TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

In the video, Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia has been found. Speaker 1 mentions that information can be found in the report prepared by director Mueller, but they are not aware of any collusion or conspiracy. Speaker 0 then interrupts and states that when the FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane, they did not have any information suggesting that anyone in the Trump campaign had been in contact with Russian intelligence officials.

You often focused on the Russia investigation, presenting anonymous FBI claims as fact. This led viewers to believe in a conspiracy between Trump and Putin, which is false. We covered the investigation, but it shouldn't overshadow the issues Americans care about. Trump discusses unleashing American energy to lower grocery costs, addressing housing affordability, and border security at every rally. Your network seems more concerned with Trump's past rather than his future policies that aim to improve the American dream. We should focus on the economic policies that affect citizens rather than unverified claims from disgruntled former employees.

News alert discusses Tulsi Gabbard releasing a report alleging a conspiracy by a sitting president, Barack Obama, and U.S. intel agencies to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency and the 2016 election. The report claims there is irrefutable evidence that 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 2016 to help Trump win. Gabbard says she obtained a House Intelligence Committee report that had been locked away in a CIA vault for nearly a decade, and investigators spent over two thousand hours interviewing 20 CIA and FBI officials. The assertion is that the Obama administration doctored intelligence to imply Putin and Trump colluded to steal the election, with a highly unusual, rush-developed assessment produced a month after Trump’s victory. John Brennan allegedly handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, who were siloed and not aware of each other’s work, with only one analyst in charge of drafting. The process was described as a rush job with no coordination with other intelligence agencies, essentially “home cooking” for Obama. The four key elements repeated in the assessment, forming the basis of the Russia hoax and the Mueller investigation, are: 1) that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; 2) Putin took actions 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. The claim is that none of these were true, and there was no reliable intelligence to support them. Senior CIA officials allegedly refused to propagate these allegations, but were overruled by CIA Director Brennan and FBI Director Comey, who pressed for them despite lacking verifiable evidence. The report alleges the Obama administration cherry-picked intelligence, misquoted sources, did not corroborate claims, suppressed counter-evidence, and even used anonymous internet postings. Rank-and-file CIA personnel allegedly admitted that these actions violated tradecraft standards, with a pressure campaign emanating from political appointees, the CIA director, and Obama himself. Speaker 1 asserts that Donald Trump knows Russia helped him win in 2016. Speaker 2 suggests Putin’s preference for Trump came from his dislike of Hillary Clinton, who was running, while Speaker 3 states Russia sought to interfere systematically to advance Trump’s prospects. The conversation notes that at one point, 60% of Democrats believed Russia hacked voting machines to aid Trump, yet the report contends Russians aimed to create chaos and undermine faith in democracy, with solid intelligence indicating Putin had no clear preference between Clinton and Trump but had dirt on Clinton that was not released. The discussion questions why the dirt from the DNC emails and claims about Clinton’s health, including tranquilizers, were not leaked to aid Trump, and whether the information about Clinton’s health is credible. The panel suggests that if Russia sought to influence the election, more damning information would have been released. The speakers claim Obama and top intelligence leaders mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious sources to craft a narrative of Putin’s preference for Trump. They contend Obama continued pushing the hoax after the election, describing it as undermining democracy. Towards the end, there is mention of potential criminal implications, with references to referrals to the Department of Justice and FBI for investigation, including possible liability for Obama. A tester voices that Brennan may have committed perjury before Congress. A final note asserts that the CIA did not rely on the Steele dossier for the intelligence community assessment, countering a claim made in the discussion. The segment closes with a call for accountability.

State Department spokesperson and a reporter clash over lack of evidence for Russian propaganda claims. Another exchange questions US military's assessment of civilian casualties in Syria raid. Administration admits mistake in drone strike that killed civilians. Journalists must ask questions to hold officials accountable and protect civilians, reflecting American values.

Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign manager Robbie Mook testified that Clinton herself approved the idea of giving the Alpha Bank story to a reporter as part of the Trump-Russia narrative. He described a moment when the campaign told Clinton they had information alleging a link between the Trump Organization and a Russian-based bank through a back channel, and that she agreed to let it be shared with the media. To provide background, the report involved an allegation about the Trump Organization, via a back channel to a Russian bank named Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin and Russian oligarchs close to Vladimir Putin. In 2016, campaign attorney Michael Sussman went to James Baker, the FBI’s general counsel at the time, informing him that he had information linking the Trump Organization to a Russian bank through a back channel and via a computer server. James Baker took the information to the FBI, which investigated and found nothing substantial. The Clinton campaign also learned about the information, and Robbie Mook later stated that Clinton was briefed on the allegation and gave the approval to disseminate it to the media. Sussman faces one count of providing a false statement to the FBI. The moment described by Mook—that Clinton personally approved sending the story to a reporter—was presented as surprising in court, especially since the information later turned out to be baseless. During coverage, a reporter quotes Mook: “we told her, Hillary Clinton, we have this, and that's the information about this bank allegedly having this communication or at least the server suggested so with the Trump Organization. We told her we have this, and we wanna share it with a reporter. She agreed to that.” The discussion also notes that the information was ultimately false or lacking evidence. Questions are raised about why the information was given to reporters, including a claim that they did not have the expertise to judge the information and were briefed by Mark Elias about it. Mook says they decided to give it to a reporter so the reporter could run it down more. It’s argued that reporters may not have done due diligence to verify with the FBI or other sources, and that the story was amplified despite its lack of substantiation. Speaker commentary emphasizes the perceived strategic value of the release and critiques the media’s coverage, suggesting that the Russia narrative was intensified by those opposed to a Trump presidency. The discussion also references Mark Elias, who led the law firm that funded the Steele dossier, tying the episode to broader assertions about campaign desperation and attempts to influence the political outcome.

- Speaker 0 states they believe certain people are dishonest and crooked and that they may have to pay a price; they insist they are truly bad and dishonest people, and imply consequences may follow. - Speaker 1 discusses a criminal investigation into James Comey and John Brennan related to the so-called Russian collusion hoax, asserting they tried to ruin Trump’s life and that he prevailed. - Speaker 1 notes that for years, ranking members of Congress, the intelligence community, and the FBI claimed Donald Trump was colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election, and that this was continued through his first presidency. - Speaker 2 references emails suggesting Donald Trump Jr. was willing to collude with Russia, questioning how to know what happens when Trump and Putin meet, and suggests Trump’s repeated denials of collusion may have been truthful. - Speaker 3 asks if there has been any evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, and Speaker 2 disagrees, saying there is plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight. - Speaker 1 cites a recently declassified CIA “lessons learned” document from John Ratcliffe noting that the investigation was messed up, aimed at preventing Trump from winning and then hampering his agenda, and mentions multiple procedural anomalies in the preparation of the ICA (intelligence community assessment). - They walk through the timeline: Christopher Steele, a former MI-6 officer with Russian intel expertise, was hired by Fusion GPS, which was paid by Perkins Coie for Hillary Clinton’s campaign (notably Mark Elias) to produce opposition research on Trump; this unvetted dossier was used to bolster the case and was shopped to media to create a narrative of Trump-Russia ties, then used as a legal hook to push a narrative. - Speaker 1 argues Hillary Clinton leveraged influence to funnel the unverified dossier into the FBI and into a FISA warrant for Carter Page, noting it was not disclosed that the dossier was funded by Hillary Clinton, which they view as a major omission. - Ratcliffe’s document is cited as saying including the Steele dossier in the ICA undermined credibility and ran counter to tradecraft principles. - A second parallel element involved Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer paid by Fusion GPS and Clinton campaign, who met Don Jr. at Trump Tower; Don Jr. texted during the meeting that he was unsure what was happening, and the meeting was publicly used to support the Steele dossier claims about Trump’s ties to Russia. - The Speaker covers Hillary Clinton’s classified server issue, including the use of BleachBit and hammers, and notes DNC servers were hacked by Russia; they frame these events as being used to shift focus to Trump collusion. - They describe Crossfire Hurricane as the investigation into Trump, calling it an “insurance policy” to deflect attention from Clinton’s classified server issues and to portray Trump as guilty, describing the investigations into Trump associates (Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Manafort, Flynn) as efforts to keep the narrative alive even after Trump’s election victory. - Speaker 1 asserts Mueller’s appointment was scope-limited but later expanded, allowing broad access and substantial taxpayer cost; Brennan and Comey are accused of feeding initial information for a political purpose, with high-level agency involvement and misrepresentation in Congress. - They claim there was never any actual evidence of Russian collusion charged against the Trump campaign. - They mention Charles McGonigal, a former FBI counterintelligence official, as someone charged in connection with Russia, implying the broader narrative was invalid and asserting that those involved lied. - The speakers conclude that the entire setup was a scam and express a desire for accountability.

