reSee.it - Related Video Feed

New details suggest that the CIA, under Obama's administration, targeted Trump and initiated the Russia investigation. Former CIA director John Brennan identified 26 Trump associates to be monitored by the 5 Eyes Intelligence Alliance, and the FBI then targeted these individuals as suspicious. This led to the launch of the Russia collusion investigation. The operation's details were kept in a top-secret binder, which Trump has ordered to be declassified. There are rumors that the binder may be missing.

The US intelligence community allegedly asked foreign spy agencies to help monitor over 2 dozen associates of Donald Trump during the 2016 election, according to a report. The report suggests that President Obama's CIA director, John Brennan, identified these individuals as targets for collection and misinformation. The Five Eyes nations (US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) were involved. The release of this report coincides with house conservatives preparing a bill to reauthorize section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The House Rules Committee is set to meet regarding Pfizer reform.

Evidence suggests President Obama may have orchestrated the Russia collusion hoax against Donald Trump, though some FBI agents who lied to the FISA court remain unidentified. Mainstream media outlets initially downplayed the story, focusing instead on potential threats to figures like John Brennan. The documents indicate Obama himself ordered the operation, raising questions about a former president attempting to overthrow an incoming one. Some consider this the biggest scandal in American history, a decade-long coup attempt. The question of statute of limitations is being raised, with some arguing that national security exemptions should apply to such crimes. Tulsi Gabbard is believed to have more information, including a presidential daily brief.

New details have emerged about how the CIA under Obama targeted Trump and initiated the Russia hoax. It was previously believed that a tip from an Australian diplomat led to the FBI's investigation of Papadopoulos, but new reporting suggests that the CIA orchestrated the whole thing. Former CIA director John Brennan identified 26 Trump associates to be targeted by the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance, and the FBI then deemed their interactions suspicious, launching the Russia collusion hoax. The alleged details of this operation are stored in a top-secret binder, which Trump has ordered to be declassified, but it may be missing. This is a serious allegation of illegal spying and election interference.

An individual sent two FBI agents to the White House to interview a senior official, Michael Flynn. This action bypassed typical protocols involving the White House counsel, which would have been followed in administrations like those of George W. Bush or Barack Obama. The speaker believed it was early enough in the administration to circumvent the usual process. A call was placed to Flynn, informing him that a couple of agents were being sent over to ask him some questions, to which Flynn agreed. The agents interviewed Flynn in a conference room at the White House Situation Room, and Flynn allegedly lied to them during the interview. He later pled guilty to this. Flynn was not informed about the specific purpose of the agents' visit beforehand.

