like, granularity to getting into the these districts in Wisconsin or Michigan or, you know, I mean, they play on that level?
Speaker 2: It appears now that it was pretty sophisticated, and they did focus on on certain voter blocks. And, of course, 70 or 80,000 votes in three states would would have would have swung the election. And, you know, the Russians have gone to school on our system, understand it. You know, we've we've had very successful campaigns in this country. President Obama, case in point, where he did this micro analysis on a district by district, precinct by precinct basis.
They would understand that
Speaker 0: based on just, you know, observing American television or they need some kind of help through a Cambridge Analytica or people on the ground who have been, you know, assets that have been developed over many
Speaker 2: question. They could have, but it's very clear that they understood the the dynamic the political dynamics, the political landscape here, and they certainly understood how to use tools to exploit it.
Speaker 1: The Russians take full advantage of the openness of our society. They have operated here in The United States for many, many years. So they can have access to experts and others who they try to elicit information from, even those individuals who do not even know that they interacting or supporting the Russians. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So we're looking at the different attack vectors. Information, was was one of them in terms of what they were pushing out. Collecting information from the Internet in terms of the email theft that went on with the DCCC, the DNC. But also we knew from experience that the Russians had many different methods of influencing elections in Europe. Getting politicians to accept money, trying to get push money into political parties, maybe camouflaging the source, and extorting and even blackmailing individuals to work with them.
We've seen that across the board, there's a lot of publicly available information and stories about that.
Speaker 0: To try to understand the the intersection between money laundering, cyber warfare, and influence peddling. I mean, how does all of that work?
Speaker 2: Well, to the extent that you can you can hide the money, hide the the disguise sources of funding for political action groups, which may be quite legitimate, they'll use financial instrumentalities to hide that the passage of that, of of those of that funding, to political movements or interest groups. But I I do know that collusion is clearly a tool in the kit bag that the Russians will use. So any way they can co op somebody, recruit them, influence them, even where the party that they're recruiting is unwitting, they'll do it. And I suspect they did so at every opportunity where they saw an opening, they'll exploit it.
Speaker 1: But following that financial trail is so quickly important on so many aspects of national security. We do it in the terrorism realm. We do it in the counterintelligence realm. We do it in the proliferation arena as well. And the FBI financial investigators as well as the intelligence community financial analysts, they are tremendous.
And that's why I do have confidence that Bob Mueller and others are going to get to the bottom of some of this by tracing the money and see what might have circumvented the normal
Speaker 0: procedures
Speaker 1: for moving money and was there a motivation, a political motivation behind it either on the giver or the receiver's part?
Speaker 0: I mean, listen, we we talk about, you know, our system, our democratic way of life came under attack. I mean, we use those terms, you know, because they attacked an election, But we don't talk about it in terms of war. I mean, you know, it's cyber war and it's a you know, there's no tanks, there's no planes, there's no infantry. I mean, there's none of that. And yet, perhaps Putin thinks of it as because if you say it's been going on for for a long time, which it has been, I probably the czarist days, it is a war.
It's a war for wrestling for an ideology, whether or not democracy is gonna survive. He's been trying to undermine it for forever. So in his mind, it is a war. So how do we if how do we respond?
Speaker 1: I think we have to strengthen that cyber environment certainly. We learned some very painful lessons because of nineeleven, but as a result of nineeleven, the Congress established a commission, nineeleven Commission, that tried to address those gaps, those shortcomings. I have been a law proponent of having a similar type of commission established by Congress, an independent commission, that can take a look at what we need to do in the future to better protect and safeguard that environment and have the engineers and futurists and technologists and scientists and U. S. Officials and private sector, all of them getting together, something akin to a major, major undertaking to look at it strategically.
Trying to strengthen that environment, and it's not just against attempts to interfere in the election, but also, again, criminals and terrorists and pedophiles and others, and I don't think we, as a country, have yet come to terms with what the role of the government is in that environment.
Speaker 0: Why do you think that that didn't happen? I mean when the buildings were hit or when the bombs hit Pearl Harbor, we all came together as a country. We knew we would had been attacked in some level. Now I understand this is a much more insidious type of attack that you don't feel right away, but it is an attack at the fabric of democracy. There's no question about it.
