Polling Shows More People Paying Attention to Russiagate – That’s Good News and Bad News


Posted originally on CTH on August 4, 2025 | Sundance 

Interestingly, yesterday I posited some random thoughts about accountability on Teh Twitter, noting that a few dozen random accounts know more about Russiagate individually than any person who has ever sat in a room with President Donald Trump.  [FWIW – The author of this story I’m highlighting agreed.]

Miranda Devine notes in a New York Post article (Murdoch publication), polling shows more people are following the declassification of Russiagate documents than ever before [READ HERE].  That’s both a good thing from the perspective of an enlarged awakening but also holds a serious downside if people are focused on the delivery of accountability.

The series of documents declassified by the DNI (Gabbard), CIA (Ratcliffe) and FBI (via Grassley) has not changed the arc of the story; but they have provided strong evidence to support what was already obvious.

Essentially: the Clinton Campaign and the U.S. Intelligence Community, particularly the FBI, conspired together to exonerate Clinton from her email scandal, and frame Donald Trump as a Russian asset to assist her election win in 2016.

Everyone who has walked the deep weeds of Russiagate/Spygate has essentially known this framework for seven or more years.  The DNI, CIA and FBI evidence is providing receipts for the operation as it unfolded.  The latest evidence has proven the conspiracy researchers accurate, and the corporate media participants who participated in the ruse are not happy.

Miranda Devine breaks down the data on who is following the story and what the releases have done to squash the defenses of those who tried to label the Clinton/FBI operation as conspiracy theory.  All of this is a very positive outcome and a greater percentage of the public are now aware.

However, there’s a downside as a result of those who are new to these discoveries.  Even more people are thirsting for accountability for the conduct, and those who are very familiar with the story are renewing expectations of criminal activity against the perpetrators of the fraud.

Those who carried out the operation did not leave a trail of signed documents outlining their misconduct.  There is no one single element of the very complicated story that provides a ‘gotcha’ moment.  Instead, there is an assembly of mounting evidence that showcases how the fraud was perpetrated.  Each document release adding more layers of corruption to the pile of fraud as it was manufactured.

The Clinton campaign knew what they were creating.  The Obama White House knew what was happening.  The CIA could see what the Clintons and her FBI/DOJ allies were assembling, and the FBI was a willful participant.  All of this is not refuted, despite the Gordion knot of plausible deniability they wrapped it in.

The problem for the Trump White House is not that Clinton and the IC collaborated to frame Donald Trump in 2016. The problem for the Trump White House in 2025, which now becomes a problem for the Dept of Justice, is that a large portion of the American public expect some form of legal accountability for it.

Absent of criminal liability, people with increased knowledge get angry at the lack of accountability.  Simultaneous with this increased knowledge, people are susceptible to the influence of outrage voices amplifying the criminal accountability demand.  It’s a precarious position for the White House and Dept of Justice.

If the Trump administration does not ‘punish’ the perpetrators, they run the risk of losing electoral support.  However, when you look carefully at how the fraud was perpetrated, the criminal aspect is a very challenging hurdle.

The overarching defense of the perpetrators pertains to the baseline of the fraud itself, which is, essentially, that candidate, then President-elect and eventually President Trump was compromised by Russia.

The Obama White House, FBI, CIA and aggregate IC claim they were investigating whether Donald Trump and members of his administration were taking action to the benefit of a foreign adversary, Russia.   Outwardly, President Obama famously warned his officials to make sure all things within their investigation were done “by the book.”

When the CIA or FBI failed to brief Trump-allied Republicans (ie. Devin Nunes), their justification is they were investigating something “sensitive” to the national security of the nation, and therefore unprecedented measures were taken.

Sure, you can argue the officials at the top of the CIA, FBI, DNI and DOJ knew Trump-Russia was nonsense, but how do you prove it… I mean, really prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.  Even with the mounting declassified releases, you end up in the Horowitz/Durham conundrum, saying “they should have known.” Unfortunately, that’s not criminal.

The CIA or FBI leadership lied to congress, misled congress or were “less than fulsome’ with congressional oversight.  Again, they fall back on the unprecedented approach and sensitive national security threat – that’s the shield.  Yes, we did not answer the question(s) accurately -even honestly- to the U.S. govt., because we were investigating the U.S. govt.