The speaker stated that the intelligence community repeatedly and incidentally collected information about US citizens involved in the Trump transition. Details about US persons associated with the incoming administration, with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value, were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting. The speaker also confirmed that additional names of Trump transition team members were unmasked. He emphasized that none of this surveillance was related to Russia or the investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team. The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate the surveillance and its subsequent dissemination to determine several questions: who was aware of it; why it was not disclosed to Congress; who requested and authorized the additional unmasking; whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates; and whether any laws, regulations, or procedures were violated. The speaker said he has asked the directors of the FBI, the NSA, and the CIA to expeditiously comply with his March 15 letter and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities. He noted that he informed Speaker Ryan of this new information this morning and that he would be going to the White House this afternoon to share what he knows with the president and his team. Before taking questions, the speaker referenced a recent event, expressing concern over a terrorist attack in the United Kingdom and extending thoughts and prayers to friends and allies across the pond. He added that intelligence reports clearly show that the president-elect and his team were, at least, monitored and disseminated in intelligence and what appears to be, though not raw, intelligence reporting channels.

An individual accuses another of repeatedly presenting unnamed FBI agents' words as truth on their network, leading viewers to believe Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin conspired in 2016, which they claim is false. The other individual denies the accusation. They then state that President Trump went to extraordinary lengths to keep specifics about his meetings with Vladimir Putin secret, even from his own administration. They play a clip of President Trump responding to a question about whether he ever worked for Russia, where he calls it insulting but does not directly answer. The individual then asks if the president of the United States ever worked on behalf of the Russians against American interests.

We covered the Russia hoax constantly because the FBI was actively investigating it. We reported what unnamed FBI agents were saying. Any viewer would have believed that Trump and Putin conspired in 2016, but that was completely false. Trump went to extraordinary lengths to keep his meetings with Putin secret, even from his own administration. When asked if he ever worked for Russia, Trump responded that it was the most insulting question he’d ever been asked and the most insulting article ever written about him. He did not directly answer the question, which is a stunning turn of events. Did the President of the United States ever work on behalf of the Russians against American interests?

We look at where we are now over the last several weeks. We've declassified and released documents that exposed how president Obama and leaders in the intelligence community knowingly manufactured a false intelligence document after the twenty sixteen election was done, after the American people said, no, we want Donald Trump to go and be our commander in chief, not Hillary Clinton. And this manufactured document alleged that Russia aspired to help president Trump win the election with the aim of undermining his presidency and usurping the will and the voices of the American people who sent Trump to the White House.

The discussion revolves around accusations against Donald Trump regarding his comments on the election and Liz Cheney. One participant dismisses the notion that Trump's remarks are fascist, arguing that they are taken out of context. They express skepticism about the portrayal of Trump's words and suggest that he is more reasonable than those who advocate for war. The conversation shifts to media coverage of the FBI investigation into Russian interference, with one side claiming that the network presented unverified sources as truth. The other side insists they reported on the investigation accurately. The dialogue concludes with a focus on Trump's recent statements and his rally messages.

Hillary Clinton started the Tulsi narrative because Tulsi was a rising star. She was a woman, a minority, and combat vet. Tulsi began 'to be kind of open minded to what Bernie Sanders was saying' and spoke up, making enemies in the party. She was outraged when she learned the DNC 'cheated on behalf of Hillary to try to make sure she got the nomination and screwed Bernie.' Hillary Clinton allegedly called her a 'Russian asset,' part of the 'Russia, Russia, Russia hoax.' 'Her campaign made up the all the stuff about there being a server in Trump Tower Right.' Don Junior was using it to commute. Tulsi left the party. She argued the Russia-Ukraine war 'didn't have to happen' if Putin's views on NATO expansion had been listened to. She met with Bashar al Assad; Trump opened negotiations with Kim Jong Un; 'Diplomacy means you talk to your enemies.'

There had been contacts between members of mister Trump's staff and Russian officials, and Trump benefited from the hacks. The spokesman said: “It's obvious, that Trump knew what was going on” and that he was “not suggesting cooperation at all.” Context was the CIA assessment that the hacks were done “to tilt the election” toward a candidate. The discussion noted that DNC hack and “a hack of Hillary Clinton's advisors' emails” were released in “drip, drip fashion,” generating “negative” coverage and implying it helped Trump's campaign and hurt Hillary's, though it “doesn’t mean that the Trump campaign was coordinating.” The president-elect's “admiration for Putin” and desire to forge a cooperative relationship to focus on terrorism were acknowledged. In October, “every intelligence agency” agreed that “the Russians had hacked the DNC” and that the information was released “by Russian intelligence and Russian officials at the highest levels,” not a surprise.

You continuously discussed the Russia investigation as if it were undeniable truth, leading viewers to believe in a conspiracy between Trump and Putin in 2016, which was completely false. President Trump has taken significant steps to keep his meetings with Putin secret, even from his own administration. When asked if he ever worked for Russia, he found the question insulting and did not provide a direct answer. This situation raises concerns about whether the President has acted against American interests.