The transcript follows a chaotic exchange among multiple speakers discussing information sources, political narratives, and protests, with several recurring themes and claims. - There is a pattern of questioning information sources and personal actions. Speakers repeatedly ask, “Who the fuck is Jeremy? Where do I get my information? Why did I delete karaoke?” and “Who the fuck is Jonathan? Where does he get his information? Why did he delete karaoke?” indicating a concern with source credibility and content deletion. - A speaker (Speaker 2) describes a sense of purpose from sharing information, claiming that Wisconsin was the first state where “the evidence that I and my one of my associates, Chris, had put together for Peter, Wisconsin was the first state where it was actually presented, you know, under oath in, you know, a senate… Wisconsin Senate Committee on Election Integrity.” -Jeremy Oliver (Speaker 3) promotes alternative information channels, stating he has a YouTube page, a personal Facebook page, and that viewers can see “at the last protesting.” He frames mainstream media as unreliable, promising to “stream live and show exactly what's going on at the protest and really just support the people that are out there fighting for our First Amendment rights.” - Several participants discuss plans to act on protest grounds, including references to “Using other state capitals for practice dry runs” (Speaker 4) and “we’re basically ready to storm the capital with us in a couple of minutes” (Speaker 5). - There are assertions that “we’re all actors, but I wanna direct and act” (Speaker 6) and depictions of confrontations with others during protest or media interactions, including exchanges where people demand to speak with others about Mary Fenix/Fanning (Speaker 5). - A series of critical assertions target then-President Donald Trump and link various individuals and organizations to a network. A speaker states: “Donald Trump has no business being president,” followed by further claims about a coalition “super think tank of Biden, Harris, a couple intellectual figure behind them… Mike Flynn… and two economists,” including Simon Johnson, described as IMF chief economist, with English birth. - The conversation introduces the America Project and Patrick Byrne, claiming Flynn registered Flynn Intel Group from Stanley McChrystal’s home and associating McChrystal with the Defeat Disinfo Pack, an AI system that detects opposing viewpoints for Trump, and then shares those viewpoints to counter them. The system is said to target the Patriot movement. - There is a claim that the Flynn network included Ali Alexander and Michael Flynn, and that their aim was “to create instability as they're trying to carry out a color revolution,” listing criteria such as “a united and organized opposition,” “an ability quickly to drive home the point that voting results are falsified,” “compliant independent media,” and “capable of mobilizing tens of thousands or more demonstrators.” - A discussion on 2020 voting numbers is presented as a comparison to the midterms. It is stated that “2020, they reported 395,000 in-person voters on election day,” with debate about whether that figure was statewide or in Maricopa County. Projections speculate on how many Republicans intended to vote but did not cast ballots, with estimates ranging from around 150,000 to 700,000. - Additional claims connect groups and individuals to broader political finance and media ecosystems, including mentions of the US Agency for Global Media, prior Hillary Clinton and John Kerry involvement, and references to propaganda concerns. - Toward the end, the discussion touches upon Wisconsin politics again, with commentary on a state supreme court candidate and voter ID emphasis as a Democrat-leaning position contrary to expectations, followed by a shift into a more personal debate about a case involving a mother’s tragedy and media attention, ending with a tangential accusation of sympathy manipulation.

In 2016, nobody believed it possible for Donald Trump to defeat Hillary Clinton. When he did, it seems president Obama just couldn't take it. He convened in 12/09/2016 meeting in the White House Situation Room just weeks after Hillary Clinton conceded. He ordered an ICA or intelligence community assessment to functionally attribute Trump's unexpected win to the doings of Vladimir Putin. That Obama ordered phony assessment was about politics, not national security or the truth.

Newly declassified material reveals handwritten notes by former CIA Director John Brennan from July 2016. According to the notes, Brennan briefed Obama and senior officials, suggesting Hillary Clinton's campaign approved a plan to tie Trump to Russian interference in the election, allegedly to distract from her email scandal. The notes outlined concerns about Russian knowledge of this strategy. The speaker claims that in 2016, Brennan, Obama, and their advisors knew Hillary Clinton was running an operation and were worried about Russia finding out about it. The speaker suggests that officials knew early on there was no evidence that General Flynn had done anything wrong, but talked about continuing to investigate him anyway.