Why isn't it that we didn't respond the way the way we you know, why wasn't there, you know, George W. Bush standing on the pile of rubble saying, you know, you'll hear from all of us? I mean, democracy was attacked.
Speaker 2: Precisely because we didn't have a pile of rubble. Things in the physical domain that you can see, feel, and touch, destroyed buildings, people killed, wounded, injured, that has a much more apparent, immediate, and indelible impact on people than something in the cyber domain, which is a bit more ethereal. And it's hard to, you know, it doesn't have physical attributes, so it's harder to get your arms around.
Speaker 0: Well, for instance, you know, after nine eleven, George W. Bush was reluctant initially to have a nine eleven commission because, obviously, from a political standpoint, you know, he might be blamed for not, you know, being more proactive or whatever. But ultimately, he agreed to do it because the country's security and the protection of our country was more important than trumped any kind of, you know, personal political gain that he had, but I don't see that now. I I I don't see that, and that's what scares me.
Speaker 1: You know, it really comes down, I think, to leadership. As long as the occupant of the Oval Office continues to refute the unanimous assessment of CIA, FBI, NSA about what they did and continues to ignore, I think, the the real challenges to our system of government by what the Russians and others can do. It it undercuts any effort to try to deal with this issue comprehensively, strategically, and thoughtfully. And until that leadership that comes out of the White House is really going to say, this is critically important for our future as a country and as a democracy, it's gonna be a really tough road.
Speaker 0: And why doesn't he? Why why isn't that? I mean, I I don't I don't don't I mean, I understand, you know, his feeling like maybe it's gonna delegitimize his election and, you know, I don't know. I we don't know where any of these in these these investigations are gonna go, but we're talking about our country. Yeah.
Our democracy is at stake here.
Speaker 2: When we briefed John and I and and
Speaker 0: You guys were there
Speaker 2: Briefed when
Speaker 0: this happened?
Speaker 2: The president-elect at the time January 6. I I think he viewed what we presented to him, which had very high confidence levels in what we presented him, which by the way, a point I'll make, had nothing to do with the dossier. We did not draw on the dossier. The dossier, the infamous dossier, was not a part of our intelligence community assessment.
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 2: What we did present, we had very, very high, confidence level in. And I believe, the the his first reaction to it was that this caused a question about the legitimacy of his election, which wasn't the intent at all. And, yeah, that's I get it. That's important. But the bigger issue here and what is bothersome to me is a singular indifference to the threat posed by Russia.
Speaker 0: To me, in my the way I see it, it goes beyond, you know, not pushing back. There's been an active, you know, effort on the administration's part to denigrate the intelligence community, to denigrate law enforcement and and the justice department. And to me, that's the most disturbing because we're talking about pillar it's one thing to say fake news, fake news, and the media is, you know, destroyed or they tries to destroy the credibility of the media, but he's trying to destroy the credibility of our security system.
Speaker 2: Well, I have said consistently that in the case of the intelligence community, I believe the intelligence community as an institution will continue to convey truth to power. And whether the power accepts that truth or not, well that's another issue. Now I don't know how long that can be sustained, I do worry about that, but I believe the fundamental instincts of the community are to do the right thing. I do worry about denigration of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The premier law enforcement organization on the planet, which is composed of 35,000 plus people, they're humans.
Do they make mistakes? Sure. Does the bureau make mistakes as an institution? Yes. But overall, when you think about what the bureau does for this country day in and day out, rank and file patriotic dedicated professionals all over this country and all over the world keeping this nation safe and secure, and I wish we could keep that in in in perspective.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The comments coming out of mister Trump's mouth have been very dispiriting to the professionals at CIA, FBI, NSA, and others, who really dedicate their lives with great sacrifice and certainly very dispiriting to their families that make great sacrifices on behalf of their loved ones, as well as it sends, I think, a very bad message to the people of The United States, which is that these are the institutions that were established to protect our democracy, our security, our safety. It also sends a very bad signal to the world that if the person who holds the title of president denigrates, disparages the work and the professionalism and the integrity of the FBI and CIA and others, how then is the rest of the world going to look at those institutions? How are the CIA and FBI going to be able to work with counterparts around the globe on issues related to life and death matters, whether it be terrorism or proliferation or whatever, or interference in democratic systems? So the power of those words that have come out, I think, cannot be sort of understated.