"This is 100% them pushing Trump with a rate on his lawyer and the deep state." "Because Trump's not a Russian agent, but anybody's lawyer, you're gonna be able to find something according to FBI rules that didn't pay taxes right or something." "The damn rebels are Al Qaeda and ISIS. Our own government funded them to take over the Middle East from Libya to Egypt to Syria." "Assad is pro diversity, pro religious freedom. They stood up. They beat it." "The Russians were pulling out." "And then Trump says a week ago, he's pulling out of Syria, and then they start this crap." "They grabbed his lawyer's documents." "Donald Trump shit his fucking pants at the fucking moment of truth." "We did an emergency fucking thirty six hour broadcast trying to stop this shit that can lead to World War three."

"We look at where we are now over the last several weeks. We've declassified and released documents that exposed how president Obama and leaders in the intelligence community knowingly manufactured a false intelligence document after the twenty sixteen election was done, after the American people said, no, we want Donald Trump to go and be our commander in chief, not Hillary Clinton." "And this manufactured document alleged that Russia aspired to help president Trump win the election with the aim of undermining his presidency and usurping the will and the voices of the American people who sent Trump to the White House."

It is important to put the investigation into Trump and his associates aside. There is no denying that the Russians interfered in the election to help Trump, hurt Hillary Clinton, and destabilize democracy. According to public testimony before Congress by intelligence professionals, this interference is a clear and present danger to the country. If the roles were reversed and Hillary Clinton had won, she would have stopped at nothing to find out what happened and ensure it never happens again. She would have stood up in front of the country and said that even if it advantaged her, she would not rest until the truth was uncovered.

Some say this is a witch hunt, but they've caught a few witches. There have been a few indictments. One lawyer called the investigation absurd. But is it? We broke the story about the existence of the dossier and that President Trump had been briefed, but we didn't mention its contents. The FBI director was talking about prostitutes. Almost exactly two years ago, we reported that President Trump had been briefed on the intelligence community's assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election, including the existence of the dossier. Despite the president's denial, the special counsel's team has already proven some of the claims in that dossier are true. Have Democrats found any evidence of collusion? Yes, we have. I just want the truth and facts to be respected again in this country.

Speaker 0: By a member of the Ukrainian parliament. Let's talk about the tape recording evidence. Speaker 1: We don't know. Yeah. We don't know much about it because it's floating around Ukraine, but we do know the general prosecutor of Ukraine, our equivalent of the attorney general, came on our show this morning and said the following. There's enough evidence for me to open up a criminal investigation into the illicit effort by a Ukrainian to try to influence the United States election in favor of Hillary Clinton. That's a profound statement coming from the top law enforcement official of Ukraine. Why is it important? There's a court in Ukraine that's already concluded that, Ukrainian officials leaked Paul Manafort's financial records to try to sway the US election. You haven't heard anything about that in the American press, but that ruling occurred recently. Then a parliamentary member comes out and says, I have a tape of these law enforcement officials saying they did it specifically to help Hillary Clinton. That becomes the foundation of the Ukrainian investigation. Speaker 0: You have talked to people that have heard this tape. Correct? Speaker 1: Well, the, the prosecutor himself has heard the tape and said it was important enough, good enough evidence to warrant opening the investigation. So the tape, the court ruling, the top prosecutor in Ukraine says there was a foreign power Speaker 0: Two separate issues here. Number one Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: Did Ukrainian officials offered us evidence that, in fact, they were involved in election interference in 2016 to help Hillary Clinton's campaign? But why didn't anybody in in the media pursue the interference story? And I thought they cared about interference, but, obviously, only if it's Russian interference and Trump because we know they don't care about the dirty Russian dossier. Speaker 1: That's right. Keep in mind that just a few months ago, Sean, we reported on your on your show and inside the hill that Ukraine's embassy in Washington confirmed on the record that back in 2016, the Democratic National Committee trying to help Hillary Clinton get elected asked the Ukraine Embassy to help interfere in the election by doing two things, dig up dirt on Paul Manafort and have Ukraine's president make a kerfuffle here in Washington about Manafort and Trump when he came to visit. Now the Ukrainians say they they rebuffed that attempt, but Hillary Clinton's campaign, the DNC, made that request according to the, Ukraine embassy in

Revelations involving Michael Cohen raise serious questions about the president's legal exposure. The speaker says the president is nervous as time runs out to 'hold himself above the law.' The claim that 'the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in trying to subvert the election' is highlighted, with Manafort and Trump Jr. meeting Russian agents who offered dirt on Hillary as part of the Russian government's attempt to help them, and 'it's clear that the campaign colluded.' Two developments are noted: 'the president's personal attorney lied to congress, but about the fact that he was personally involved on behalf of the president in arranging business deals with the Russians during the campaign.' And 'the president's campaign manager was involved with communicating with WikiLeaks during the 2016, at the time, you know, well before they served as a conduit to release the the emails that that the Russians'