Search Posts

but take a look, June 19th, a male, blue shirt, reaches in, stays there for a little while. He goes back down, comes back up multiple times. What's he doing? Then a female, white tote bag, she reaches in, needs a better angle, sets the bag down, dives in a little deeper. And we don't know who these people are. No one was stopped or questioned by police, so no arrests. And we don't have the police report yet. But what are they doing with their hands in the pool? Are they cutting the lining? Are they peeling off the paint? And we don't know if they're committing a crime. They'll probably tell you they dropped their wedding ring. The Department of Interior says this, quote, "In the video, you're seeing two suspects observe destroying and removing a piece of the lining and attempting destruction of the lining. This incident took place on June 19th, 2026, and we are investigating. Destroying, injuring, defacing or removing cultural or architectural resources is a federal crime." The Department of Interior says the Department of Interior

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A screenshot of a declassified US government document: a National Intelligence Council Memorandum (NICM 2020-003) dated 15 January 2020, titled "Vulnerabilities in US 2020 Election Infrastructure." The page has the NIC seal at top left and header/footer text in red stating it was declassified by DNI Gabbard and approved for release by President Trump. The body text is a "Key Takeaway" section with a scope note and several bullet points assessing that Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea have the capability to access and potentially manipulate US election-related computer systems, though intentions are unknown. Several lines and blocks throughout the document (including parts of headings, one sentence, and classification/derivation lines at the bottom) are redacted with solid black bars.

Text in image: DECLASSIFIED BY DNI GABBARD on 16 March 2026 APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE BY PRESIDENT TRUMP on 3 July 2026 NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COUNCIL MEMORANDUM 15 January 2020 NICM 2020-003 ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Vulnerabilities in US 2020 Election Infrastructure (U) Key Takeaway ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Scope Note: This memo assesses the potential impact of cyber operations against US election infrastructure for the 2020 presidential election, including the voting process and integrity of results. It does not assess adversary intentions or views of US vulnerabilities. We assess that at least Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea have the capability to access and potentially manipulate data in US election-related computer systems, but we do not know whether they have specific plans to interfere with the functioning of these systems. We assess that centralized election-related data repositories, such as voter registration databases, pollbooks, and official election websites, are most vulnerable to exploitation, and adversaries could use access to these systems to disrupt election processes. Systems that tabulate, transmit, or display election results are vulnerable to localized exploitation but would be difficult to manipulate on a wide enough scale to alter the election outcome. Adversary claims of manipulation would be difficult to disprove and could undermine public confidence in election results. We judge that US adversaries, including at a minimum Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, as well as nonstate groups, have the capability to compromise US election infrastructure for the 2020 presidential election. Adversaries gaining access to election-related systems could disrupt the voting process, steal sensitive data, or undermine confidence in the election results, but we do not know whether any of them have specific plans to manipulate election-related systems. Russia almost certainly reconnoitered all US state election networks during the 2016 election cycle, accessed election-related infrastructure in at least two states, and exfiltrated voter data from at least one state. Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are all capable of conducting similar operations during the 2020 election cycle, judging from their known cyber capabilities and past operations. The availability of sophisticated computer network intrusion or attack tools on the dark web gives additional countries and nonstate actors the potential capability to interfere in the election. We judge that cyber criminals and hacktivists could also target election infrastructure for financial or political reasons, based on past incidents possibly or definitely attributed to such groups. (U) This memorandum was prepared under the auspices of the National Intelligence Officer (NIO) for Cyber. ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Classified By: ■■■■■■■■ | Derived From: ■■■■■■■■ | Declassify On: ■■■■■■■■

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

Screenshot of a tweet/post from a verified X (Twitter) account "Hugo Lowell" (@hugolowell), with a "Subscribe" button visible next to the profile, indicating this is displayed to a logged-out or non-following viewer. The post is a news item about a legal case involving a former federal prosecutor accused of theft related to mishandling a document from the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case investigation led by special counsel Jack Smith. A link to storage.courtlistener.com is included, along with the post timestamp and view count.

