TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript states that documents contain emails allegedly from the senior vice president of the George Soros Open Society Foundation. These emails quote a Clinton campaign adviser saying, "it will be a long term affair" and to "demonize Putin and Trump," and that, "later, the FBI will put more oil into the fire." Other emails reportedly reveal Hillary Clinton approved the idea of tying Trump and Russia to election interference, describing it as a scheme hoping the allegations would distract people from her own email scandal. The documents purportedly provide clear evidence that Hillary Clinton's campaign was behind the Russia hoax and that the FBI knew what the Clinton team was up to, acknowledging that the information they were receiving about the Trump campaign may have come from the Clinton camp. The transcript adds that, despite these alleged disclosures, the Obama intel community forged ahead with a 2017 assessment concluding that Russia aspired to help Trump win the election.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
In July 2016, Christopher Steele gave his dossier to the FBI while John Brennan, then head of the CIA, received information about the Hillary Clinton campaign's questionable activities. The evidence related to this was either destroyed or returned to the Clinton Global Initiative. The corruption within the DOJ and FBI is concerning, as an entire investigative team conducting a lawful investigation can be shut down by the Department of Justice. This should be a major story, given the magnitude of the situation.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Hillary Clinton personally signed off on something. Robby Mook made it clear that Clinton paid Fusion GPS through her campaign and lawyers, and was told the papers provided hadn't been verified. They figured the media would vet the information, specifically Slate, not the New York Times or Wall Street Journal. This occurred while Clinton was deleting emails and having server issues. Clinton's team had an October surprise, and on October 31st, she retweeted Jake Sullivan's tweet about Trump's server with Alfa Bank, which was a lie. Robby Mook testified that Comey, not Trump, caused the most damaging days of the campaign. Hillary Clinton said in May 2017 that if the election were on October 27th, she would be president.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The investigation reveals that the CIA framed Trump by manipulating foreign spies to target his campaign associates. Classified documents suggest Russia actually preferred Hillary in 2016, but the CIA, led by John Brennan, fabricated evidence to suggest Russian interference in favor of Trump. Brennan's manipulation of intelligence led to the false conclusion that Russia supported Trump. The CIA is withholding a 50-page report confirming Russia's preference for Hillary. Accountability for Brennan's actions lies with Congress, who must demand the release of these documents.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
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.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
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.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The Clinton plan referenced in the video was a purported plan by one of Mrs. Clinton's foreign policy advisers to create a scandal linking Donald Trump to the Russians. This information was received around the same time as the Australian intelligence. On August 3, 2016, Director Brennan briefed President Obama, Vice President Biden, Director of National Intelligence, FBI, Attorney General, and others about this intelligence. However, it was not provided to the agents working on the case or the secret FISA court. The Steele dossier, which was entered into the congressional record, has not been corroborated by the FBI or anyone else.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The Trump-Russia collusion story was allegedly a hoax known by Democrats, the FBI, the CIA, and Barack Obama. John Ratcliffe approved the release of documents to the DOJ regarding the Obama administration's oversight of the Trump-Russia investigation. John Brennan briefed Obama in 2016 on Hillary Clinton's plan to link Trump to Russia. John O'Connor claims the Clinton campaign, not Trump, worked with Russia. Critics allege abuse of power and potential criminal activity by intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats were responsible, and Obama and Biden may have known. A CIA memo notes Russians believed Hillary Clinton tried to stir up scandal to distract from her email server. The FBI allegedly shut down investigations into the Clinton Foundation and illegal contributions to Hillary's campaign from overseas. James Comey allegedly pushed to spy on the Trump campaign. The Obama administration allegedly prevented investigations into Hillary and greenlit fake investigations into Trump. Obama allegedly lied about not discussing pending investigations with the Attorney General or FBI director. The Biden administration allegedly obstructed the Durham report. The New York Times allegedly had meetings with the Clinton campaign. The Durham report is considered devastating to the FBI and exonerates Donald Trump to a degree. Some believe those involved should be prosecuted for misusing the CIA and FBI.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