Svetlana Lokova recounts a years-spanning, shadowy influence operation that she says began long before the public Russiagate narrative took hold and continued to unfold through high-level intelligence and political circles in the United States and the United Kingdom. She argues that a coordinated conspiracy, involving American and British intelligence figures, political operatives, and foreign partners, was designed to undermine Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, demonize him in the public sphere, and ultimately reshape U.S. politics in ways that persist to today. She explains that the conspiracy starts with the idea of weaponizing Russia as a pretext to derail Trump. In September 2015, Hillary Clinton’s circle tied to Strobe Talbott and to London-based figures including Richard Dearlove and Christopher Andrew decides to dust off “the old Russian handbook” and pursue a plan to run with Russia as the central smokescreen. Svetlana notes that General Michael Flynn, then head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under Obama, was already engaging with Russia on matters of security and terrorism, and that Flynn’s Moscow trip in December 2015, arranged through the DIA, became a focal point of later accusations. She emphasizes that the trip was conducted under normal security procedures, with defensive briefings and debriefings required for someone of Flynn’s level of clearance. A key tie-in is the Cambridge operation she herself experienced. In 2015 she was an academic at Cambridge University, where she formed connections with MI6’s Richard Dearlove, Cambridge-based MI6-linked figures, and CIA asset Stefan Halper, who had Cambridge cover as a professor. She describes what she calls “bump” encounters—unexpected introductions that later produced routine reports. One such meeting introduced her to John McLaughlin, then acting CIA director, who allegedly expressed admiration for Russia and who later became a conduit for information within the FBI and CIA. Alan Collar, a London-based FBI liaison (Ligat) and a contact to Cambridge, also emerges as a pivotal figure; Svetlana recalls that Collar later sought to have Halper’s help in various capacities, including a potential PhD placement at Cambridge. Svetlana underscores how the operation leveraged a web of relationships: Christopher Steele in Britain, Halper in the U.S., McLaughlin, and MI6 heads like Dearlove, all part of what she describes as a “newsroom-to-FBI-to-CIA” loop. She explains that Steele and Halper acted as confidential informants for the FBI and CIA, with Steele’s dossier and Halper’s reports forming the backbone of what would become the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. She contends that the plan was not simply to accuse Trump of wrongdoing but to create a narrative of foreign interference—Russian involvement used to undermine Trump’s legitimacy and to give cover for the political takes of the Clinton-Soros alliance. The narrative continues with the infamous 2016 timeline. Svetlana recounts how the Hillary Clinton campaign, with Soros backing and with John Podesta’s circle, leveraged a “two-pronged” approach: demonize Trump through a public narrative of Russian interference and simultaneously seed a parallel set of claims about Trump campaign contacts with Russian intelligence. The plan, she says, was documented in internal emails circulated through Soros-linked channels and high-level Clinton aides. An August 2016 Oval Office meeting reportedly included Barack Obama, Susan Rice, James Comey, and John Brennan; Brennan allegedly noted that Hillary’s plan to distract from her email scandal involved tying Trump to Russia and ordered or supported steps to surface contacts between Trump advisers and Russian intelligence. This, she says, culminated in the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, justified by Downer’s May 2016 meeting with George Papadopoulos in London, which fed the FBI’s launch of an overarching inquiry into the Trump campaign. Svetlana emphasizes the mechanics of the operation: a cascade of “two-source” corroboration that failed to exist in reality but was manufactured through coordinated reporting. Stefan Halper and Christopher Steele allegedly provided separate but harmonized lines to the FBI and to journalists (for example, Washington Post and New York Times), with Fusion GPS coordinating research and payments, and with journalists feeding stories into the media while the FBI used those articles as cover to justify surveillance. She notes that the Steele dossier and Halper reports described contacts with Russian figures and asserted Kremlin orders, even while evidence mountains suggested the opposite or were non-existent. The operation allegedly relied on “ambiguous” or “dual-source” reporting to maintain plausible deniability and to keep multiple actors downstream of a single fabrication. Svetlana also describes internal institutional dynamics. She recounts that the Cambridge network included Gina Haspel (then head of the London CIA station) and Mike Morell (a senior CIA official) who allegedly used Cambridge as a front to pursue operations with university cover. The effort, she says, involved the use of “color revolutions” metaphors and methods—funding, organizing demonstrations, and controlling media narratives—through a transatlantic network that included British intelligence (MI6), American agencies (CIA, FBI, DHS), and at times Ukrainian actors. She asserts that the aim was not merely to affect the 2016 election but to create a “fog of war” (as she calls it) to obscure the truth, with the ultimate objective of removing Trump from power or preventing his influence in foreign policy. Two focal consequences are highlighted. First, the emergence of the Russia-collusion frame itself, built on forged or misrepresented evidence about Trump’s alleged ties to Russia and to Russian elites. Second, the use of this frame to drive real-world investigations, media coverage, and political pressure—culminating in the Mueller investigation and attempts to impeach or remove Trump from office. She contends that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, and later the intelligence community assessment that purported Russian interference and Trump’s supposed collaboration, were built on manipulated or false premises, with the principal architects’ fingerprints on the evidence and the dissemination of the narrative across intelligence and media channels. In her discussion of the Mar-a-Lago documents and the Florida case surrounding John Brennan and other co-conspirators, Svetlana asserts that declassification by President Trump of Crossfire Hurricane documents demonstrated both the existence of the conspiracy and government overreach. She repeats a central point: the documents show a plan written down by Brennan and other aides to tie Trump to Russia, demonize him, and justify an ongoing investigation to undermine his presidency. She notes that the same players who orchestrated the scheme—Halper, Steele, Downer, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and others—were allegedly involved in a broader pattern of off-the-books operations, funding, and information leaks designed to influence U.S. politics and foreign policy outcomes, with foreign allies in Britain and elsewhere participating in the broader maneuver. Svetlana’s overarching message is that accountability is possible but contingent on public attention and political will. She points to subpoenas and grand jury activity around Brennan and others as indications that the origins of the Russia investigation are formally being examined. She stresses that, despite the persistence of the conspiracy narrative, documents and testimony could reveal the truth behind the orchestrated campaign to disrupt the Trump presidency. She calls on the American public to demand accountability and to remain vigilant about the institutions and actors involved in what she describes as a continuing conspiracy, from Crossfire Hurricane to the later narratives surrounding Mueller and impeachment efforts, and into current political disputes. The dialogue closes with a personal appeal from Svetlana to the audience and to Lara Logan: the need to push for transparency and for due process, to scrutinize the roles of the people who allegedly manufactured and propagated the Russia collusion claims, and to insist on accountability for those who oversaw or participated in actions she frames as treasonous or seditious. She credits Lara Logan for ongoing coverage and expresses gratitude for the support of viewers and readers who seek an unflinching account of events, urging continued public scrutiny and a demand for principled governance.

