@no1marauder saidAccording to documents declassified this week, Obama’s intelligence team rushed to produce the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), a key pillar of the Trump–Russia probe, despite lacking empirical evidence. The ICA falsely claimed Russia sought to elect Trump—a conclusion House Intelligence investigators found contradicted by evidence that Vladimir Putin actually expected Clinton to win and intended to exploit her health and political vulnerabilities later.
He lied to the FBI, admitted he lied and admitted those lies were material to the investigation.
No "railroading" at all.
The dossier paid for by Clinton’s campaign, which included unverified claims of Trump’s “golden showers” with Russian agents, was inserted into the ICA at Brennan’s urging, despite being labeled “highly problematic” by intelligence officials. Congressional testimonies revealed top Obama aides had no evidence of collusion, conspiracy, or coordination between Trump associates and Russia. Even former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director Brennan and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted under oath they had “no direct empirical evidence” of Russian collusion with Trump but still advanced the narrative publicly.
https://www.newstarget.com/2025-07-26-docs-show-obama-aides-orchestrated-russia-hoax.html
1 edit
@Metal-Brain saidDude, there's no reason whatsoever to trust the opinion of some writer over at "newstarget.com" to tell you what were the conclusions of the intelligence committee investigation of this. They published all of it (except the last bit that was previously classified). You can read the whole thing. Republicans and Democrats agreed to the final report conclusions and signed the document. You can even read the transcripts of all the dozens of interviews that they conducted.
According to documents declassified this week, Obama’s intelligence team rushed to produce the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), a key pillar of the Trump–Russia probe, despite lacking empirical evidence. The ICA falsely claimed Russia sought to elect Trump—a conclusion House Intelligence investigators found contradicted by evidence that Vladimir Putin actuall ...[text shortened]... licly.
https://www.newstarget.com/2025-07-26-docs-show-obama-aides-orchestrated-russia-hoax.html
That report found the Russians interfered in our 2016 election to hurt Secretary Clinton and help the candidacy of Donald Trump. The purpose of this effort by Russia was to destabilize US democracy. It worked.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/2020/08/18/publications-report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures/
https://democrats-intelligence.house.gov/russiainvestigation/
@wildgrass saidThe writers are from US intelligence. Don't kill the messenger.
Dude, there's no reason whatsoever to trust the opinion of some writer over at "newstarget.com" to tell you what were the conclusions of the Senate intelligence committee investigation of this. They published all of it (except the last bit that was previously classified). You can read the whole thing. Republicans and Democrats agreed to the final report conclusions and sign ...[text shortened]... tes-senate-russian-active-measures/
https://democrats-intelligence.house.gov/russiainvestigation/
@Metal-Brain saidWhy would someone from US intelligence write about "new evidence" while referring to a document that was publicly released in 2020?
The writers are from US intelligence. Don't kill the messenger.
@no1marauder said
You're going to be disappointed with this nothingburger.
Ron Wyden, the Democratic senator from Oregon who is the ranking Democrat on the Senate finance committee, told the New York Times that four major banks had “flagged more than $1.5bn in transactions – including thousands of wire transfers for the purchase and sale of artwork for rich friends, fees paid to Mr Epstein by wealthy individuals, and payments to numerous women”.
Nothing to see here. Trump says its a hoax.
Any idea why the money hasn't been followed through to link Epstein's friends to these crimes?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/24/what-are-jeffrey-epstein-documents-trump
@wildgrass saidThere's two different reports. The one you are referencing was the unanimous product of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The one Gabbard is relying on was a partisan one from the House Intelligence Committee. The main difference being that the pure Republican one from the House rejected the idea that Putin was interfering with the US election to help Trump. https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/5416183-gabbard-releases-new-documents-on-2016-election/
Dude, there's no reason whatsoever to trust the opinion of some writer over at "newstarget.com" to tell you what were the conclusions of the intelligence committee investigation of this. They published all of it (except the last bit that was previously classified). You can read the whole thing. Republicans and Democrats agreed to the final report conclusions and signed the ...[text shortened]... tes-senate-russian-active-measures/
https://democrats-intelligence.house.gov/russiainvestigation/
@no1marauder saidAha that explains it. It's still 5 years old though. There's nothing new.
There's two different reports. The one you are referencing was the unanimous product of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The one Gabbard is relying on was a partisan one from the House Intelligence Committee. The main difference being that the pure Republican one from the House rejected the idea that Putin was interfering with the US election to help Trump. https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/5416183-gabbard-releases-new-documents-on-2016-election/
Ultimately it is true that Russian interference was intended to destabilize democracy. They just thought that promoting Trump was the best way to do that, because Trump's an idiot.
This is all old news. Tulsi is just regurgitating old reports and at the same time repacking it to seem like something extremely disturbing to distract FoxNews from Epstein.