Text in image: Hugo Lowell ✓ @hugolowell Subscribe New: Former federal prosecutor in Ft Pierce has been indicted of theft after she sent a copy of Trump special counsel Jack Smith's report on the Mar-a-Lago classified docs case to her personal email, naming the file "Chocolate Cake Recipe" storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco... 4:06 PM · May 20, 2026 · 3,152 Views

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

We have a Fox News alert. James Brennan and James Comey are likely regretting going all in on the Russia hoax now because DOJ sources are telling Fox Digital that the FBI indeed has launched a criminal investigation into the former CIA director and former FBI director for potential wrongdoing related to the Trump-Russia probe and all the alleged false statements made to Congress. The full scope of the investigation is unclear right now, but two sources describe the FBI's view of the duo's interactions as, quote, "a conspiracy." Here to break it down, Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law prof and Fox News contributor. Jonathan, we've been hearing for some time about Brennan's alleged perjury over his role in the Steele dossier and the advancement of that and perhaps understanding that that was not credible. Your reaction tonight to this stunning development. Well, it's obviously a major development. These are two of the top people in the American intelligence system. And there have been these long unanswered questions about what they told Congress. At points, they both seem to adopt the surgeon Schultz approach of I knew nothing. If only I knew I would have done something that didn't strike many as being very credible. Both of these tend to be somewhat of micromanagers. They take pride in the fact that they followed the details of their departments. And it all comes down, particularly to a period in 2017, an intelligence community assessment at ICA that went out and viewed the Steele dossier, that infamous dossier funded by the Clinton campaign as credible. And that in fact, Steele was credible. They knew that was not true. The CIA had already said that it had great misgivings about the Steele dossier. Even though the Clinton campaign was denying to reporters that it funded the dossier, it was in fact funded through the law firm of the Clinton campaign that the Clinton campaign used. And so there's a lot of questions here as to why particularly Comey, for example, signed off on these FISA warrants, these secret court warrants to conduct this surveillance. The other thing, by the way, they knew very early on was that Carter Page, who was such a significant figure in the Steele dossier and the whole Russian hoax, was not only not a Russian spy, but was actually a CIA asset. And so the CIA told the FBI, "You're on the wrong road here. You're going after someone who is assisting us." All of that somehow got buried. And what came to the surface was the Steele dossier, which was not only not verified, it had been really shredded by many people in the intelligence committee. Yeah. And Comey claimed that it was Papadopoulos, that poor, poor, hapless kid. That Papadopoulos, his interactions with the Russians started the whole thing. And it was long before the dossier. But this was Comey testifying back in 2020 about this. Watch. It was done by the book. It was appropriate and it was essential that it be done. Okay. So you're proud of it? Overall, I'm proud of the work. There's no indication, and the inspector general would say it if he found it, that people were doing bad things on purpose, but that doesn't make it any less concerning. This was an investigation that was appropriately predicated and opened, that had to be opened. Jonathan, it had to be opened. Supercilious doesn't begin to describe him. So dismissive. Now, I remember listening to a testimony and just almost falling out of my chair. I mean, virtually everything he said was untrue. In fact, the IG reports shredded the FBI and said that they didn't follow protocol, that they ignored counterintelligence, that they pushed the Steele dossier forward. And these were two of the key individuals who did that. So the question is, does any of this trick the wire to perjury? And both of these are sophisticated players. You'll notice that they're very careful in how they word this. Comey is very careful to say that there wasn't basically malicious intent, not that there weren't mistakes. And time and time again, Comey portrayed himself as ignorant of all of these countervailing sources. Now, and again, the Brennan perjury questions have been swirling about for years and years. This is like one big flashback for both of us, Jonathan. Thank you very much.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

