tick tock the walls are closing in, some cons say. i'd say that the odds of anything earth-shattering are small but about to be released documents will put the Hoax into much deeper context. it will be another decade or so before the normies and media concede what happened.

https://x.com/DNIGabbard/status/1946271402971312514

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114088)

https://theothermccain.com/2025/07/19/to-cap-an-action-packed-week-of-winning-tulsi-nukes-russiagate/

https://twitchy.com/aaronwalker/2025/07/18/breaking-tulsi-gabbard-report-declassified-evidence-of-obama-admin-effort-to-subvert-trumps-first-term-n2415866

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114374)

https://x.com/krassenstein/status/1946557531238683010?s=46

https://x.com/krassenstein/status/1946291971913662844?s=46

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114384)

there is no doubt that Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Rice, Yates, and others pushed a phony theory for partisan ends. Obama has been carefully insulated from direct evidence so far but if you're not partisan you have to believe that Obama knew it was bullshit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114398)

“Gabbard’s claims run counter to a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation that found Russia interfered in the 2016 election and noted that although Trump’s contact with Russian officials presented a “grave” intelligence threat, it was not clear if the president’s allies knowingly worked with Russia to bolster Trump’s chances of victory.”

“A 2019 report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller also found Russia interfered in the election.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2025/07/18/with-trump-under-scrutiny-over-epstein-tulsi-gabbard-calls-for-prosecution-of-obama-era-officials/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114401)

i don't have time to respond more fully right now, but you are conflating two very different things -- which is the standard ploy since the Russia Collusion Hoax was exposed as Hillary's fraudulent creation.

did the Russians attempt to influence the election? yes, apparently so, although (1) every major nation on earth tries to influence US elections and (2) the actual steps Russia took and the impact of those steps is disputed and in my view is wildly exaggerated. one thing everyone agrees on is what Trump said from the get-go, Russia and Trump did not collude.

another thing we all know is that Brennan knew that Hillary, Perkins Coie, Fusion, and the british guy Christopher Steele were concocted a false narrative of Trump colluding with Russia. Brennan even briefed Obama on the fact that Hillary was concocting it and would bring it public through hidden means.

but if Russia was trying to influence the election and if Hillary was concocted a Russian Collusoin fraud why not (1) call in Trump and give him a defensive briefing and then focus LEO efforts on stopping the influence, and (2) call in Hillary and say we know what you're doing and we're investigating it and you need to cut that shit out right now?

instead, the IC-DOJ-Obama team did not investigate Hillary's fraud about Trump's collusion and instead they treated it as legitimate to the massive detriment of Trump and his first presidency. Brennan even insisted that the baseless Steele Dossier be part of the IC assessment, and the IC community tried to entrap Carter Page and others near Trump. they got four fraudulent two-hop FISA warrants against a patriotic American and even used doctored evidence against him. (given that Page was a consultant to the Trump campaign, the two-hop rule presumably means that Trump himself was under surveillance.)

it's quite revealing that for all the indictments that Mueller pursued after all the subpoenas, document seizures, grand jury testimony, confidential interviews under oath, and other fact finding, no one was accused of, or indicted for, collusion and the Report says that there is no evidence of collusion. so at this point, the Krassenstein's of the world fall back on "omg Mueller found that Russians interfered!" as if that was the crucial issue.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114460)

from the hints in the media it sounds like Bondi's DOJ might claim a wide-ranging conspiracy that includes what went down in Mar-a-lago and they will say that the SoL hasn't run because the conspiracy continued and that the matter can be venued in FL rather than DC (where the judges and juries will do anything they can to stop Trump). if that's what they're going to try, it's weak bullshit and will go nowhere.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49114476)

And all of those shills will be deployed to support Tulsi’s “bombshell”

No one gives a shit after the Epstein dud. Trump dented his own propaganda pipeline.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49125205)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHj2r4NwRs4

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49115128)

IC assessed that Russia didn't have the intent or the tools to try to change the election outcome.

then Trump won.

even after that IC continued that assessment.

but in early December there was a PDB put together, saying the same thing. but that PDB was pulled suspiciously and was never released until Tulsi just did it.

the next day, Obama holds a meeting of his top National Security officials and the results of that meeting were just released. Obama directed a piece of intelligence that was manufactured to reverse the consistent IC assessments that preceded it. this Obama mandate is the one that we just learned was driven top down by Brennan to fit a narrative rather than driven from below from real intelligence. this was the assessment that Brennan insisted would include the Steele Dossier.

that doctored assessment was the basis for the Mueller appointment, for the fraudulent FISA warrants, and for the entire movement to stymie a lawfully elected POTUS.

===

i found her narrative persuasive. she's a straight shooter.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49115152)

Walls closing in!

This is HUGE!

Wait two weeks!

Arrests any day now!