In these matters of potential national security compromise, the CIA can easily lie to congress and then claim the lie was necessary to protect the government against the threat, and the investigation thereof.  The ‘we had to lie’ scenario.

All of the players within the fraud end up carrying some form of plausible deniability, so long as the originating context for the investigation remains valid, even if it is tenuously valid.  Something akin to ‘we saw Russian intel intercepts outlining a potential plan by Clinton, but there was also the potential of the Trump-Russia collusion being real’, so we had to look into it…. and we did it, “by the book” where there was no “book” to guide us.

Those legal defenses, while frustrating to accept – and almost entirely based on lies, are valid and purposeful when outlined in legal proceedings.  Unfortunately, that legal defense seems to cover all of the 2015/2016 and even early 2017 participants.

Keep in mind, Inspector General Michael Horowitz conducted three investigations with only one criminal referral, Kevin Clinesmith.  [(1) IG investigation of Clinton emails. (2) IG investigation of FBI conduct in Clinton investigation, and (3) IG investigation of FISA abuse (Carter Page)].  Additionally, Special Counsel John Durham investigated the origin of Trump-Russia and was never able to penetrate any of the top names for criminal accountability.

All four of these extensive investigations end up as defensive legal shields against any indictment, and the media is already using them to full value.  Factually, all those previous investigations create significant “reasonable doubt.”

Intwined inside this legal Gordion knot is the problem for the current Dept of Justice.

Making matters worse still, in a little-known court filing, which has not had enough scrutiny, the President Trump DOJ told the FISA Court in July 2018 that predication for the investigation of Carter Page was valid [SEE HERE].

If the Donald Trump Dept of Justice was saying the warrant against Carter Page was legally valid in 2018, a full two years after the FBI began investigating the Trump-Russia collusion, then how can the Donald Trump 2025 Dept of Justice claim the investigation of Donald Trump was invalid.

We essentially watched any hopes for Russiagate legal liability melt as a result of that July 12, 2018, letter.  Which, stands on soapbox, is exactly why I was shouting about it when the letter was finally revealed FIVE YEARS AGO.

The Trump DOJ wrote the letter to the FISA Court after Inspector General Michael Horwowitz released his highly critical investigative findings into the Carter Page FISA application.  The Trump DOJ told the FISA Court that despite the information from Horowitz the application was properly predicated.   THIS IS IN 2018! 

Keep in mind this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018.  Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG; Christopher Wray was FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy, and Dana Boente was FBI chief-legal-counsel.

[SOURCE]

As you can see, there are a myriad of defenses for the Russiagate conspirators to draw from, including defenses directly from the Trump administration.  Which brings me to the final two points.

For President Trump the most dangerous part of this entire storyline is pushing an expectation that criminal indictments could be possible.  Instead, the possibility of criminal accountability is almost non-existent.  Expectations need to be managed. Because if people get their hopes up and then nothing happens the collapse in morale could be politically devastating.

I am open to hearing counter opinions established in solid framework; however, based on current evidence, from my perspective the only people who potentially show any signs of legal accountability are the ones who come along AFTER Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann begin their 2017 coverup operation.

The court of public opinion is the venue for the rest.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe Outlines Importance of Latest Declassified Documents


Posted originally on CTH on August 4, 2025 | Sundance 

CIA Director John Ratcliffe appears on Fox News with Trey Gowdy to discuss the latest batch of declassified documents that underpin the “Russia Collusion Hoax.”  Director Ratcliffe notes what the Durham Annex was about and why it matters.

Additionally, CIA Director Ratcliffe notes more documents will be coming out after declassification. WATCH:

.

The Durham Annex + AMA | Marlow | 8.2.2025


Posted originally on Rumble By Charlie Kirk show on: August, 2, 2025

The Biggest Cover-Up in American History? What You Need To Know About the Durham Annex


Posted originally on Rumble By Charlie Kirk show on: August, 2, 2025

The Durham Annex Just Exposed the Biggest Cover-Up in American History: Here’s What You Need to Know


Posted originally on Rumble By Charlie Kirk show on: August, 2, 2025

Heads Need to Roll: Alex Marlow on the Russia Hoax, Durham Annex, and Rigged 2020 Election


Posted originally on Rumble By Charlie Kirk show on: August, 2, 2025

Sunday Talks – Stephen Miller Is Outraged at Latest Russia Hoax Evidence


Posted originally on CTH on August 3, 2025 | Sundance

White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior Policy Advisor, Stephen Miller, appears for an interview with Maria Bartiromo.  Mr. Miller is outraged at the latest declassified evidence that provides evidence of how the intelligence apparatus was weaponized against Donald Trump 2016 through 2020 and beyond.