General Michael Flynn, a highly respected former general and intelligence officer, recounts a lifelong connection to the ocean and service to the country, describing his career as a path that led him to become the deputy and later national security adviser to President Trump. He frames his experience as a stark contrast between his duty and a perceived betrayal by the U.S. government and its institutions. Key points and sequence of events: - Early career and worldview - Flynn describes growing up near the ocean, surfing, and a commitment to service. He says he loves the country and entered the service to defend it. - He recalls facing what he calls the “worst enemy” in America after returning from service and becoming a target of accusations of treason and being called a Russian spy. - War, policy, and intelligence critique - Flynn discusses the costs and consequences of war, praising sacrifice but arguing that war is a failure of policy, diplomacy, and leadership. - He portrays war as a constant state driven by money within the military-industrial complex and questions the necessity and management of ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. - He recounts the moment of taking command of a battalion and witnessing a helicopter crash, describing the grim realities of war and the reaction of coalition forces. - Intelligence reform and career advancement - Flynn emphasizes reforms to intelligence in Afghanistan, referencing a 2010 report titled a blueprint for making intelligence relevant in Afghanistan, which he authored as a senior intel officer. - He explains his appointment to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Senate confirmation process, highlighting the opposition from the existing intelligence establishment (SES) and the resistance within Washington. - He notes how his leadership and intelligence work were both celebrated by some allies and targeted by others who wanted to push him out. - Personal and family impact - Flynn’s wife, Laurie, is described as a stabilizing force; the couple recounts decades of marriage, raising a family, and the toll of public life on their private lives. - He discusses the stress and trauma inflicted on his family during investigations, including the impact on his son and grandchildren, and describes the emotional and financial burdens of legal battles. - Transition to politics and Trump - Flynn relates how his experience and reputation led him to work with Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, where he became a trusted adviser and ally. - He recounts meeting with Trump in 2015, the several-month collaboration, and his view of Trump as someone who could fundamentally change U.S. policy away from endless wars. - He describes the 2016 presidential transition, his offer to be national security adviser, and the initial endorsement by Trump, followed by a White House shake-up. - National security adviser role and the Russia narrative - Flynn explains the circumstances around his appointment as national security adviser and the opposing views within the White House about Russia and sanctions. - He recounts briefing the president and key figures in foreign policy, and the subsequent disputes and accusations that led to his resignation beneath a cloud of controversy, including claims that he had lied about sanctions. - Investigations, FARA, and prosecutorial conduct - Flynn details the scrutiny around his contacts with Russian officials and later the Flynn Intel Group’s work in Turkey, explaining that he was accused of violating FARA for actions tied to a private businessman rather than government-directed activity. - He discusses the narrative of being accused of being a Russian or Turkish spy, the portrayal of his son as a target, and the role of Covington & Burling in his legal defense. - He charges that the government used off-the-books deals and pressured plea agreements to pressure him into pleading guilty, including allegations of a “deal” that would protect his son from prosecution. - The courtroom and legal process - Flynn describes the high-profile court hearings led by Judge Emmet Sullivan, who publicly accused him of treason, stirred dramatic tensions, and threatened prison time for lying to the FBI. - He recalls the shock of the judge’s behavior, the break in proceedings, and the eventual decision to delay sentencing as he faced immense legal and financial strain. - Sidney Powell, exculpatory evidence, and defense strategy - Flynn’s legal team changes: Covington & Burling is replaced by Sidney Powell, who uncovers conflicts of interest and unveils Brady material and exculpatory evidence that had not been disclosed. - Powell’s involvement is described as a turning point that allowed Flynn to challenge government misconduct and pursue the truth rather than simply accepting a guilty plea. - Public support, family resilience, and the pardon - Flynn and family describe a groundswell of support from ordinary Americans through letters, gifts, and fundraising, including a legal defense fund that helped sustain them through financial hardship. - They describe the eventual decision by President Trump to issue a pardon of innocence in November 2020 after the government moved to dismiss the case, noting that Flynn did not seek the pardon initially and that Sidney Powell advised against accepting a plea in order to secure full vindication. - Flynn reflects on how the pardon, while welcome, carried mixed feelings given the years of damage and public misunderstanding. - Reflections on power, governance, and the future - The narrative frames a broader critique of entrenched agencies, media influence, and political storytelling, alleging the intelligence and justice systems have been weaponized and corrupted by political agendas. - The speakers emphasize the importance of truth, resilience, faith in family, and public accountability, arguing that Flynn’s story should illuminate issues of governance, the integrity of institutions, and the need for reform to restore trust in the republic. - The closing messages stress ongoing commitment to fight for reconciliation and reform, with Flynn characterized as a persistent presence who, despite wounds, remains engaged in public life and the defense of the republic. Throughout, the speakers present Flynn as a figure who faced relentless pressure from political and bureaucratic forces, endured personal and family hardship, and ultimately sought redress and vindication through a combination of legal advocacy, public support, and a historic presidential pardon. The narrative centers on themes of duty, betrayal, reform, and perseverance in the face of systemic challenges.