>> Breaking tonight, a Fox News exclusive. We have new information that appears to directly contradict the Biden administration's insistence it had nothing to do with the Justice Department investigations into then former President Trump's alleged retention of classified material and the subsequent raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. Correspondent David Spott has details tonight. Good evening, David. >> Brett, good evening to you. These emails obtained by Fox News paint a different picture of the relationship between the Biden White House and the Biden Justice Department. These two offices made it clear at the time, at least publicly, they were not connected and stayed away from any political interference. However, new emails obtained by Fox News from May 2022, three months before Mar-a-Lago was raided by the FBI illustrates coordination between the White House Counsel's Office and the DOJ regarding an interview of Walt Nada. Now remember, Walt Nada is a current White House aide to President Trump who was then former President Trump's aide in Florida. Nada was later charged alongside Trump by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The May 10th, 2022 email reads in part, coordination with DOJ and White House Counsel are in work to start the process to confirm and interview current administration employee Walt Nada. This event is dependent upon the timeline of President Biden's brief decision and coordination between White House Counsel and DOJ and in turn Evan Corcoran's position on the override of privilege assertion and whether or not he seeks an injunction to prevent access. That was written by an FBI agent and Evan Corcoran, of course, one of Trump's lawyers at the time. This coming August, Brett will mark four years since FBI agents raided Mar-a-Lago. A few days after that, then Attorney General Merrick Garland said this. I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter. Second, the department does not take such a decision lightly. And we're getting new reaction to these emails. Judiciary chairman Jim Jordan in the house says in part, it's always worse than we thought. These newly released documents confirm that the Biden DOJ's raid on Mar-a-Lago was politically motivated. We're also hearing from Attorney General Pam Bondi. A.G. Bondi says the more we learn about the DOJ weaponization under the prior administration, the worse the story gets. And Brett, she says this right here, it's a key part. She says we will continue disclosing key evidence to our congressional partners to deliver the truth and bring those who committed crimes to justice. That coming from the Attorney General tonight, Brett.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A short while ago, just the news obtained this email. This is a very important email. It comes from the former CIA director, Mike Morrell. Yes, the guy that organized that letter from the 51 intelligence professionals who tried to fake you into thinking that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation when it wasn't. It is between him and John Brennan, one of the signatories, you know who John Brennan is. He was Obama's CIA director, right? He's the guy that told Obama, hey, Hillary Clinton is doing a dirty trick on Donald Trump called Russia collusion. Well, this is just before the presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Hunter Biden's laptop is flinging out there. This is what Mike Morrell, former CIA director, tells his successor, John Brennan, hey, sign this letter because I'm, quote, trying to give the campaign, particularly during the debate on Thursday, a talking point to push back on Trump on this issue. A man with a security clearance, a man with the title of CIA director, knew that he wasn't creating an intelligence product, an American civic duty with 51 people. He was trying to create a political moment. Damning evidence, we'll try to find out if Congress has this letter, but this is a very important piece. It is the ultimate proof that what went out on that letter was a political dirty trick coordinated with the Biden campaign.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

All right, breaking tonight. We are learning that Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has a letter to the DOJ referring New York Attorney General Letitia James for a criminal referral over her insurance fraud. Now, the DOJ has confirmed they received that referral. We did reach out to Letitia James in our office for comment. We have yet to hear back with all the details. He is the founder, editor-in-chief, chief investigator, reporter, JustTheNews.com. John Solomon is here with the very latest. This is a blockbuster based on what I've seen with these documents. Yeah, the documents are very clear. The evidence is very strong. Some of it is court records. So Bill Pulte did his homework. New York's top cop is in a world of trouble. This is a very serious legal referral. If you remember last year, there was a referral made for mortgage fraud. It led to an indictment, but then the indictment got thrown out by a judge on the grounds that the U.S. attorney wasn't lawfully appointed there. That will not be the case where these two referrals are being sent. They're being sent to Chicago, where all state insurance is located, in Florida, where a second insurance company where Letitia James took out her homeowner's insurance was based. Both have sitting U.S. attorneys. Both have juries with a long history of sending politicians to prison when they believe they've engaged in corrupt acts. And both are getting referrals that have very specific information that Letitia James filled out insurance applications for her home in Virginia, claiming that it would not be occupied for five months of year. That probably got her a better rate. And in fact, the house was occupied around a year by a niece and a family member. And so the evidence is strong. The jurisdictions have a long history of convicting politicians if they think that they've done something corrupt. And both of the U.S. attorneys are confirmed by the Senate. So that's a big deal. By the way, the one in Florida is going to the same U.S. attorney that's doing the grand conspiracy case looking at weaponization, Jason Canones. That's another big thing. A lot of resources down in that office.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Good morning director if you'll let me quickly summarize your opening statement this morning You said in volume one on the issue of conspiracy the special counsel Determined that the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign Conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities and then in volume two For reasons that you explained the special counsel did not make a determination On whether there was an obstruction of justice crime committed by the president. Is that fair? Yes, sir All right now in explaining the special counsel did not make what you called a traditional prosecution or declination decision The report on the bottom of page two of volume two reads as follows The evidence we obtained about the president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from Conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime It also does not exonerate him the special counsel's job. Nowhere does it say that you were to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence Or that the special counsel report should determine whether or not to exonerate him. It's not in any of the documents It's not in your appointment order. It's not in the special counsel regulations. It's not in the OLC opinions It's not in the Justice Manual and it's not in the principles of federal prosecution Nowhere do those words appear together because respectfully respectfully director It was not the special counsel's job to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence or to exonerate him Because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence It exists for everyone. Everyone is entitled to it including sitting presidents and because there is a presumption of innocence prosecutors never ever Need to conclusively determine it now director the special counsel applied This inverted burden of proof that I can't find and you said doesn't exist anywhere in the department policies and you used it to write a report and the very first line of Your report the very first line of your report says and you as you read this morning It authorizes a special counsel to provide the attorney general with a confidential report Explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the special counsel. That's the very first word of your report, right? That's correct Here's the problem director. The special counsel didn't do that on Volume 2 with respect to potential of obstruction of justice the special counsel made neither a prosecution Decision or a declination decision. You made no decision You told us this morning and in your report that you made no determination. So respectfully director You didn't follow the special counsel regulations. It clearly says Write a confidential report about decisions reached nowhere in here Does it say write a report about decisions that weren't reached you wrote 180 pages? 180 pages about decisions that weren't reached about potential crimes that weren't charged or decided and respectfully Respectfully by doing that you managed to violate every principle and the most sacred of traditions about prosecutors not offering extra prosecutorial analysis about potential crimes that aren't charged so Americans need to know this as they listen to the Democrats and socialists on the other side of the aisle as they do dramatic readings from This report that volume two of this report was not authorized Under the law to be written It was written to a legal standard that does not exist at the Justice Department and it was written in violation of every DOJ principle About extra prosecutorial commentary. I agree with the chairman this morning when he said Donald Trump is not above the law He's not but he damn sure shouldn't be below the law