The outrage of Miller is righteous; however, the outrage of Miller also breaks down along partisan lines.  “One outrageous felony after another,” Mr. Miller explains.  WATCH:

The non-pretending take. Tulsi Gabbard was not really paying attention in ’17/’18 when each Trump-Russia granular detail was discovered. What she knew of it was surface level and suspect.

Fast forward… Tulsi Gabbard in 2025 is paying close attention. However, she (like almost all others) still has an overall information deficit; but the stuff she is discovering today seems enough by itself.

Think about what they don’t know: The SSCI stuff, the John McCain stuff, the Wolfe stuff, the Mueller/Weissmann stuff, the Waldman stuff, the Deripaska stuff, the Mifsud stuff, the Mary McCord stuff, the Michael Atkinson stuff and all the stuff Durham was not allowed to review.

Just the stuff they know looks bad, really bad. Yet, that’s the tip of the Iceberg…. AND that my friends is the problem.

Bartiromo has been trying to position herself outside the collateral damage blast circle for 3 weeks. She knows the “accountability” part will not happen, and she doesn’t want to go down with the ship of outrage sellers.  Her current presentation style is strategic. I don’t blame her.

All three branches of govt. (Legislative, Judicial and Executive), and the leadership of both political parties, actively, willfully and purposefully participated.

You cannot parse this one.

In 2016, Obama hated Trump and the professional Republicans hated Trump.  Just like the 2010-2012 Tea Party targeting, both the Democrat and Republican apparatus benefited.

The Trump-Russia conspiracy, took an all of government approach – including the Robert Mueller coverup. AND THAT reality is exactly why no one will be held accountable for it!

Remember, Democrats thirst for POWER. Republicans thirst for MONEY.

Democrats use money to get power. Republicans use power to get money.

Now, insert Russiagate.

Dems used money to create fraud. Republicans use the fraud to create money (current status).

That’s the frustrating circle we are stuck in.

We need a different approach.

Replace the truth managers.  Keep Tulsi, indict the system.

A much more confrontational approach.

A group of people who will stand up and call the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch out for their duplicity.

The system needs to be indicted, using very specific evidence.

Confront Republicans and Democrats by name, by committee, with intensity and purpose.

Rep. Crane: “This Is Another Nonprofit That I Believe Is A Cutout For The CIA.”


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannon’s War Room on: August 2, 2025

“It Certainly Doesn’t Send A Message That The Admin Or The Officials Are Taking This Seriously.” Paskal On Northern Mariana Island Governor Funeral


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannon’s War Room on: August 2, 2025

Disappointment with Trump Raising Serious Concerns Worldwide


Posted originally on Aug 2, 2025 by Martin Armstrong 

Trump 2023 v 2025

QUESTION: This may seem to be a conspiracy theory, but has a double been sent in to pretend he is Trump. The anti-ear old Trump has moved nuclear subs to the border of Russia, and the Telegraph reported that no president has ever played a game of nuclear brinkmanship. Trump looks different and much older since the election. I ask AI if someone could have cloned Trump. This is what it said:

“While theoretically possible, human cloning remains unlikely in the near future due to ethical and scientific barriers. However, advances in genetic engineering (like CRISPR) and biotechnology could change the landscape.”

KL

Brain Dead

ANSWER: I fully understand what your suspicions are. I have no rational explanation for the 180-degree turn on war and embracing Zelensky and blaming Putin for everything. It makes no sense. Some have said this is Trump’s ego taking over, where he thinks he is king of the mountain. I don’t think he has been cloned. It may be possible to clone someone as they have accomplished with animals. But they would not be able to catch up by aging it. I would say the only remote possibility would be a double. Granted, when you compare the photos from pre-2024 and 2025, Trump does look older. His hair is turning all grey/white. But that may be just part of the job – it tends to age you rapidly. Many presidents had dark hair and came out grey.

military_figure_war combatton

I have spoken to political contacts in DC, and I was told they are hearing the same thing from many people. This is the style of Trump and his ego of using his position against an opponent, but this is not negotiating a trade deal. This is World War III. The danger here is that this is the path to nuclear war rather than conventional warfare. If Trump were to commit troops to Ukraine, then something is seriously wrong, and I would have to question whether he is a double. This is not the Trump I knew in March 2020.