They discuss Flynn wanting to audit the Office of Net Assessments to learn who was being paid and why, citing a private book on tens of billions of dollars. They show a timeline where Stefan Halper, who is a now outed spy, was paid $211,000 in $15,411,000 dollars the next year, “just a couple of months before they secured the wiretap to spy on Carter Page.” They ask what was going on at the Pentagon or the CIA overseen by John Brennan that General Flynn wanted to audit and that put him in such a bad light with all of these people: “They wanted him out.” Flynn was “right on” and had “the best intelligence machine in modern warfare history,” noting waste and corruption in Washington’s intel bureaucracy and Al Qaeda resurging in Iraq, which became ISIS; Flynn was fired. They found “odd amount of money” moving through ONA, “hundreds of thousands of dollars.” Halper “was not a spy,” he “helped Christopher Steele make things up,” with “no sources” and “phony reports.” Rosenstein and Wray gave “crickets” when asked what they knew, and they questioned if hundreds of thousands had gone missing. They say the problem at ONA emerged in early 2018, with the “dirty cops” opening an investigation on the president that became the special prosecutor. “Remember Unbelievable.” The American people would know zilch about this if Donald Trump did not win; if he doesn’t win again, there will be no accountability, while the left, including Congress, media, FBI, and tech companies, are “all on the same page to take down Donald Trump.”