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A screenshot of a tweet/X post from a verified user named "Joe Kent" (@joekent16jan19), shown against a black background in X.com's dark mode styling, with the X.com logo in the top right. The account's profile picture shows a man with curly gray hair. The post is a reply directed at @realDonaldTrump, dated 7:38 AM · 1/8/20, arguing for military action against Iran's ballistic missile capability and withdrawal of troops from Iraq, following the January 2020 Soleimani strike and Iranian missile response.

Text in image: Joe Kent ✓ @joekent16jan19 @realDonaldTrump We should not sit and wait for the next attack, wipe Iran's ballistic capability out and get our troops out of Iraq - they are only targets now. No US WIA/KIA is a tribute to the professionalism of our military and intel professionals not Iranian restraint. 7:38 AM · 1/8/20 X.com

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

are new details that sharply undercut years of media and Democrat speculation and assertions about Donald Trump. Newly released FBI interview records confirmed that Trump personally contacted Florida police in 2006 during the original Jeffrey Epstein investigation and not to shield Epstein, but to support law enforcement going after him. According to the former Palm Beach police chief, Trump called investigators and praised them for pursuing the case. He warned about Epstein abusing underage girls. Trump also flagged Ghislaine Maxwell as evil and he urged the police in Florida to focus on her role in recruiting victims. This is all in the Epstein files. Trump was right. The entire narrative around him and Epstein was a hoax perpetrated by Democrats to deflect away from their own problems. The police chief told federal investigators that Trump was the only prominent figure who proactively reached out to assist their investigation at a time when Epstein was surrounded by powerful friends and enablers. The FBI records also reinforce long-standing reports that Epstein was barred from Mar-a-Lago after inappropriate conduct there. And there is more. Additional documents show Democratic Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett communicated with Epstein using a fake name, presumably to shield herself from scrutiny. Reports indicate Plaskett used a pseudonym while exchanging messages with Epstein in connection with official matters, raising new questions as more names surfaced in the expanding Epstein document release. We'll have more to come as the Epstein files continue to be reviewed but it seems to me there's vindication here for Trump and more trouble for Democrats than the media have as ever wanted you to know. It's got Jenny