I have publicly stated that Trump is wrong. These types of discussions MUST be by phone, not in public. Once you take to the open press, you will NEVER be able to negotiate, for now your opponent cannot yield or look weak. This is the most fundamental law of diplomacy. I have dealt in geopolitics for decades. When Merkel publicly stated that she intentionally lied and never intended to implement the Minsk Agreement, I was stunned. Europe lost all credibility in any possible negotiation. You only make such a statement if you have ZERO intentions of a peaceful resolution and all you want is war.

Putin Trump Meeeting G20 2017

Here, Put’s response to Trump calling him crazy publicly showed that Putin understands diplomacy better than Trump. He rebutted, but without naming Trump specifically:

As for any disappointment felt by anyone, all disappointment stems from excessive expectations. That’s a well-known general rule.”  Putin noted that ending Russia’s aggression against Ukraine requires “serious discussions – not in public, but calmly, in the quiet of the negotiation process”.

Putin’s response was that of a dignified leader. Trump’s personal comment calling Putin “crazy” was a blow to diplomacy. This makes me wonder if Trump is being manipulated to sabotage any negotiation, leaving war as the ONLY alternative.

Putin said on Friday in response to Trump’s ultimatums that Moscow has begun production of its newest hypersonic missiles and reaffirmed plans to deploy them to Belarus later this year, posing a threat to neighbouring Ukraine and Europe. He publicly stated that the military already has selected deployment sites in Belarus for the Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missile.

8 1 2025 Telegraph Trump Nuclear brikmanship

As the Telegraph has pointed out: “Not even during the Cold War did a US president publicly move nuclear submarines towards Russian waters.”

8 1 25 Trump_Russia_nuclear_submarine_tension_escalation_World_War_III_fears_grow_as_T

I can’t even count all the emails coming in asking what the hell is going on with Trump. I will do a private post on what the computer has been showing. I really do not know. The computer has been forecasting that war tensions would begin during the last week of July. The monthly target has been August and September since the beginning of the year.

ECM Ukraine 8.6 R

The EU, US, UK, and Canada agreed on February 26, 2022, to remove select Russian banks from the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) messaging system as a sanction in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The disconnection of seven Russian banks—Bank Otkritie, Novikombank, Promsvyazbank, Bank Rossiya, Sovcombank, Vnesheconombank (VEB), and VTB Bank—took effect on March 12, 2022, as mandated by EU Council Regulation (EU) 2022/345. Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, was later removed from SWIFT as part of the EU’s sixth package of sanctions on June 14, 2022. Gazprombank was spared due to its role in energy payments, reflecting Europe’s reliance on Russian gas.

BRICS Currency

Nonetheless, this served to intensify the incentive to expand BRICS for geopolitical gamemanship. BRICS was formed in 2006 as BRIC, with Brazil, Russia, India, and China holding their first summit on June 16, 2009, in Yekaterinburg, Russia. South Africa joined in 2010, making it BRICS, with the first expanded summit on April 14, 2011. South Africa saw BRICS as a platform to enhance trade and investment ties with major emerging economies. Joining BRICS elevated South Africa’s global diplomatic stature, giving it a seat at the table with significant powers. Membership provided access to BRICS initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB), established in 2014, which funds infrastructure and sustainable development projects. China, a key BRICS member, actively supported South Africa’s inclusion to expand the group’s geographic and political reach, particularly into Africa. The US foreign policy has been usurped by the Neocons, like Bliken, and as a result, they have interfered in the world economy for geopolitical power reasons – not economic. This is why after 2032 the financial capital of the world will move to China because the Neocons are only interested in power at the expense of the American people, rule of law, and economy.