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.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
- 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.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The Durham report allegedly reveals the Trump-Russia collusion story was a hoax known by Democrats, the FBI, the CIA, and Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton allegedly started the collusion story to distract from her email scandal, including a fabricated "pee tape" lie pinned on a Russian, conceived by DNC operative Charles Dolan. The FBI allegedly shut down investigations into the Clinton Foundation and Hillary's campaign taking illegal foreign contributions. James Comey allegedly pushed to spy on the Trump campaign, instructing people to not put anything in writing. Obama allegedly lied about his involvement in these investigations. The New York Times allegedly colluded with the Clinton campaign on stories, even seeking approval on drafts. The Biden administration allegedly obstructed the Durham report. While CNN acknowledged the report is devastating to the FBI and exonerates Trump to a degree, MSNBC claimed the report is a "big fat nothing." The speaker suggests the media believes they won because no one was jailed.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1, who was the CFO of Hillary Clinton's campaign, about facilitating payment for the Steele Dossier. Speaker 1 denies knowledge of it. Speaker 0 brings up John Podesta's involvement and accuses Speaker 1 of being aware of the campaign's payment for the dossier. Speaker 1 maintains that they were not aware. Speaker 0 criticizes Speaker 1 for not holding themselves to the same standard as private sector CFOs. Speaker 1 clarifies that the SEC's focus is on financial accuracy, not campaign payments. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 asking if Speaker 1 accurately paid for the dossier.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript states that Russia claimed to have very, very damaging information—high level DNC emails relating specifically to Hillary Clinton's physical and mental health and DNC leaders questioning whether, if elected, she would be capable of carrying out the duties of the presidency. Russia had this information. If they wanted to swing the election for Donald Trump, they would have released it in September or October 2016 at a pivotal time to swing momentum in Donald Trump’s direction and damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. They did not do that deliberately. They understood that Hillary Clinton would likely be the inevitable president of The United States. They didn’t think Trump could win like a lot of other people. And so they were withholding this damaging information about Hillary Clinton and planning to release it in the days or weeks leading up to her inaugurate expected inauguration in order to once again sow chaos within The United

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 says it's "preposterous that we were talking about Hillary Clinton's emails again in the year 2025," that "they get activated," and that Trump won't be blamed for not releasing the Epstein files, "We spent years on this story." Speaker 1 counters, "No. Let let me you you had to take this story seriously for years, and it was false. It wasn't false." He asserts that "When Trump won in 2016, the intel community concluded that Russia didn't have a hand in his victory," but "Obama determined and wanted a new conclusion," sending "Brennan" to "come up with a new collusion," and insists "There was no proof." They claim "They amplified a false conclusion that Trump colluded with Russia in 2016." He adds, "The Democrats never cared about Epstein until they saw a political motivation," while noting "the right is more on top of Epstein" and that "We actually cared," concluding with "Save me your selective outrage."

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
In early 2016, two Open Society Foundations officials allegedly held confidential talks with the Clinton campaign and the DNC, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Their objective was to promote the Trump-Russia collusion narrative and distract from Hillary Clinton's email and Clinton Foundation scandals. According to the transcript, Open Society executive Leonard Bernardo outlined a plan for strategic media manipulation using CrowdStrike, ThreatConnect, and Intel channels. CIA and FBI analysts reviewed the evidence and deemed the emails likely authentic. Despite this confirmation, the FBI allegedly did not follow through, allowing the trail to go cold. The speaker claims this was not a mistake but a cover-up.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