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

(crowd chanting) Was it all just a dream? ♪ This is my first song ♪ ♪ Take back my life song ♪ ♪ Prove I'm already strong ♪ It was the night before the election, 2016. Everything seemed to be going as planned. Amateurs and experts alike had already called the election months ago. There's not going to be a President Donald Trump. That's not going to happen. Donald Trump is not going to be President of the United States. Donald Trump will never be elected President of the United States. He's not going to be President. Is there a path to victory for Donald Trump at this point? No. Do you still think she has a 100% chance of winning the election? I do. I'm not sure the Republican Party is going to survive. I would like to introduce to you the next President of the United States, Mr. Henry Clinton. Thank you all, and thanks to Jay-Z and Beyoncé. And thanks to Chance the Rapper, and Jay Cole, and Big Sean. She had no idea who any of these rappers were, but it didn't matter. [CHANTING] The big day is finally here, and it's time to vote. A giddy nation awoke that morning to the news in The New York Times that Trump had only a 15% chance of winning. You know, growing up with a little girl, I never thought I could be President. It's becoming very real. Congrats, Hillary, our first woman President. Whoo, Hillary, all the way, all the way through the White House. I waited over an hour to vote. I'm so happy. In Rochester, New York, thousands put eye-voted stickers on the grave of suffragist Susan B. Anthony. This is the most important election that I have ever voted in. I got to vote for all but for President. [LAUGHTER] I don't make it to. [MUSIC PLAYING] Once the polls closed, before the votes were even counted, the champagne corks were popping at Hillary's victory party in New York City. This has a literal glass ceiling, a glass ceiling you're hoping to symbolically burst through tonight. Let's be one nation indivisible with a kick-ass President. [CHEERING] Meanwhile, just 17 blocks away-- [MUSIC PLAYING] It's a decidedly small venue, perhaps the smallest one I've ever seen for an event like this. --things were looking bad for the other candidate. The crowd was glum. GOP officials now fear that if Donald Trump loses by a landslide, he could take down the congressional majorities with it. Fox News seemed relieved that they wouldn't have to support this man for the next four years. I think Hillary's going to win. The betting odds on the presidential race are three to one in favor of Secretary Clinton. [MUSIC PLAYING] Look at all these wins. We're projecting for Hillary Clinton right now. She wins New Jersey with 14 electoral votes. Mrs. Clinton is also performing strongly on the East Coast, Massachusetts, Maryland-- --and Illinois with 20 electoral votes. Hillary Clinton projected the winner. No huge surprises thus far. [MUSIC PLAYING] Then something strange began to happen. Big news for the first time tonight. Really big news in the presidential race. We can project that Donald Trump will win the state of Ohio. Donald Trump will carry the state of North Carolina. And that is huge for Donald Trump. This is exactly what he needed to do. Donald Trump will carry the state of Florida. State of Wisconsin. He will win Wisconsin. Trump doing very well in Pennsylvania right now. There's a cliffhanger going on here in Michigan. 56% of the vote is in. Look at how close it is. Right now, Donald Trump is ahead. It's completely flipped now. To make matters worse, Fox News was using my name. Michael Moore, who knows white working class voters, has made movies about them, grew up in Michigan, has been saying all along to the Democrats, dismiss him at your own peril. And he said, I'm warning you, I know the people who live in my state. And I know how they think. And I know what their concerns are. [MUSIC PLAYING] Everybody should head home. You should get some sleep. We're not going to have anything more to say tonight. This is a Fox News election alert. Donald Trump is the president of the United States. [MUSIC PLAYING]