Peter Alexander reports that former Obama administration officials confirmed President Obama warned President-elect Trump against hiring Mike Flynn during their meeting less than 48 hours after the election. This warning is significant, especially given Trump's recent criticisms of the Obama administration for hiring Flynn, who was later fired by Obama. Additionally, Obama cautioned Trump about North Korea. In another segment, discussions revolve around Stefan Halper, who received a substantial contract to study Russia and China, with implications that his work was subpar and potentially misallocated. There are claims of fabricated evidence and misconduct related to the investigation into Flynn, with assertions that it was an attempted overthrow of the government. Anticipation builds for the upcoming Durham report, which is expected to reveal more information on these matters.

Following Trump's significant victory in the 2024 election, General Flynn issued a stark warning about potential threats to Trump’s safety and the necessity for immediate action against entrenched officials from the previous administration. He emphasized the importance of appointing loyal and capable individuals to key positions to prevent sabotage. Flynn expressed concern over ongoing plots against Trump, suggesting that if Trump had lost, he would have faced severe repercussions. He identified John Brennan as a key adversary and stressed the need for heightened security around Trump. Flynn called for a reform of government departments and urged vigilance against the ongoing threats posed by those opposed to conservatism. The discussion concluded with a reminder to stay alert and informed about the actions of political adversaries.

Michael Flynn, a former DIA head and Trump national security advisor, was an intelligence community surveillance target, as was staffer George Papadopoulos. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a report clearing Trump of colluding with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election. Sources close to the committee, led by Adam Schiff, continued working covertly in Langley. They had access to raw logs and communications from agencies like the CIA and the National Security Council.

Speaker 0 states that sources have indicated Brennan used "reverse targeting" to entrap Trump advisors Carter Page and George Papadopoulos via Halper and Mifsud. Papadopoulos then told former Australian ambassador Downer about Russian offers to help Trump. This appears to be how Russiagate started. Speaker 1 believes John Brennan is a dark figure. Speaker 1 was arrested in 2012 and charged with espionage for blowing the whistle on the sea ice torch program. Speaker 1 claims to have found memos where Brennan told Holder to charge him with espionage, even after being advised against it. The espionage charges, carrying a potential death penalty, were later dropped after Speaker 1 went bankrupt from legal fees. Speaker 1 believes Brennan was responsible for the origin of Russiagate and that the CIA, under Brennan, devises operations to ruin people, cause suicides, or entrap individuals.

Michael Flynn pleaded guilty for lying to the FBI. He understood the intel world and its funding, making him a threat. A political appointee felt pressured to change their assessment but refused. President Obama warned Trump to stay away from Flynn.

There is irrefutable evidence that detail how president Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false. The Obama administration doctored the intelligence to make it look like Putin and Trump stole the election. A month after Trump beat Hillary, Barack Obama wasn't satisfied with his intelligence reporting and ordered his CIA director to create a new assessment of how Russia interfered with the election. John Brennan handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, and they were siloed. None of them knew what the other was doing, and only one analyst was in charge of drafting this report. There was a massive pressure campaign that came right from the top. Obama and his spy chiefs knew that Putin didn't prefer Trump over Hillary, but they cooked the intelligence to make it look like he did.