And I'm hoping we're going to be able to get through this very, very, I think, very sad chapter of our history. But I have great confidence that the professionals that Jim and I work with, that the organizations, are trying to do their very best to protect this country because that's why they do what they do. They love this country and irrespective of the denigration, irrespective of the lack of honesty and integrity of the people at the highest levels of government, the professionals and intelligence and law enforcement will do their work.
Speaker 0: One of the great resources that we've been given is the wisdom of the founding fathers to create a constitution upon which we can build this wonderful, now two hundred and forty one year experiment that we've had. And my fear is that those pillars of that institution are being torn away, the press, law enforcement, intelligence, and we're seeing no checks and balances coming from the Congress. That's my fear and the question I always have is, is our constitution created strong enough to withstand this kind of assault?
Speaker 2: I hope and pray that constitution, has stood us in in in great stead for many, many years, will sustain us through this bad period. But in the end, it's how we as a nation and how the nation's leadership, and I mean by that, both the Congress and the administration, the executive branch, how well they abide by it.
Speaker 1: The President of The United States needs to speak with the greatest amount of precision, honesty, and integrity because he or she speaks to the world, and he or she serves as a role model every moment of every day.
Speaker 0: People who have held very high positions in the intelligence community, as you guys have obviously, don't normally come out and speak out the way you have been speaking out. What what is it that reason you come out, why do you do that?
Speaker 2: For me, this has has been very difficult. I've toiled in the trenches of intelligence for every president since then, including John F. Kennedy. My dad was an army officer. I've been a political pointee in both Republican and Democratic administrations.
So I've always been instinctively apolitical. The oath of office you take though is not to a person. You don't pledge loyalty to a person. You pledge loyalty to the constitution. And because our institutions that underpin this country are are under assault, both from external sources, Russia, and internal sources, that I need to speak.
Speaker 1: Both Jim and I and other senior intelligence officers love this country, and we have worked long and hard to do what we could in our own little individual ways to contribute to this country's safety and security. I never thought I would witness what I've been seeing over the past year as far as what is happening to our government, the dishonesty, the lack of integrity, the lack of ethics. We spent our lives looking at foreign governments and countries and analyzing them and seeing how corruption and incompetence and ineptness and lack of ethics undermined the ability of countries to thrive. And I never thought I would see some of those similar types of traits and attributes here.
reSee.it AI Summary
Two months before the Mar-a-Lago raid, the FBI retroactively reclassified Crossfire Hurricane documents that Trump declassified in his last week. They hid them, not expecting Trump to return. Jack Smith charged Trump under the Espionage Act for keeping and distributing classified documents. A stamp shows “Classified until 2091” dated May 25, 2022; the same document on the left isn’t classified. It describes Somma meeting with Halper who lied about Flynn and me to start Crossfire Hurricane (RAZOR).
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
🚨Two months before the Mar-a-Lago raid, Wray's FBI retroactively and secretly re-classified Crossfire Hurricane documents that President Trump DECLASSIFIED in the last week in his first term. Then they hid the documents, they thought forever, they didn't expect President Trump to come back. Then Jack Smith charged President Trump under Espionage Act, accusing him of keeping and distributing classified documents, endangering national security. Look at the stamp on the document on the right, top left corner. Classified until 2091 (effectively forever) on May 25, 2022, two months before the Raid. On the left it’s exactly the same document not classified. This document describes FBI agent Steven Somma meeting with FBI informer and CIA operative Stefan Halper who lied that General Flynn and I had an affair and that I was a Russian spy. This was done to start the Crossfire Hurricane investigation of Donald Trump's advisor General Flynn (RAZOR).