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

We eventually broadcast a story about the Hunter Biden laptop after the midterm elections in 2022. We commissioned a forensic review. I got a copy of the laptop data. I have it here still. I went to a lot of effort to get the cleanest copy of the laptop data, the same data that was provided to the FBI, because I didn't want to have any professional journalistic risk for CBS News. I wanted this thing to be totally locked down. When we did the story, we did it after the midterms. I argued against that because it was ready before the midterms, and my training is that you should always do the story when it's ready to go. You should not be dictated by the political cycle. Once we got the laptop story on the morning news, I felt that there was so much there that we could still do. For example, in the text messages, there's unfortunately the use of the N-word, the liberal use of the N-word. I thought this was worthy of a story, but I was told that it was not something that interested CBS News. Then I asked for a forensic review of the laptop, and we found that there were more than half a dozen emails that were likely used by Joe Biden. I thought that was a story. The answer that came back was, "Well, we need to know what the content is of the emails," but that was going to be a years-long process. There were a lot of reasons I was told not to do it, not to pursue it. I spent a lot of my time at CBS following the Hunter Biden story. One of the things that really struck me is this kind of disconnect. I didn't understand how a senior executive like George Cheese could tell me that this was a high priority for the network and for his boss, and yet the executives at CBS News showed producers anchors could refuse that. I came to the conclusion that they must have felt that they were more powerful than George Cheese, which was astonishing to me. I'd never worked at a place where a directive from the top would be so defied.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Brand new details about how Obama's CIA targeted Trump and started the entire Russia hoax. For years, we were told that tips from an Australian diplomat tipped off the FBI after a random conversation with Papadopoulos, a no-name 20-something. But according to new reporting by Michael Schellenberger and Matt Taibbi, the whole thing was a CIA setup. Former CIA director John Brennan identified 26 Trump associates to be targeted by the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance. And then those interactions were the targets and were targeted by the FBI as suspicious. And that's how the FBI launched the Russia collusion hoax. The details of this entire operation have been stored in a top secret binder in a secret room in Washington. Trump ordered the whole thing declassified. And now the rumor is that the binder might be missing. Go to me now, one of the reporters who broke the story, Michael Schellenberger. Michael, explain how this all started with the CIA picking these 26 Trump people. Yeah, good to be with you, Jesse. Well, obviously, this is an extremely serious story and serious allegation by multiple credible sources that Public and Racket, that's Matt Taibbi's publication, have spoken to. These are people that are close to the house intelligence investigation of how the Russia collusion hoax began. The story, as you mentioned, was that, oh, we were just informed by foreign intelligence about this. Our sources tell us a very different story, which is that this was initiated by the U.S. government. It came from within the U.S. government's intelligence community, including the CIA, that they asked the so-called Five Eyes Nations intelligence agencies. That's the other English-speaking nations, including Britain and Australia, to spy on 26 Trump associates, or at least they had a list of the 26 associates that were identified. This is new information. Some people have theorized about this and speculated about it. We feel very confident that our sources were in a position to know and are very credible in this report. It's obviously a very serious allegation because this is illegal spying and it's illegal election interference. Okay, so you're reporting that the CIA got these allies to bump these 26 Trump associates, create interactions, and then call these interactions suspicious and let the FBI know they were suspicious, and that starts the whole thing. What about this binder that encapsulates this whole thing and no one knows where it is right now or Trump has it? What's that? Well, Jesse, we'll have a piece tomorrow that is specifically about the binder, but as a friend of the show and of yours on this, I'll say that there has been widespread speculation that this binder was the reason or a reason for the FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago, and we'll be discussing that tomorrow. But obviously, if this binder contains what we have been told that it contains, which may include raw intelligence, information showing that the U.S. government, the CIA and the intelligence community of the U.S. government, initiated the Russia collusion hoax, that it did not occur in the way that the official story including the German investigation had portrayed it, then that's extremely serious information, and it may be, if the FBI then went to go get it in order to continue the coverup of this information, that obviously adds an even more dramatic wrinkle to this. Again, we'll have more to say about it tomorrow, but this is a huge, huge story. I mean, I can't, I've been thinking about it in the history of the United States of America. Have we ever had something like this where the intelligence community was weaponized against a political candidate and using our foreign allies to do it? I can't think of a more important or dramatic story. - Yeah, and then going to great lengths by using FBI raids to cover it up. That's just an absolute incredible development. Great reporting to you and to Matt, and we look forward to your report tomorrow. Thank you so much.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

