Obama Faked Trump-Russia Narrative and Almost Got Away With It

 

This week in the news, the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, made a discovery that she has documents, under her purview, that are pertinent to the so-called Russian collusion hoax of 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018.

Remember what that was? During the campaign between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2015 and 2016, there were allegations that Donald Trump was enlisting Russian President Vladimir Putin to disparage or hurt Hillary Clinton for his benefit.

That charge was never substantiated. Special counsel Robert Mueller—after Donald Trump was elected—spent 22 months and $40 million and found no evidence that Donald Trump was directly involved in any Russian escapade to throw the election.

But here’s the two new sources of discovery. The first is that, apparently, the Dutch intelligence had tapped into Russian intelligence, unknowingly to the Russians. And they were concerned that they were being accused of colluding with Donald Trump by the Hillary Clinton campaign. And yet, they had intelligence that Hillary Clinton had actually hired—and we know now that that was true—through the paywalls of the Democratic National Committee, the Perkins Coie law firm, the Fusion GPS political operation, to give money to Christopher Steele for this so-called Steele dossier that was proven to be fraudulent and the source of this entire hoax.

So, here’s the point. That had been completely proven false, both by the Mueller investigation—saw that no credible—but the intelligence agencies, one of these 18 or all of them or some of them, knew from information from the Dutch that there was no validity.

But here’s the second thing. Apparently, John Brennan and James Clapper, maybe or not James Comey, the head of the FBI, also knew from their own intelligence teams, when they were trying to act on this information and prepare it for digestion by Barack Obama, the lame-duck president, who was on his way out, they said:

Wow. All of the people who are investigating this Russian collusion, it’s pretty clear there was no Russian collusion. They may have wanted to tamper in or troll or get on the, you know, websites, like the Chinese have done. But there was no evidence, according to our subordinates, our intelligence chiefs of these subdivisions, and Tulsi Gabbard, remember, oversees some of these well beyond the FBI or the CIA, there’s no evidence that our team can find any evidence.

Now, what’s Tulsi Gabbard upset about? That was known to John Brennan. That was known to James Clapper. That was probably known to the FBI. But they have notes, they have information that when they prepared this digest daily, weekly digest of intelligence updates to lame-duck Barack Obama in 2016 and into 2017, he ignored it. He did not want to hear that. He wanted more information pertaining to Donald Trump and the Russians colluding. It was almost like, you find me the crime and I’ll give you the criminal.

And so, what did Brennan and Clapper allegedly do? They reversed the opinion of their own intelligence subordinates. And they crafted or fabricated after the election, remember that? After the November 2016 election. And then, according to the wishes of Barack Obama, they created an intelligence falsehood, a false narrative, a fake narrative, that Donald Trump, now the president-elect, soon to elect office, had been colluding with the Russians.

And we know what happened after that. They destroyed the career of Michael Flynn. We got these false charges that Trump was Putin’s asset or puppet. Jeff Sessions foolishly, but tragically, appointed Robert Mueller, who was an intimate of James Comey and many of the intelligence chiefs. His team, the “All-Stars,” as they were called, they were pretty partisan. Remember Andrew Weissmann and all that mess? That went on for 22 months, $40 million. I think it’s fair to say it nearly wrecked the first two years of the Trump administration. And I think Tulsi Gabbard is making the allegation that was by design.

We couldn’t stop him with a Steele fake dossier. Hillary couldn’t stop him. Nobody could stop him during the campaign. But Barack Obama, allegedly, by Tulsi Gabbard’s conjectures, said, “We can stop his presidency. So, you guys go back, ignore what your subordinates are saying, when they found no evidence, and ignore foreign intelligence that found no evidence. Just get me a narrative that Donald Trump is colluding with the Russians and we’ll spread it.”

And spread it they did. And it nearly destroyed Donald Trump.

Is it serious? If it’s credible, then you have a conspiracy of the top people in the United States intelligence and investigative communities conspiring with a sitting president of the United States to destroy the administration of his opponent, successor, Donald J. Trump.

Trump Sends So-Called Experts Reeling After Historic First 6 Months

 

In this first six months of the Trump administration, we’ve entered unknown territory. I guess the best way to term it is there are a lot of known unknowns. We’re doing things we’ve never done before. And our experts think they can predict it, but they’ve been wrong.