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe there should be an investigation into Lisa Monaco and others regarding their involvement in the Mar-a-Lago raid. I find it hard to believe she wasn't aware of what was happening, especially since Attorney General Garland seemed uninformed initially. The raid, which was highly publicized, resulted in no significant findings, and it took Garland three days to address the situation publicly. This raises questions about the motives and knowledge of those involved in orchestrating the raid.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Devin Nunes: Investigate Lisa Monaco and others for their role in the Mar-o-Lago Raid and the Grand Conspiracy "People like Lisa Monaco, who was the Deputy Attorney General. I find it hard to believe that she was not behind and had knowledge about what happened at the raid of Mar-a-Lago, because I believe that Garland, although maybe he knew about it after the fact, but if you remember, he didn't seem to know much, and they didn't find what they were looking for, because it took him three days after this magnificent raid, with all the cameras there, that clearly were tipped off about this Mar-a-Lago raid happening on President Trump. Miraculously, they didn't find anything, and it took Garland three days before he came out and made a statement."
Video Transcript AI Summary
Devin says he's expecting a full investigation and notes transparency from the intelligence agencies under Trump. He argues the 'Russia hoax' was designed to get Trump and that officials were worried about Hillary Clinton emails coming public in 2016. He asks how Jack Smith was appointed in 2022, who decided the Mar-a-Lago raid, and what documents they were seeking. He asserts there was a conspiracy to weaponize US intelligence against the Republican, citing 'five investigations tied to the Russia hoax and Ukraine impeachment hoax,' accusing officials of lying and misleading Congress. He mentions 'August 2016 discussions in the Obama White House' and the 'August 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid,' Monaco’s role, and the '40-page Russia influence report' concluding Russia didn't think Trump would win. On Gaza, he says no one trusts Hamas, but sees an opportunity with Trump's diplomacy. He closes as chairman of President Trump's advisory intelligence committee.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Russia hoax some seven, eight years ago. Devin, it's great to have you this morning. Welcome back.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Great to be with you, Maria.
Speaker 0: I wanna get your expectation of more charges to come against Jim Comey and more of his colleagues who worked on the Russia collusion story pushed it through across the world. What are you expecting?
Speaker 1: Look. I'm expecting a full investigation. If you look at the transparency that's been brought by the intelligence agencies under Trump, unprecedented level of transparency where we're now finally getting out documents that the American people had never seen. So I think you're beginning to see real clear clairvoyance on what happened between 2016 all the way to the Mar a Lago raid. And I think that's where culminating with the Mar a Lago raid is where I think I really still have a lot of questions of documents that really need to get out there.
I think an investigation needs to kinda start there and go back because we we know for sure what happened in 2016 that Comey was well aware of is that this was all the whole Russia hoax was all designed to get Trump because they were worried about the her emails coming public back in 2016 before the election. So Yeah. I think we have real clairvoyance there, Maria. You've covered on your show for many, many years. Where we still are missing information is, know, how was Jack Smith appointed to go after Trump in '22?
Who decided to raid Mar A Lago? What documents were they looking for? These are all the questions that still remain to be answered, and I think where the investigators need to start from there and and go back.
Speaker 0: What is different about grand conspiracy? What does grand conspiracy tell us if in fact they are able to put the puzzle together that, yes, this has been a conspiracy since 2015?
Speaker 1: Well, I think you just have to ask yourself the common sense question. Is was it a conspiracy or not? And clearly, unless you've been hiding under a rock somewhere, this has been a conspiracy to weaponize The US intelligence agencies against the most popular Republican since Ronald Reagan, and that is president Trump. He became very popular in 02/2016, was a popular president, remains popular, was reelected president. It was all designed to target and take down one of your political enemies so much so that they actually raided his home, his private a private home of a former president at that time.
I mean, these are not things that allow a republic to be in a in a situation where it can withstand the long run if you have intelligence agencies that are effectively working with the fake news, working with nonprofits, all to benefit one political party. And that's what you've had. So it it was a conspiracy. It is a conspiracy. And so whether or not you can make those charges, I'm not a lawyer, never been a prosecutor, but I've done a lot of these investigations.