So just got word that the FBI is in Atlanta, Georgia conducting a search warrant and the Fulton County election office and I have spoken to a number of individuals over the last couple of weeks have not spoken about this publicly, but who have been called in by the FBI questioning and was aware that the FBI was here do not have any information with the search warrant is related to other than Fox News is reporting is related to the 2020 election. And I'd like to remind you that the reason that we, some of us specifically Bert Jones, Brandon beach, William Ligon and myself, the first four that stood up and called for a special session because of the legislature could do this back in 2020. I'm glad that we finally will be getting to the bottom of whatever it was that happened in 2020 thanks to the federal government wish that we could have done it much, much earlier. We'll keep you posted on what we know, but the FBI is here and hopefully we'll get the truth soon.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Again with John Solomon, editor-in-chief, founder, chief investigator of ReporterJustTheNews.com, revealing tonight that an FBI investigation uncovered the fact that Mr. Higher honor himself. James Comey routinely leaked classified information to The New York Times through an intermediary, a friend on the faculty of Columbia Law School. The sheer amount of leaking appears to be political, deep, dark, purposefully deceptive, in a myriad of ways, here with details, is investigative reporter, founder of JustTheNews.com, editor-in-chief. All right. Mr. Higher honor, years ago on this program I said you have the right to remain silent and you might want to use it. This is a very long piece that you have here. It is a worthwhile read. I'll let you sum it up, and then I want your conclusion on what you're finding here, because to me it's very damning. Well, what you find out is that James Comey decided not to work through the FBI press office when he wanted to change the narrative in Washington, burnish his reputation against attacks from Democrats, and try to sully Donald Trump's reputation. If you remember, Democrats were mad that James Comey let out of the bag just before the election that there might be some new evidence in the Hillary Clinton email scandal. Hillary blamed Comey for throwing the election. She blamed the Russians for throwing the election. She blamed everybody but herself for throwing the election for her. But Comey was trying to rehabilitate that. And so he had an intermediary, a Columbia law professor by the name of Daniel Richmond, who the FBI confirmed and interviewed. And Richmond said, yes, I used my relationship with a New York Times reporter named Michael Schmidt. He's one of the authors of the Pulitzer Prize-winning package that President Trump is now suing over. And my goal was to improve negative stories about James Comey and to set a narrative, i.e., set the Russia collusion narrative. This guy worked around the official channels of the FBI press office. And at one point, the FBI noted, you met with James Comey. He gave you access to classified information. A short while later, you had a conversation with that New York Times reporter, and he ends up reporting something that appears to be classified. Did you do it? He gives, I think, perhaps the most famous denial people will remember, since Bill Clinton says it depends what the meaning of the word is, is when he tried to obfuscate whether he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky, he says, I can say, I don't think I confirmed the information. I can say, with a discount, that I didn't give him the classified information. With a discount means you got to give me some room. It's an extraordinary moment. The FBI clearly had strong suspicions that this was a potential backdoor for information, maybe classified information, to get out to the media with James Comey's fingerprints on it. And they didn't go much further. They didn't put Comey before the grand jury. That we can tell. They didn't appear to put this gentleman, Daniel Richmond, before the grand jury. And like Adam Schiff, as we told you last night, here they have an eyewitness whistleblower who said, I was in the room, when he authorized leaks of intel, these end up being a dead end again. And it's another reminder of a dual system of justice that the Justice Department had the last six years. These are documents that were never given to Jim Jordan. Jim Jordan confirmed that to me today. And we're just learning, eight years later, because of what Cash Patel turned over, that the FBI had all the evidence of how the false narrative of Russia collusion was spread across this country, to the detriment of voters, to the detriment of President Trump's first campaign. And they did nothing about it. It's a credit to the FBI. It's a credit to Cash Patel. It's a credit to the people that are involved in sharing this information now with the public. Do you see legal jeopardy here? I think if Pam Bondi goes the grand jury route, that these are people that are going to be hauled before the grand jury. I want to remind people, most classified information statutes have a five-year statute of limitations. But there is a provision that extends it to 10 years if it's willing and knowing. And there is some pretty clear evidence of a strong apparatus put in place to make these leaks occur, according to the FBI documents. I think a grand jury could go back and try to compel testimony and find out if it rises to the level of criminality. Tomorrow, though, I think we're going to take people on a new destination, which is, how often did the FBI get blocked in trying to investigate Hillary Clinton corruption at the Clinton Foundation? You're going to be shocked by the answer. We'll have you back tomorrow. I'm John Solomon. This is unraveling very quickly. Thank you.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