@wildgrass saidIt should be noted that even the House report conceded that Russia interfered with the 2016 election. It's first sentence:
Aha that explains it. It's still 5 years old though. There's nothing new.
Ultimately it is true that Russian interference was intended to destabilize democracy. They just thought that promoting Trump was the best way to do that, because Trump's an idiot.
This is all old news. Tulsi is just regurgitating old reports and at the same time repacking it to seem like something extremely disturbing to distract FoxNews from Epstein.
" In 2015, Russia began engaging in a covert influence campaign aimed at the U.S. presidential election. The Russlan government, at the direction of President Vladimir Putin, sought to sow discord in American society and undermine our faith In the democratic process. "
https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/final_russia_investigation_report.pdf
p. viii
1 edit
@wildgrass saidDisappointedly for MB, even Devin Nunes' boys agreed that Russia hacked the DNC and gave the emails to Wikileaks:
Aha that explains it. It's still 5 years old though. There's nothing new.
Ultimately it is true that Russian interference was intended to destabilize democracy. They just thought that promoting Trump was the best way to do that, because Trump's an idiot.
This is all old news. Tulsi is just regurgitating old reports and at the same time repacking it to seem like something extremely disturbing to distract FoxNews from Epstein.
"(U) While the intelligence case for attribution to Russia is significant, alternative
scenarios have been examined to include an insider threat or another cyber actor. No credible evidence was found supporting either alternative, including a review of information contained in classified intelligence reports.
{U) Finding #8: Russian-state actors and third-party intermediaries were responsi
ble for the dlssemination·of documents and communications stolen from U.S. po
litical organizations.
(U} Russlan-state actors and third party intermediaries were responslble for the selective dissemination of information from hacked U.S. political systems. This represents a "significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort" In Russia's "longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order." It is therefore likely that high-level Russian government approval was required in both planning and execution of the operation. 10
at p. 28
AND:
"(U) Wikileaks played a key role in Russia's malign influence campaign and served
as a third party intermediary for Russian intelligence during the period leading up to the 2016 U.S.· presidential election.
at p. 30
https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/final_russia_investigation_report.pdf
@wildgrass saidWho said it was new evidence?
Why would someone from US intelligence write about "new evidence" while referring to a document that was publicly released in 2020?
@no1marauder saidAssange said it was not Russia and implied it was Seth Rich. I know all democrats want to believe he lied, but he really had no incentive to lie.
Disappointedly for MB, even Devin Nunes' boys agreed that Russia hacked the DNC and gave the emails to Wikileaks:
"(U) While the intelligence case for attribution to Russia is significant, alternative
scenarios have been examined to include an insider threat or another cyber actor. [b]No credible evidence was found supporting either alternative, including a review of ...[text shortened]... ]
at p. 30
https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/final_russia_investigation_report.pdf
There is no evidence Russia colluded with Trump to interfere in the election. Sharing poll data is not election interference. Poll data is only useful to the campaign, not foreign governments.
All you have are opinions from politicians and such. No actual evidence. That is why you keep resorting to "even so and so said" crap. You have no evidence.
@Metal-Brain saidTulsi gabbard said Obama committed treason but her own political party said no wrongdoing 5 years ago.
Who said it was new evidence?
1 edit
@wildgrass saidIt could have been one of 15 things. You make a big deal out of why he went.? Why not? It’s legal.
Trump's personal lawyer with no experience on the case interviewed ghislaune Maxwell last week with no other witnesses present and no agenda.
Are y'all cool with that in MAGA-land?
It was either a bribe or a publicity stunt. I don't see any other explanation.
Looks like clapper Brennan Comey and Hillary committed crimes. Obama the mob boss. We can investigate criminals, so can you. You find out about the Epstein matter and we will find out about the Obama conspiracy. I see no fault with any of that.
Don’t you think that we can be adult adults and get to the bottom of both cases? I think we have a better chance of proving our point than you do, since nothing has ever turned up on Trump in many years of knowing about his joining Epstein junkets.
@AverageJoe1 saidOver 7 years long and 1,000 pages of declassified bipartisan reports on taxpayer funded investigations concluding no wrongdoing by Obama in Russia gate and y'all ain't had enough yet?
It could have been one of 15 things. You make a big deal out of why he went.? Why not? It’s legal.
Looks like clapper Brennan Comey and Hillary committed crimes. Obama the mob boss. We can investigate criminals, so can you. You find out about the Epstein matter and we will find out about the Obama conspiracy. I see no fault with any of that.
Don’t you t ...[text shortened]... ince nothing has ever turned up on Trump in many years of knowing about his joining Epstein junkets.
Epstein though. Very mysterious. He trafficked over a thousand women. Those women have named names of the involved criminals but no charges filed. No investigations whatsoever. Not a single leaked document other than bill Clinton's painting.