Comments On The Latest Revelations About The Russia!! Hoax

Manhattan Contrarian ^ | 21 Jul, 2025 | Francis Menton

[MtnClimber]

It all began a couple of months before the 2016 presidential election. That’s when candidate Hillary Clinton began accusing Russia of interfering in the upcoming contest, and simultaneously accusing her opponent Donald Trump of “urging” the Russians to engage in some unspecified form of “hack” as the means of interference. From the New York Times, September 5, 2016:

Hillary Clinton accused Russian intelligence of interfering with the American election, implying that President Vladimir V. Putin viewed a victory by Donald J. Trump as a destabilizing event that would weaken the United States and buttress Russian interests. . . . “We’ve never had the nominee of one of our major parties urging the Russians to hack,” Mrs. Clinton said in a news conference. “I want everyone — Democrat, Republican, Independent — to understand the real threat that this represents.”

The accusations of Russian interference in the election accelerated from there, and then really took off after the election, in December 2016 and January 2017.

In my opinion then and now, it was obvious from the beginning that this had been a completely political operation, with no underlying substance, orchestrated in some parts by Hillary Clinton, and in other parts by Barack Obama, first to defeat Trump’s candidacy, and then to hobble his presidency. During Trump’s first term, I was hopeful that Trump would be able to expose the inculpating communications among the key players in the hoax; but for the most part that did not happen. Now, under the supervision of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, it is finally occurring.

But for today I want to reprise some of my posts from back in 2017 and 2018 laying out the obvious inferences to be made from what was known even at the time. At those early dates, few emails among the participants in the hoax had been released; but they didn’t need to be.

I first wrote about the Russia hoax in a March 2, 2017 post titled “What Is With This Weird Obsession With Russia?” That post pointed out that the whole theory that there was something amiss in a political campaign or transition team speaking with representatives of a foreign country didn’t make any sense:

Am I the only one who thinks that it would have been completely incompetent for a president-elect's transition team not to have met at some point before the inauguration with the ambassador from Russia, and for that matter with the ambassadors from 50 or more of the more consequential countries of the world?

So clearly the Trump/Russia story had to be about something else. By April 7, 2017, I was making “Reasonable Inferences About The Weird Obsession With Russia.” The key inference was that the “Russia collusion” line had to be a cover story to attempt to excuse illegal use of the national security apparatus to surveil the campaign of the political opponent. Here’s the key paragraph:

The obvious inference is that surveillance of Trump and his associates went on throughout the campaign as part of a completely political operation to help defeat the adversary. It's just in the nature of the very most powerful human instincts and incentives that that is what has occurred. And the Russia thing? I mean, in the off chance that Trump might win, the existence of the surveillance would inevitably come out. A cover story was needed, and it had to surface before the election because it wouldn't be believable if it only emerged after the surveillance had been discovered and publicized.

In the Spring of 2018 information came out about the FBI obtaining FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, including by the use of false representations to the court to obtain the warrants. My observations then (in a May 18, 2018 post titled “A Few Comments On The Latest Revelations Of FBI Corruption”):

[Y]ou would be very unlikely to go wrong by inferring . . . that high-ranking officials in the Obama administration had succumbed to the overwhelming temptation to use the tools of state surveillance to advantage their political friends and disadvantage their enemies. . . . Did President Barack Obama, and candidate Hillary Clinton, know what was going on? And, indeed, were they giving overall direction to the activities? So far, I haven't seen any [direct] evidence. On the other hand, I know what the reasonable inference is.

And all I can say now is, things turning out far worse than even I could have imagined. With regard to Hillary, the piece about the Steele Dossier, supposedly tying Trump to Russia, being fake opposition research originating from the Clinton campaign, has been long since revealed.

But with the latest revelations the focus is turning to Obama, and to the period after the 2016 election, when the lame duck President turned away from trying to defeat Trump to now using the Russia scam to hobble his incoming administration. New documents released by Gabbard show Obama and his national security advisors (particularly CIA head John Brennan and DNI James Clapper) altering presidential briefing materials to imply serious concern about Russian interference in the recent election. From Fox News today, quoting investigative journalist Matt Taibbi:

"The last major revelation that came out was that John Brennan and James Comey were the focus of criminal investigations that had been opened by the Justice Department, but these new documents that were released by Tulsi Gabbard… make it clear that the investigation is now aimed at the Obama White House and, in particular, at Barack Obama, because of decisions that were made in early December 2016 to suppress the presidential daily briefing and go ahead and order a new intelligence community assessment that ultimately would have much more aggressive conclusions about Trump and Russia," he told co-host Bill Hemmer.