Let’s take some examples. Usually, tariffs are not a source of revenue because traditional economic orthodoxy says that whatever revenue they generate, they decrease gross domestic product by inflicting attacks on goods. But yet, we don’t know what the profit margin is in these countries. And perhaps the tariffs are not resulting in rising prices. At least they haven’t in May and June.

Which suggests, again, that the Germans or the South Koreans or the Chinese were making so much money by exporting to the United States, while protecting their own industry and piling up surpluses, that they could pay tariffs and still remain in our market at a cost-competitive profit.

The result is that we’re getting $26 billion a month and higher. No one anticipated that. Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary, said, “In theory, the year could end with a third of a trillion dollars—$330 billion.” That’s almost 5% of our revenue is coming from tariffs, which we’d thought would be impossible.

Another impossibility is usually we’re running a $2 trillion debt. That’s what we were usually told by people. But in the month of May, there were more federal revenues than there were debits. And that was a result of the Department of Government Efficiency cuts and the tariffs and the seasonal increase in federal revenues that come through taxation and other charges against the private sector.

Everybody said, “Well, May’s always a good month. It’s the one good month of the year.” But we haven’t had a surplus since 2017 in any month, which is kind of strange if we’re going to run this huge $2 trillion budget deficit. And while we’re discussing it, more money is coming in than going out. And we have this known unknown about tariffs. Then something’s up. And that something’s up is amplified.

When we look at the foreign investment, we were told, $4 trillion, $6 trillion, $8 trillion. That’s a phenomenal number. Nobody has ever had $8 trillion of foreign investment in the United States in one year. The secretary of interior, Doug Burgum, says to us now that the actual income or amount or capital investment from foreign sources of various statuses could be $15 trillion. Economists have ratios for each billion dollars in foreign investment, depending on the nature of the foreign investment, the jobs created. If this were true, it’s a phenomenal number.

He also said something that was quite striking. That the value of U.S. assets that have been untapped—natural gas, coal, oil, timber, rare earth minerals—is somewhere between $100 trillion and $200 trillion.

Now, we don’t want to exploit and plunder our countryside, but it’s something to think about, that if we were not buying rare earth minerals from China—and we probably may not be—or we had a mechanism to tap our coal and use it cleanly to help generate the electricity for artificial intelligence.

This is unusual. This is crazy: $15 trillion of foreign investment, $200 trillion of unrealized assets. And remember that the $15 trillion is coming from people who were not willing to do that prior to President Donald Trump. They’re doing it in fear of tariffs.

There’s a couple of other things, and that is the military was short anywhere—depending on who you talked to—45,000 to 65,000 recruits. They could only get 50% of their benchmarks. A year ago, at this time, about 50%, only about half of the people were enlisting. But when they changed the ad campaigns, and they said they were no longer going to prejudice recruits for tenure promotion, enlistment, advancement, etc. by their race or gender, and they were going to stress battle efficacy, all of a sudden, recruitment soared.

Nobody thought you could do it in six months. But in less than six months, the military went from, “We’re short 50%. We don’t know what to do. Maybe it’s gangs. Maybe it’s tattoos. Maybe it’s drug use. Maybe it’s obesity. Maybe we’re competing—” to, “I don’t know what happened but all these people have enlisted.” And we all know what happened. They stress what the military is for in their ads and communications. And they got what they wanted.

And there’s one other final thing that’s inexplicable. We were letting in up to 10,000 illegal immigrants a day for over a four-year period. It’s controversial how many in total came. But it could be from 8 million to 12 million.

So when Donald Trump said he was going to offer a self-deportation, you get a thousand dollars, you get your way paid for, and you can apply for legal immigration at some future date—if you don’t do this, you’re disqualified for 10 years. And then the “Big, Beautiful Bill” will continue the wall. He put pressure on Mexico to enforce its own borders, to stop this trek northward.

We could go through all the things he has done. But we all thought that maybe he could reduce it from 10,000 to 2,000, maybe to 1,000. I thought maybe, “Wow. If he does all this, if he actually forces people and he creates a new deterrence, he might get only 500.” Some months, there’s nobody; 126 people I think it was in May. This is phenomenal.