Michael Flynn, a former Defense Intelligence Agency head and Trump national security advisor, was an intelligence community surveillance target, as was staffer George Papadopoulos. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a report clearing Trump of colluding with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election. Sources close to the House Permanent Select Committee, led by Adam Schiff, continued working covertly out of a small room in Langley. They had access to raw logs and communications from agencies like the CIA and the National Security Council.

Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, released new evidence alleging that former President Barack Obama and top aides conspired to subvert President Trump’s February victory and undermine the democratic will of the American people. The speaker asserts that while Obama publicly appeared to support a peaceful transfer of power, privately he took steps to sow discord and sabotage Trump, including manufacturing and politicizing intelligence that was used to justify baseless smears against the new president. The claim is that Trump had no involvement with Russia and that the Russia collusion narrative was a massive fraud, known to Obama and others involved, including former CIA director John Brennan, former DNI James Clapper, former FBI director James Comey, former deputy director Andrew McCabe, and others. The speaker reiterates that DNI Gabbard’s report confirms there was no collusion or corruption by Trump, attributing any wrongdoing to Barack Obama and the “weaponized” intelligence agencies of the time. The Russia hoax is characterized as a blatant lie manufactured by Democrat political operatives, approved by Obama, and leaked to the media to launch a years-long witch hunt against Trump in his first administration. Allies of the president, including Donald Trump Jr., were smeared as Russian assets, with some personally harmed by the false narrative. The speaker notes that much of this occurred during Trump’s first two years in office, consuming vast resources, time, and political capital to debunk the allegations at the highest levels of government. According to the speaker, nearly a decade later, declassification of documents by DNI Gabbard, alongside contributions from CIA Director Ratcliffe and committee Chairman Rick Crawford, supports a newly declassified 2020 report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. This report reportedly found the intel community did not have direct information that Vladimir Putin sought to help elect Trump in 2016; instead, Russia was allegedly preparing for a Hillary Clinton victory. The narrative claims that, at the time, Obama’s unusual stance led the intel community to publish implausible intelligence to sabotage the incoming president. The speaker asserts this constitutes one of the greatest political scandals in American history, noting that legacy media outlets such as the New York Times and the Washington Post were rewarded with Pulitzer Prizes for propagating political disinformation. The claim is made that those awards should be stripped from journalists who disseminated out-of-context and false intelligence to push a political narrative in service of the Democrats and associated intelligence actors.