All I can say is, however badly you may have thought about these people, they are worse. Now, to a substantial extent, there are documents to prove it.

[MtnClimber]

They should be sure to include Judge James Boasberg in the conspiracy group. He was the Fisa court judge that authorized spying on Carter Page (and thus the Trump campaign and later the Trump presidency). He is still in operation issueing restraining orders to shut down the Trump agenda.

[Singermom]

Great point #1

[Singermom]

#2

[Don@VB]

Golden Oldies from the past. Let’s play them again. Wolfman Jack, line #1.

[Don@VB]

Golden Oldies from the past. Let’s play them again. Wolfman Jack, line #1.

[Tom Tetroxide]

It all started with that Steele Dossier from the UK...
Perfidious Albion alert!

[cuz1961]

Judge James Boasberg in the conspiracy group. He was the Fisa court judge that authorized spying

/

Thanks for pointing that out,

( I thought it was Roberts )

Jack the ripper Boasberg , the Judicial black plague of the Hague and DC swamp.

The epitome of swamp monster.

[nathanbedford]

It might be possible to get around the problem of blue city juries committing jury nullification in cases in which popular Democrats are defendants by bringing a civil action under Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968

If two people agree and engage in a course of conduct to deprive an individual of his civil rights (for example improper search and seizure as happened in Mara Lago), under color of law, they might be liable for treble damages and forfeiture of property. It might be possible for Donald Trump or other plaintiffs to bring such a suit in which the venue is not in a blue city but in a red jurisdiction.

Moreover the burden of proof would be less of a standard, preponderance of the evidence, rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.

Discovery might also be very broad, broader than is available in a criminal action.

Such a suit could also be brought in parallel with a criminal action for sedition.

[FlyingEagle]

It is The Big Lie.

Hitler and Nazis used The Big Lie to vilify Jews.

Clinton and Obama used The Big Lie also, to vilify Trump.

It is that simple.

[RummyChick]

Gabbard better hurry. Tom cotton trying to shut her down

Why

Perhaps wife

Perhaps because he is director of IRI

I don’t care who it is ...or which side of the aisle .a cover up is a coverup

When you see someone trying to shine a light and others try to shut it down you need to look to see why

[TTFlyer]

Tom Cotton can go to hell.

[Kharis13]

I think the Left’s sudden fixation on Epstein is to try to deflect from this. They knew it was coming, and they know the stakes. It’ll only take one to start talking and the house of cards will begin coming down.

[Old West Conservative]

Whistleblowers might already be talking. With receipts.

[1Old Pro]

All I can say is, however badly you may have thought about these people, they are worse. Now, to a substantial extent, there are documents to prove it.

We knew these people were BAD, the only question remaining is will they be held to account. If not, our country will suffer as this type of corrupt weaponization of government will certainly escalate.

[PGR88]

It was a two-fer. Not only did they want to smear Trump, remember too that everyone in DC expected Hillary Clinton to win anyway.

So the other leg of the scheme was to propogandize Americans into believing Russia was a mortal enemy, and prepare them for a war over Ukraine they knew was coming.

And the hinge of this all was Steele and MI6

[Reily]

Cotton’s bill is to shrink the DNI! It’s not to interfere with Gabbard. Even if it was it wouldn’t be implemented fast enough. The DNI since created is a bloated bureaucracy full of castoffs from all over the IC. It’s original purpose was to deconflict and integrate Intel and Itel needs across the IC. Particularly resolv3xthe sticky law enforcement info IC info divide. Everyone remember the block Jamie Gorelock did to keep certain IC info from crossing into the FBI that might have alerted itblto the 9/11 highjackers. It was to be not more then 1000 people (That’s way too many!)it’s now several times that. I don’t see why it should be any more then 150-200 people.

[nopardons]

BTTT

[Wally_Kalbacken]

My suggestion would be to ask the NSA to sweep through the communications captured in the DC area the night and the day following Trump’s victory in 2016. If only to review pen-register level information about calls made in those first 24 hours, as it dawned on the Obama Administration that they were not handing over the reins to a friendly successor. The setup of the Russia Hoax, the framing of Flynn, etc., were all hatched in the White House by angry and exiting Obama staff. However, I would be willing to bet that a significant amount of documents and data were hastily discarded that day, and that can be traced.

[goodnesswins]

And, hillary said...paraphrasing..on election 2016 night...”you better fix this or we’ll all hang”