And to me, really, what matters is the court of public opinion. What matters are the statutes and law, and I would from my vantage point, it's pretty clear that there was conspiracy on a number of fronts. Most importantly, I think lying and misleading. I think that's a keyword misleading congress and and other investigations. As you know, there were, I don't know, some five different investigations that occurred over the last seven years that relate as it relates the Russia hoax, Ukraine impeachment hoax, and all the other hoaxes that did what targeted president Trump and his family.
Speaker 0: And and I talked with you throughout this ten year period over and over again, and I remember many years ago, you would say, we've asked them for these documents. We've asked them for that document, And they sat on it and waited and did not give you the documents as chairman of the intelligence committee or ranking member as the intelligence committee. You you demanded these these documents. Tell us how specifically Jim Comey and others may have misled you and the congress.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I can say this is that those days are over. Right? Now the president's made me chair of his intelligence board. We are working to help declassify where we can all the information that you now are are seeing come out.
Where I think you where where it's pretty clear is is let's talk about two interesting dates, Maria. One was in August 2016 in the Obama White House with Biden and a bunch of other cast of characters there, including Comey, including Brennan, where where they are told by Brennan that, hey. There's a hoax going on. That's my word. You know, that basically, they're looking the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC are looking to frame president Trump or that time candidate Trump with this Clinton email scandal.
If and when these emails come out, they wanted to to make it look like it was the Trump campaign working with Putin. They knew that in August '16. Now how is it possible that all of these cast of characters that were interviewed by multiple, not only the house house intelligence committee, but also in the senate and Horowitz and and, you know, all the way to Durham. They just had amnesia, just forgot about this. They they all those years went by, and they don't remember that this was a cover up for the Hillary Clinton email campaign.
Nonsense. We know that's not true. They had to have known it. So what's the other important date? The other important date is in August, ironically, almost six years to the day, August 2022, where they raid Mar A Lago.
Many of the same people were involved in that, not Comey because he had been fired, but others who had been in the the first Obama term all the way through were then put into the into the Biden term. I mean, people like Lisa Monaco, who was the deputy attorney general. I find it hard to believe that she didn't that she was not behind and had knowledge about what happened at the rate of Mar A Lago because I believe that Garland, although maybe he knew about it after the fact, but if you remember, he didn't seem to know much, and they didn't find what they were looking for because it took him three days after this magnificent raid with all the cameras there that clearly were tipped off about this Mar A Lago raid happening on president Trump. Miraculously, they didn't find anything, and it took Garland three days before he came out and made a statement.
Speaker 0: Wow. And Lisa Monaco got a big job now. She's the president of global affairs at Microsoft, which I reported first. Look. I've got the majority staff report right here on the intelligence community assessment of the Russia influence campaign targeting the twenty sixteen election.
You believe that was one of the things they were looking for when they raided Mar A Lago, but it wasn't there.
Speaker 1: Yeah. That's right. Because that was supposed to be declassified. We asked president Trump to declassify that in 02/2020. We were told that it was declassified.
We thought that that information was gonna be at the archives like all the information should. But then when we asked the archives about it and other people asked the archives for it, it wasn't there. So it's just and that document's very damaging. It's a 40 page report that house Republicans worked on for a long time, not only, you know, my committee and and now, you know, now the current chairman, Rick Crawford, was able to get that information out. It's a very damning report that showed what?
That Russia didn't think that Trump was gonna win, which I think we all know. Once again, just common sense in 16. Why would the Russians be helping someone that they didn't think was gonna win?
Speaker 0: Right. A great point. Devin, real quick on Gaza. Do you trust Hamas to actually keep its word here real quick?
Speaker 1: No. I don't think anybody trusts Hamas, but I think president Trump bringing Egypt, Turkey, The Gulf States altogether. This is an opportunity that president is giving for The Middle East. Let's hope that they take it. But I think we're time is clicking, and we'll see what happens.
But I would not wanna, be on the wrong side of president Trump. He's proven that he will take action.