Lmao cons come on guys. How have you not learned by now?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49115165)

Obama absolutely done here (for real this time)!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49115178)

but this dump once again makes it obvious why hours before Trump was inaugurated Obama called that bizarre meeting and kept saying that everything has to be by the book! and Susan Rice wrote an email to herself confirming that. i assume Obama knew the shitstorm that was coming down and that Brennan, Comey, and Clapper were hacks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49115182)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49115427)

there was a consistent finding and assessment that Russia lacked the tools to accomplishment any significant interference with the election -- so much so that the Presidential Daily Briefing was drafted to repeat that yet again but was pulled the day before the big meeting.

so Obama calls for a new assessment and *before* any new work was done the Obama administration started leaking to WaPo, NYT, CNN and others that there was interference and that Trump may have been involved.

ok, so how are they leaking the conclusion *before* the assessment is actually done or even barely begun? because they know what the conclusion will be under Brennan.

then, during the assessment we see Brennan and Clapper breaking protocol to insist on claims that fit a pre-existing narrative. which makes perfect sense because it's what they were leaking and it's what was pre-ordained.

it's a strong case against Brennan, Clapper, etc. there is still no direct or even circumstantial proof against Obama unless you assume in advance that Obama drove the false narrative.

watch the first 15-20 minutes of this:

https://x.com/megynkelly/status/1947869932235960550

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49125198)

fallback: Trump didn't collude but he was "receptive" to Russian support!

define "receptive."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49125847)

https://www.racket.news/p/in-brutal-document-release-the-russia

In Brutal Document Release, the Russia Hoax is Finally Exposed

Official claim that Putin "aspired" to help Trump was based on four pieces of evidence, all bogus, even "ridiculous," according to long-suppressed report just released by DNI Tulsi Gabbard

Matt Taibbi

Jul 23, 2025

∙ Paid

It was worse than we thought.

The January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment concluding that Russian President Vladimir Putin “developed a clear preference” for Donald Trump and “aspired to help his chances of victory” is revealed in a report released this morning by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard to have been based on four pieces of evidence. One was the Steele Dossier. The surprise is that the other three were even less credible, each included over objections of the report’s CIA authors.

The first item was a “scant, unclear, and unverifiable fragment” of one sentence that the report’s five CIA authors read “five ways” and initially left out, only to have Director John Brennan order it back in. The second item was an email with “no date, no identified sender, no clear recipient, and no classification.” The third was supposedly backed by “liaison,” diplomatic, and press reporting, as well as signals intelligence (SIGINT), except the “SIGINT” didn’t mention Trump, the “liaison reporting” didn’t mention Trump and was from 2014, and the “diplomatic and media” reporting was a post-election review by a U.S. Ambassador citing a Russian pundit who said Putin and Trump should “work together like businessmen.” This was “evidence” that Putin “developed a clear preference” for Trump.

All three reports weren’t just unsourced and unreliable, but discarded fictions pulled out of the CIA’s trash heap. “They manipulated the manipulations,” is how ODNI Deputy Chief of Staff Alexa Henning put it.

The Assessment was written by just five CIA analysts hand-picked by Brennan, but even these most favored lieutenants couldn’t accept the key pieces of evidence. Two of the five went to Brennan to say, “We don’t have direct information that Putin wanted to get Trump elected,” only to be overruled. The same thing happened when members of the group objected to the Steele material, saying it didn’t meet even “basic tradecraft standards.” When confronted on this point, Brennan reportedly said, “Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?”

KILL SHOT: John Brennan, apprised of the Steele dossier’s evidentiary failings, reportedly said, “Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?”

Similarly, when FBI agents tasked with preparing source material were asked about use of the Steele reports, one replied, “Our instructions were that anything we had was to be used,” and that “We were to push this.” The analyst added, about the Steele material, that FBI leadership had decided it was “the right thing to do,” but “we were not able to verify it.” Use of the dossier was debated but ultimately insisted upon by Brennan and FBI Director James Comey, who wrote, “I thought it very important that it be included.”

The information comes from a secret review conducted by a team of House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) investigators who worked “mostly at CIA Headquarters” and “spent over 2,300 hours reviewing the ICA and its source reports,” confirming what Racket and Public reported last year. A long list of other reporters, from Lee Smith to Aaron Maté to Paul Sperry to Ray McGovern to Margot Cleveland of The Federalist to Glenn Greenwald and the Internet sleuthing group “The Corner,” previously reported on the existence of this HPSCI report, which has been “locked in a vault” and “held hostage” at Langley since 2018, as current HPSCI chair Rick Crawford put it. Only after Donald Trump interceded in early July was this report returned to the Hill, and Gabbard’s ODNI has been working to declassify it ever since.

“The most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history,” is how Gabbard described it today.

“Amazing,” is how former Judiciary Committee Chief Counsel Jason Foster describes the report. “It takes apart the ICA piece by piece.”

A staffer from the House intelligence Committee under Devin Nunes, who assigned the report in question, commented: “You don’t have to read much past the first page before it becomes crystal clear why the IC spent years trying to bury this report.”

Details about the poverty of the primary evidence linking Putin to Trump were not the only shock in the report. There were many, many more:

[PAYWALL]

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752281&forum_id=2/#49125852)