When we look at the first turning point on the ECM Wave of the Ukraine Russia War, we come to the typical myopic view of Neocons and how they only look at their objective in front of their nose and nothing else. It was right on schedule when U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken issued his warnings to China about its support for Russia’s military efforts in Ukraine during his visit to Beijing on April 24–26, 2024. He specifically stated publicly on April 26, 2024, in an interview with NPR, that the U.S. had already taken action against over 100 Chinese entities with sanctions and export controls and was prepared to take further measures if China did not curb its supply of dual-use items to Russia. This included machine tools, microelectronics, and optics, which were aiding Russia’s defense industry. Blinken emphasized that China’s actions were “helping fuel the biggest threat” to European security since the Cold War. That is really NATO, but he warned, “If China does not address this problem, we will.” Similar concerns were raised during his meetings with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and President Xi Jinping, where he stressed that China’s support for Russia’s defense industrial base threatened both Ukraine and broader European security.

2 12 25 Trump says call highly productive

Donald Trump initiated direct peace negotiations with Vladimir Putin concerning the Russia-Ukraine conflict shortly after his second-term inauguration on January 20, 2025. Specifically, on February 12, 2025, Trump held a phone call with Putin, which he described as “highly productive” on Truth Social. This marked the beginning of direct engagement between Trump and Putin on this issue, with further talks facilitated through intermediaries and meetings, such as those in Istanbul in May 2025.

5 16 25 Istanbul Talks Fail

That turning point of May 15th was the precise day of the peace talks in Istanbul. The talks failed that very day. Ukraine wanted a 30-day unconditional cease-fire, which it would have used to replenish its troops, and Russia insisted it had to pull its troops out of the. Ukraine refused, Russia’s chief negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, reportedly threatened to seize even more:

5 25 25 Putin is Crazy

Donald Trump called Vladimir Putin “crazy” on May 25, 2025, in response to Russia’s massive drone and missile attacks on Ukrainian cities, which were described as the largest aerial assault of the Russia-Ukraine war. Trump made these remarks in a Truth Social post, stating, “He has gone absolutely CRAZY!” and earlier that day told reporters,“I don’t know what the hell happened to Putin,” expressing frustration over Putin’s escalation despite ongoing peace negotiations.

5 26 25 Trump_calls_Putin_absolutely_crazy

Putin keeps taking the high road and has not lowered himself to name-calling. Trump’s guy Steven Witkoff spoke positively of Vladimir Putin. He called Putin a “great guy” and “super smart“. Witkoff said, “I liked him, I think he was honest,” and “I don’t regard Putin as a bad guy” (see https://www.newsweek.com/steve-witkoff-ukraine-ceasefire-russia-mistake-regions-annexed-vladimir-putin-2049224). All my sources, including people who have met with Putin face to face, all say the same thing. He is one of the smartest men they have ever met. Even Bill Clinton said the same thing.

Putin is very Smart

The media has lied to start EVERY SINGLE WAR because that is what they are there for. Even Tulsi Gabbard found that the CIA project Mockingbird is still active, where the recruited journalists spread their lies. Here is the release of papers to dispel the lies that Putin was an Oligarch. I was in the middle of the plot to seize Russia in 2000, which brought Putin to Power, after I was told that they were blackmailing Yeltsin, demanding he appoint their stooge Boris Berezovsky as the new head of Russia. I know what the scam was, and everything the press says has been an outright lie.

CLINTON Putin Was NOT ‘Chosen’ by the Oligarchs

We will address the computer as it forecasts an array of markets that are all anticipating war from now on. Unintended consequences and misjudgments have often triggered wars. A prime example is World War I. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914 was meant to advance Serbian nationalist goals, but it spiraled into a global conflict due to a web of alliances and miscalculations. That still exists with NATO today, which pounds its chest claiming it can defeat Russia conventionally because if every NATO member sent in their troops, Russia could be wrecked. That assumes no nukes.

Another case is the Iraq War in 2003. The U.S. invasion, based on faulty intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, aimed to neutralize a perceived threat but led to unintended consequences like regional instability, the rise of insurgent groups, and prolonged conflict. Misjudgments about Iraq’s internal dynamics and the feasibility of nation-building fueled chaos that lasted years.

HAS TRUMP LOST HIS MIND?

The only possible upside of this insane rhetoric is that perhaps the Europeans will get off their ass and demand political change among their leaders, or there may be no TV to watch next year. Has Trump realized that Europe will NEVER accept peace with Russia, so he is pretending to join them for World War III? This is the best possible outcome. Otherwise, I would avoid the major cities and all the military targets. In a nuclear war, you first target your opponent’s military assets. Second, you target the economic assets. Third, you seek to wipe out the major population centers.