There is no illegal immigration right now, as we speak. That frees the Border Patrol and the new agents that’ll come online and the new Big, Beautiful Bill to round up the 10 million, starting with the 500,000 criminals that former President Joe Biden let in.

Add it all up and the orthodoxy, the conventional wisdom about tariffs, about foreign investment, about our assets that are unrealized, about military recruitment, about illegal immigration, they’ve all gone with the wind. We’re in new territory. All the perceived wisdom is ignorance. And nobody knows what is what, except we’re in a very exciting period.

If $9 trillion represents the market capitalization of all of Silicon Valley, you can imagine what $10 trillion to $15 trillion would do to this country. It’s like bringing a new Silicon Valley—in total, one and a half of them—and plopping them down. And when you add in robotics and AI and the efficiency in government regulation, through these cuts and fast-tracking permits, we don’t know where we are, but we might be on the verge of an economic boom.

New Evidence Suggests Trump-Russia Collusion Was an Obama Setup

 

here’s news about Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s release of documents, alleging that then-President Barack Obama and our top intelligence head had conspired to create a false narrative that Donald Trump was, essentially, a Russian asset. And that that effort not only had damaged his 2016 campaign, it had damaged his transition to the presidency and his presidency itself in the first 22 months of the Mueller investigation.

And there’s new information coming out all the time. Essentially, the new narrative says that despite all the references to “17 intelligence authorities” that had confirmed a Trump-Putin collusion, there was no such consensus.

Now, we have had the Devin Nunes House Intelligence Committee majority report. We’ve had Michael Horowitz’s inspector general’s report. We have had various congressional, Senate and House committees report. And we’ve had the long John Durham special investigation.

And while there’s some disagreement that the Russians tried to do this or tried to interfere—and let’s be candid, the Chinese and the Russians always try to interfere—there was never any evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump colluded to throw the election to Donald Trump.

And what’s new, as I said earlier, is that foreign intelligence tapped into the Russians. And they were baffled that they were being falsely accused. That might’ve had ramifications for our strategic relationship with Russia. Not that they’re not adversaries, but they’re kind of confused that we were using the same type of skullduggery that they do. And that undermined the high moral ground vis-a-vis Ukraine and other flashpoints with the Russians.

But it all boils down to this Dec. 9 meeting of 2016. Remember, Donald Trump had won the election. Barack Obama was going out. His intelligence heads and others at this meeting—John Brennan, CIA director; James Clapper, director of national intelligence; and James Comey, FBI director; surrounded by Susan Rice, national security adviser; Loretta Lynch, attorney general, etc.—they reported to Barack Obama, who would be out of office in six weeks.

And they said to him, “Here is the intelligence update.” And the intelligence update was, contrary to media reports and contrary to Hillary Clinton, these 17 subordinate intelligence authorities had not found evidence, either in the campaign or during the transition, that Donald Trump was colluding. And so, that’s what they reported.

They said that Barack Obama—or they have leaked that, or the documents, handwritten notes suggest that Barack Obama did not accept that, but said, “No, we don’t want that assessment. We want an assessment that he did collude.” In other words, in Soviet Beria fashion: “Find me the crime and I have the criminal to insert into that false narrative.”

And they also were reporting, at various times, that, as I said, foreign intelligence sources thought that the Russians had no reason to lie, internally, in their internal communications. And they were baffled.

So, what’s new about it? What’s new is Barack Obama was confronted with this. And he’s basically said, “This is beneath the dignity of the president. This is nonsense. This is crazy. I don’t have to reply to any of this.”

Why didn’t he just say the following?

I, Barack Obama, when I was president, in the last few weeks of my term, I had a regularly scheduled intelligence committee meeting. People came in, of various branches, and they gave me an assessment. And it said that there was no evidence—as the media had alleged and as the Steele dossier had alleged and as James Comey, who was in the room, had earlier alleged when he contacted Christopher Steele—that there was any Russian collusion. And when I heard that, I was dumbfounded. So, I just simply disagreed with them. And I said, ‘Well, this is important. Go back and find other things.’

Instead, he just completely denies it.