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.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The report details information Russia and Putin allegedly possessed regarding Hillary Clinton, including potential criminal acts. These acts include secret meetings between State Department officials and US religious organizations, where increased State Department financing was supposedly offered in exchange for supporting Clinton's presidential campaign. The report also mentions documents indicating State Department patronage towards employees supporting Clinton's campaign. High-level DNC emails allegedly revealed evidence of Clinton's "psycho-emotional problems," including uncontrolled anger, aggression, and cheerfulness, and claimed she was on a daily regimen of heavy tranquilizers. The report further alleges that CIA Director Brennan and the intelligence community mischaracterized intelligence and used substandard sources to create a false narrative that Putin had a "clear preference" for Trump.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript discusses a set of emails and intelligence claims regarding the 2016 U.S. election and the narratives surrounding Russia, Hillary Clinton, and the Trump campaign. It states that documents contain emails allegedly from the senior vice president of the George Soros Open Society Foundation. One email quotes a Clinton campaign adviser saying, “it will be a long term affair” and to “demonize Putin and Trump,” and adds that, “later, the FBI will put more oil into the fire.” Other emails are said to reveal that Hillary Clinton approved the idea of tying Trump and Russia to election interference, describing it as a scheme hoping the allegations would distract people from her own email scandal. The documents are presented as providing clear evidence that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was behind the Russia hoax, and that the FBI knew what the Clinton team was up to, acknowledging that the information they were receiving about the Trump campaign may have come from the Clinton camp. Despite these claims, the transcript asserts that the Obama-era intelligence community proceeded with a 2017 assessment concluding that Russia aspired to help Trump win the election.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The Durham appendix contains statements from figures like DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz suggesting Hillary Clinton's emails were deleted "just in time." Hillary Clinton's senior advisors allegedly suggested using the "Russia play" against Trump to diminish attention on Clinton's emails. Hillary Clinton herself allegedly approved a plan to heighten tensions around the "Russia hoax" to draw attention away from her email controversy. The documents also indicate President Obama was briefed on this before the election and initially wanted to avoid his legacy being tainted by Hillary Clinton's controversy. The narrative was allegedly intentionally used at the highest levels of power, with intelligence pointing to the use of foreign agents or assets to assist in undermining President Trump's candidacy and advancing Hillary Clinton into the presidency.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker anticipates the release of the classified annex of the John Durham report this week, possibly as early as Thursday. According to the speaker, President Trump agreed to declassify the annex, and John Radcliffe is in the process of doing so. The speaker claims the annex will provide "absolute emphatic evidence" that the FBI knew Hillary Clinton was behind the Russia collusion story, and that the FBI was using the Steele Dossier and people like ambassador Downer, who was a friend of the Clintons, as part of the dirty trick. The speaker asserts the annex will reveal how the Obama administration found out that Hillary Clinton had ordered this dirty trick. The speaker says everyone was in on it, and instead of stopping the abuse of the intelligence system, they played into it.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The Durham report is out, confirming the Trump-Russia collusion story was a Democrat-led hoax, with the FBI, CIA, and Obama knowing it all along. Hillary Clinton initiated the collusion narrative to deflect from her email scandal, fabricating the "pee tape" story involving a DNC operative in Russia. The FBI shut down investigations into the Clinton Foundation's foreign money laundering and illegal campaign contributions from overseas. Comey was eager to spy on the Trump campaign, instructing his team to avoid written records. The Obama administration obstructed investigations into Hillary while pushing fake investigations into Trump. The New York Times colluded with the Clinton campaign, even allowing them to review and approve stories. The Biden administration obstructed the Durham report, with FBI agents refusing to cooperate. Despite all this evidence, the media downplays the findings, as no one is being held accountable.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript discusses the Pizzagate conspiracy, stating that it claims Hillary Clinton and her former campaign manager John Podesta ran a child sex ring at a Washington, DC pizzeria. It asserts that this is a lie. The speaker adds a satirical remark about Chuck E. Cheese robots being the only ones trapped in a pizza place, and it references a Westworld-like scenario where robots might rise up, framing it as part of the broader, unfounded fear. The origin of the conspiracy is traced to alt-right readers who examined Clinton campaign emails hacked by Russia and published by WikiLeaks. They noticed more references to pizza and pizzerias than expected, and concluded that this signified a secret sexring. The speaker notes that “a lot of uninformed gullible people” believed the theory, providing