Speaker 0: Alright. We will leave it there. Devin, always a pleasure to talk with you. You are the chairman of president Trump's advisory intelligence committee. Thank you, sir.
reSee.it AI Summary
I forgot to mention that my star guest, Mike Schmidt from the NYT, is actually my husband and facing serious issues for leaking classified info related to Comey. My other guest, Andrew Weissmann, is accused of faking the Mueller report, both tied to the Grand Conspiracy investigation.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Nicole Wallace forgets to mention that her star guest, NYT's Mike Schmidt, is actually her husband who is in deep trouble for publishing leaks of classified information from that sanctimonious git Comey as part of the Grand Conspiracy. Her other guest, Andrew Weissmann faked the Mueller report, also part of the Grand Conspiracy investigation.
Video Transcript AI Summary
They they they all see the world the same way.
And what we see them doing is moving the ball around the court and teeing each other up differently, you know, to to get them to some sort of criminal investigation.
You have the intelligence community taking the fruits of what it does or whatever classified stuff that it has, declassifying it, sending referrals to the justice department, and putting the department in a place to go forward and say, okay.
We are looking at this and using the specter of criminality to examine Trump's foes, the original foes like Obama, Brennan, and Comey.
I mean, Andrew Weisman, I don't know what moves the men in the manosphere, but it looks so freaking lame and weak to be so obsessed with Obama.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They they they all see the world the same way. And what we see them doing is moving the ball around the court and teeing each other up differently, you know, to to get them to some sort of criminal investigation. You have the intelligence community taking the fruits of what it does or whatever classified stuff that it has, declassifying it, sending referrals to the justice department, and putting the department in a place to go forward and say, okay. We are looking at this and using the specter of criminality to examine Trump's foes, the original foes like Obama, Brennan, and Comey. I mean, Andrew Weisman, I don't know what moves the men in the manosphere, but it looks so freaking lame and weak to be so obsessed with Obama.
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe they re-classified a document that Pres Trump declassified to cover their crimes, raided his home to hide those documents until 2091, and then accused him of mishandling classified information. This document is crucial as it reveals the FBI's investigation into senior Trump advisors based on falsehoods.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
So they 1) re-classified the document Pres Trump declassified to show evidence of their crimes, 2) raided his house to steal and hide those documents until 2091, 3) accused him of holding/passing classified documents. The document is the most important one according to reporters because it shows they opened FBI counter-intelligence investigation of the most senior Trump advisors based on what they knew were lies, and they continued to use the informer anyway to lie about others.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
Look at the stamp on the document on the left. Top left corner. Biden’s FBI reclassified it until 2091 on May 25, 2022, about 2 months before the Raid. On the right it’s exactly the same document not classified. The FBI meeting with Halper to start the investigation on Gen Flynn. https://t.co/8OYdiGjZJB
reSee.it AI Summary
Those urging us to "move on" from the Russia Hoax miss the ongoing pattern of attacks. It started with the Mueller investigation, then the false claims about the Biden laptop, and continued with the FBI's Arctic Frost investigation and the Mar-Lago raid aimed at seizing evidence of their wrongdoing. The same individuals have been orchestrating these efforts for a decade. It's time for accountability.
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
That’s why those lecturing for us to “move on” from the Russia Hoax are wrong. Russia Hoax was followed by the Mueller Witch Hunt, followed by “Biden Laptop is Russian disinformation” op etc followed by “Arctic Frost” FBI investigation of Pres Trump and the biggest of them all, the Mar-Lago raid to steal Crossfire Hurricane Documents-evidence of their crimes—and falsely accuse and investigate Pres Trump of passing classified documents to foreign intelligence. Same people, doing same things, for a decade. Lock them up already!
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The Mar-o-Lago Raid was both defensive and offensive Defensive move was for the Deep State actors to hide the evidence of their crimes So the FBI seized the Crossfire Hurricane documents and reclassified them L: Trump-declassified doc R: same doc re-classified by Biden post-raid https://t.co/bg1jQMBjcK
@RealSLokhova - Svetlana Lokhova
The planning and execution of Brennan’s anti-Trump ops took place at Cambridge University, England. The word University and the country, UK with capital London was classified for 9 years until Pres Trump released the docs this year. https://t.co/bhypjmho81