But the problem is that, as I’m speaking, there’s going to be new information. And these other subordinate intelligence directors that work variously for Clapper or Brennan are going to come forward in saying, “We found nothing. Clapper knew it. Brennan knew it.” And what will Clapper and Brennan say? That “we knew it, but we lied,” or, “We knew it and they told us to—Obama told us to lie,” or, “He lied. We lied.”

It’s not going to be pretty.

Will they ever go to court? No. I don’t think that they will be indicted because the so-called administrative state takes care of its own.

But this had a lot of ramifications. It undermined confidence in our elections. It tried to disrupt the campaign of Donald Trump. It tried to erode his transition. And it tried to sabotage his presidency.

And when we were dealing with Russia, our nuclear adversary, on Ukraine, we didn’t get anywhere, in part because Donald Trump could not be a force in opposition to Putin because he was under constant allegations from Clapper and Brennan—now as MSNBC and CNN contributors—that he was a Russian asset, that he was a Russian puppet.

So, they kept advancing this false narrative, even after they left office, and it undermined the credibility of an American president to conduct foreign policy with Putin. And I think Putin’s concluded: “These guys are just as bad as we are. They lie. They lie. I am not going to negotiate with them.” And the rest is history, as is amplified by the Ukraine war.

Very sorted incident—worse than Watergate, worse than Iran-Contra, worse than Monica Lewinsky. A scandal whose dimensions we can’t even imagine. But we’re going to learn a lot more. But don’t expect any of these people to face the justice that they deserve.

$2.5B Fed Cover-Up? Jerome Powell Accused of Lying As White House Demands Site Visit

 

According to White House Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell offered a private tour to his group at 7 p.m. on Friday, well outside regular hours and during a time when no so-called “renovations” were taking place. The move raises serious concerns and fuels growing worries about transparency and accountability at the Fed. With $2.5 billion in taxpayer dollars reportedly allocated for renovations, Americans deserve answers, not secretive tours and dodged questions.

Blair called for an immediate site visit, stating, “They should show us all the revisions and just let us see what’s actually going on—and whether what Chair Powell told the Senate Banking Committee is even true.” He questioned the staggering cost of the Federal Reserve’s headquarters renovation, which is reportedly more than double the per-square-foot cost of any other historic building project. Blair also highlighted that the price tag is 25 percent higher than what it cost to build the entire U.S. Capitol, despite the Capitol being five times larger and accommodating five times as many staff.

On Friday, during an interview, Pulte criticized Powell, saying that he is "sitting there like an obnoxious, arrogant, pompous person, saying I'm gonna keep these rates high." He called for Powell to resign, arguing that he sees inflation where it doesn't exist. 

"He goes into a room, he sees a ghost, and nobody else sees the ghost, which is that tariffs cause inflation," Powell said. "He's a bad guy. There's gonna be more coming out." 

This follows comments from Pulte, who stated that several members of Congress may issue criminal referrals against Jerome Powell after he allegedly lied about the $2.5 billion “renovation” of the Federal Reserve building.

Watch Out: Texas Democrat Pushes Views That Clearly Contradict Clear Biblical Teachings

 

A Texas House Democrat is claiming that there’s no biblical basis for Christians to oppose abortion. The lawmaker’s comments reflect a growing trend on the Left to twist or dismiss Scripture to justify its radical pro-abortion policies. However, for millions of Christians, the Bible is clear that life is sacred, and it begins in the womb. 

During an appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast, Texas House Democrat and self-described pastor James Talarico claimed there’s no biblical or historical foundation for Christians to oppose abortion or traditional marriage. Talarico argued that Christian beliefs against abortion and same-sex marriage are not rooted in Scripture but are instead modern political constructs—remarks that are already drawing backlash from faith-based conservatives who say his views distort core Christian teachings.

"So this idea that to be a Christian means you have to be anti gay and anti abortion... There really is no historical, theological, or biblical basis for that opinion," Talarico said. 

However, it is clearly stated in the Bible, under Jeremiah 1:5, that "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

The self-proclaimed “devout” Christian is openly pro-choice, having sponsored legislation to restore abortion access and push the issue to a statewide referendum. He has fiercely criticized Texas’s pro-life laws, claiming they’re about “controlling women” rather than protecting life. Additionally, he has opposed efforts to require the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, arguing that such measures violate the separation of church and state