Michael Flynn as an example of someone who amplified it. Flynn, who was Trump’s pick for national security adviser, tweeted: “new Hillary emails, money laundering, sex crimes with children, etcetera, must read,” as part of introducing or endorsing the narrative. The transcript emphasizes that the theory spread despite lacking corroborating evidence, highlighting the role of hacked emails and sensational interpretation by alt-right figures. The speaker adds a concluding retort: “Introducing it, you decide. Okay? Then I decide a guy who spreads this bull shouldn't be in charge of national security.” This serves as a final judgment within the dialogue on the appropriateness of promoting the conspiracy in a position of national security leadership. Key points highlighted include: - Pizzagate claims that Hillary Clinton and John Podesta operated a child sex ring at a DC pizzeria. - The assertion that this is a lie. - A satirical aside about robots at Chuck E. Cheese and a Westworld reference. - The alleged origin in hacked Clinton emails with increased pizza references found by alt-right circles, as published by WikiLeaks. - The spread of the theory among uninformed followers, with Michael Flynn cited as a notable promoter who linked “new Hillary emails, money laundering, sex crimes with children” to read. - A concluding stance that a promoter of this conspiracy should not hold a national security role.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The FBI's politicized hacks aimed to bring down Donald Trump, with the help of Hillary Clinton's campaign. The report revealed that Trump's political opponents provided leads for the investigation, relying on a fabricated dossier. While we reported on this, other media outlets downplayed it. Unfortunately, there were no consequences for those involved in the Crossfire Hurricane operation. In fact, they were emboldened and repeated their actions in 2022, this time protecting Hunter Biden.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
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

The Megyn Kelly Show

Did Schiff Approve Classified Info Leak, and Melt Down Over Trump's DC Fix, with Klavan and Solomon
Guests: Andrew Klavan, Benjamin Solomon
reSee.it Podcast Summary
Megyn Kelly opens with the DC crime debate and media reaction. She notes President Trump’s pledge to reduce crime in Washington, DC and contrasts coverage with other issues, describing a cycle where critics first deny crime, then invoke January 6th and race, and attack Trump as biased against black cities. She then introduces a bombshell: Cash Patel has released documents about how classified information was leaked and weaponized against Trump during his first term. She recalls Tulsi Gabbard’s disclosures alleging the Obama administration pressured intelligence to upplay Russia’s role, and claims that the initial assessment in December 2016 flipped after a meeting with Obama’s top staff, directing a new emphasis on Russia interference and collusion. According to Patel’s reporting, the December 8 briefing appeared to show limited Russia involvement, but by December 9 a new assignment instructed the IC to upplay Russia, with the resulting “homework” entering January 2017, aligning with Hillary Clinton’s aims to allege interference. The material asserts there was no supporting intelligence for Russia collusion, relying instead on the Steele dossier. Patel, in partnership with Just the News, presents a whistleblower who told the FBI he observed Adam Schiff approve leaks of classified information to the media, with reassurance that leakers would not be prosecuted. The whistleblower’s four FBI interviews, beginning in 2017 and continuing through 2022, form the 302 writeups released to reporter John Solomon. The FBI reportedly did not interview Schiff and the US attorney’s office declined to pursue. Solomon stresses a broader pattern: a cycle of protecting Democrats while pursuing Republicans. He compares the alleged leaks to earlier episodes in Hillary Clinton’s classified-email case, James Comey’s actions, and the broader Russia investigation, suggesting a persistent bias in prosecutions and leak investigations. The inspector general’s report is cited as questioning the whistleblower’s credibility while noting that two unnamed lawmakers were targeted by DOJ leak inquiries, though without evidentiary support for the allegations. The DOJ previously subpoenaed Apple data from Schiff and Swalwell, suggesting investigators looked at possible leaks. The conversation turns to practical questions: would a grand conspiracy toll the statute of limitations, and could the espionage act be used to extend time for willful leaks? Pam Bondi’s role as attorney general and whether she will pursue consequences is highlighted as pivotal. The segment closes with speculation that accountability may hinge on political and legal decisions in the weeks ahead, followed by Andrew Klavan’s assessment that Schiff’s actions echo McCarthyism, and a reflection on media coverage and the state of DC governance, including reactions to federal intervention and local crime data debates. The segment ends with Klavan weighing in on culture, the Sydney Sweeney ad controversy, and the state of woke Hollywood, before wrapping with sponsor plugs and a tease of tomorrow’s guests.
View Full Interactive Feed