Fox News alert: Tulsi Gabbard releases a report alleging a conspiracy by a sitting president, Barack Obama, and his intel agencies to sabotage the president-elect Donald Trump, brainwash the electorate, and undermine the legitimacy of an election. There is irrefutable evidence detailing how Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment they knew was false, promoting a narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump win, selling it to the American people as true. Gabbard obtained a House Intelligence Committee report locked away in a CIA vault for almost a decade. Investigators spent over two thousand hours interviewing 20 CIA and FBI officials, and it shows the Obama administration doctored intelligence to make it look like Putin and Trump stole the election. A month after Trump beat Hillary, Obama wasn’t satisfied with intelligence reporting and ordered his CIA director to create a new assessment of how Russia interfered with the election. This was a highly unusual move. John Brennan handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, and they were siloed; none knew what the others were doing, and only one analyst was in charge of drafting the report. It was not routine, and it was rushed to publish before Trump’s inauguration. Nothing was coordinated with other intelligence agencies. Basically, this was “home cooking” for Barack Obama. Four key elements were repeated to form the basis of the Russia hoax and the Mueller investigation: 1) that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; 2) Putin took action to help Trump win; 3) the Russians had blackmail on Trump (the Steele dossier); and 4) that the Russians tried colluding with the Trump campaign. None of this was ever true; there was no reliable intelligence to support these allegations. Senior CIA officials repeatedly refused to traffic in these allegations, but were overruled by CIA director Brennan and FBI director Comey, who insisted they be pushed without verifiable evidence. The Obama administration cherry-picked intelligence, lied about sources, misquoted sources, did not corroborate claims, suppressed intelligence counter to their narratives, and even used anonymous Internet postings. Rank-and-file CIA admitted violations of tradecraft standards; a massive pressure campaign came from the top, with unusual directives from political appointees, the CIA director, and Obama himself. This is how the Russia hoax was born. Donald Trump knows that the Russians helped him win in 2016. Putin hated Hillary Clinton, with a noted preference for the opponent he disliked least. It was Russia in a systematic effort to interfere in the election and advance Trump’s prospects. The report notes that at one point, 60% of Democrats believed the Russians hacked voting machines to help Trump win, but the report shows Russians sought to create chaos and undermine democracy; solid intelligence suggested Putin had no preference, and expected Hillary to win, holding compromising dirt on her that he never released. If Putin wanted Trump to win, why didn’t he drop the dirt? There were high-level DNC emails detailing Hillary’s psycho-emotional problems, uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and a daily regimen of tranquilizers; Brennan and the intelligence community mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious sources to create a narrative of Putin’s preference for Trump, though Obama and intelligence leaders knew Putin did not collude with Trump and did not direct his people to help Trump win, yet they published it anyway. Obama and his intel spies purportedly cooked intelligence to look like Putin preferred Trump, undermining faith in elections and causing chaos. Do you believe this implicates Obama in criminal behavior? There is a referral of documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate criminal implications. Evidence points to Obama leading the manufacturing of the intelligence assessment. Even two years after the election, Obama pushed a hoax he knew wasn’t true. Brennan, Comey, and others may have liability. Trey Gowdy claims Brennan committed perjury for lying to Congress. When asked who commissioned the Steele dossier, responses indicate the CIA did not rely on it; it was not part of the intelligence community assessment. The broadcast concludes with the assertion that what happened to these officials is not revenge, but accountability, while noting ongoing questions about potential criminal action.

President Trump's ally, the National Enquirer, accused Michael Flynn of being a Russian spy. Trump has a history of supporting the Enquirer and has a close relationship with its CEO. This could make Flynn nervous, considering Trump's frequent mention of the Enquirer. The Enquirer's attack on Flynn is significant because it aligns with Trump's past use of the publication to target his opponents.

Fox News alerts: Tulsi Gabbard releases a “bombshell report” alleging “a conspiracy by a sitting president, Barack Obama, and his intel agencies to sabotage the president-elect, Donald Trump, brainwash the electorate, and undermine the legitimacy of an election.” It claims “irrefutable evidence” that Obama directed “the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false” to promote a narrative that Russia interfered in 2016 to help Trump. A month after the win, Obama allegedly ordered CIA director to draft a new assessment; five CIA analysts were “handpicked” and siloed, a rush job “home cooking for Barack Obama.” The four elements cited: “Putin wanted Donald Trump to win,” “Putin took action to help Trump win,” “the Russians had blackmail on Trump” (Steele dossier), and “the Russians tried colluding with the Trump campaign.” It asserts none were true, with overruling by Brennan and Comey and that “This is how the Russia hoax was born.” It mentions criminal implications and accountability.

An individual sent two FBI agents to the White House to interview a senior official, Michael Flynn. This action bypassed typical protocols involving the White House counsel, which would have been followed in administrations like those of George W. Bush or Barack Obama. The speaker believed it was early enough in the administration to circumvent the usual process. A call was placed to Flynn, informing him that a couple of agents were being sent over to ask him some questions, to which Flynn agreed. The agents interviewed Flynn in a conference room at the White House Situation Room, and Flynn allegedly lied to them during the interview. Flynn pleaded guilty to this. Flynn was not informed about the specific purpose of the agents' visit beforehand.