There's new evidence that Barack Obama ask intelligence and investigatory heads like John Brennan, the former CIA director, James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, and James Comey, the former FBI director, to find me evidence that you haven't found yet so that we can continue the Russian collusion hoax after it was ineffective in the campaign. You go back, we only have a few weeks left, I'm a lame duck president, and bring me the right assessments. And that's exactly what they did, and that's why they're terrified that new information is coming forth. It suggests to the American people what they did and how they were culpable. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. I'd like to talk about the ongoing melodrama of what Barack Obama knew or did not know in his involvement with Russian collusion. The hoax that plagued the Donald Trump 2016 campaign tried to undermine his transition in 2016 and '17 and ate up the first 22 months of his presidency in 2017 and '18 and was found to be completely bogus. There are three blind mice involved in this tale, John Brennan, the former CIA director, James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, and James Comey, the former FBI director. And they all have new manifestations of their untruthfulness. Let's start with John Brennan. He's very angry right now because the trove that was released by Tulsi Gabbard of new documents and investigations may or may not have criminal referrals come out of them, and Pam Bondi may file new charges. The problem that Brennan has is that he went to a meeting and he presented a false picture of CIA assessments. The so-called CIA heads of various divisions found no Russian collusion. They said to John Brennan, "There's nothing there that we can see that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians." He rejected that, cherry-picked four or five other analysts, and then presented a false picture to Barack Obama. Or did he? Or did Barack Obama request that he do that? It'll be he said, he said, but it's more likely that Barack Obama asked John Brennan to come up with the correct CIA assessments, sort of like Mr. Berea, the head of Soviet secret police during the Cold War and at the end of World War II. He said, "I have the criminal. You find me the crime. So I have the criminal, Donald Trump. All I need is Russian collusion." And that was the methodology that they proceeded by. The problem with Brennan, though, is he, in the process of preparing this false assessment, he said again and again, both publicly but also under testimony, he didn't know anything about the Steele dossier. Didn't know anything about it. He didn't read it. It didn't compute into CIA assessments. That was a lie. That was a lie. We know now from other testimonies, especially from the trope, that he did draw on the fake Steele dossier. He referenced it to other people. And the problem with John Brennan is this isn't the first time he's misled us. He lied about the Senate staff computers. That was under oath. He lied, remember, about predator drones when he said there was no collateral damage. And remember, he lied also as one of the 51 intelligence authorities who tried to float that bogus idea that Hunter's laptop was cooked up in Russia. Then we come to James Clapper. He was sitting at this meeting in December of 2016 where he gave a false assessment, and he misrepresented what the 18 intelligence agencies under his direction had found. They had not found Russian collusion. And yet he participated in this. He went so far as later to thanking and giving credit to Barack Obama for demanding that they find Russian collusion. He said if he hadn't have ordered us to do this, we wouldn't have found it. i.e. the subtext says there was no evidence in our intelligence agency for it, so we concocted it on the directive of Barack Obama. But remember, he lied too. He swore under oath to the U.S. Congress that the National Security Agency had never spied on Americans. That was an abject lie, and he was part of the 51 intelligence authorities who also lied to the American people in 2020 on the eve of the second debate when Joe Biden denied that Hunter Biden's laptop was authentic. He quoted the 51 authorities. The FBI, remember, at that time had it in his possession and had already authenticated it as genuine. Then we come to James Comey. He also says that he had really nothing to do with the Steele dossier. The fact is, he was completely acquainted with it. His FBI offered a million dollars. They were so desperate to validate it. They said to Christopher Steele, "Just give us some proof. We can use this. We'll give you a million dollars." He couldn't even come up with the substantive arguments to corroborate his own dossier, so he didn't get the million dollars. More importantly, James Comey has a problem. He leaked on an FBI device a conversation he had memorialized to the New York Times via a third party. James Comey, remember, went before the House Oversight Committee, as I said earlier, and lied 245 times. If you say, "I don't remember, I don't recall, I don't know," can you imagine an FBI director with all that knowledge at his fingertips saying, "I don't remember, I don't know," about the most important investigation in recent history? Let's sum up these three blind mice. There's new evidence that Barack Obama asked intelligence and investigatory heads like John Brennan, like James Clapper and James Comey to find me evidence that you haven't found yet so that we can continue the Russian collusion hoax after it was ineffective in the campaign. Hillary lost the election. Now we want to sabotage. This is the subtext of the transition and his presidency. You go back. We only have a few weeks left. I'm a lame duck president and bring me the right assessments, and that's exactly what they did, and that's why they're terrified that new information is coming forth that suggests to the American people what they did and how they were culpable. Thank you very much. This is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. Thank you for tuning in to The Daily Signal. Please like, share, and subscribe to be notified for more content like this. You can also check out my own website at victorhanson.com and subscribe for exclusive features in addition.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

And now, thanks to Miranda Devine and Senator Grassley, we have some proof. There was a prosecutor who really had a passion for going after J-6ers and all things Trump. There he is, and we have an email from him to his DOJ and FBI colleagues. Take a look at this. This is how they talk to each other. Can we do some work to nail down Trump's role in this? According to this Forbes article, Trump recorded the Pledge of Allegiance at MAL, Mar-a-Lago, and Cash Patel is involved. I'll talk to Maria and Aaron and Julia about doing some follow-up here to nail down Trump's role. In other words, to nail Trump. Can we get something on Trump? This is not the way the justice system is supposed to work. No, it's the next the FBI gets in on the action. I think we have another one from a guy who was really anxious to get J-6ers as well. The FBI agent replies, "Ester and I are working on this today. "We're going to put together our findings at two "and get something to you shortly after that." This isn't justice. This isn't policing. This isn't law enforcement. This is dark political operations. And it's, they just had no problem lying about it. This is Merrick Garland. The guy should have been busted for perjury or I don't know, disbarred for something 'cause this is not true. - This appointment underscores for the public the department's commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters and to making decisions indisputably guided only by the facts and the law. - I have a chance to lead a justice department in pursuit of the rule of law. - We have only one rule. And that one rule, so we follow the facts and the law and we reach the decisions required by the Constitution and we protect civil liberties. - Mr. Smith. - No, they don't. No, they didn't. And they said it so much, it was like muscle memory. It was like automatic, right? It was, it became boilerplate language. We only pursue, we don't look at politics. It's only the facts. I mean, look at Jack Smith. Does anybody believe all of these indictments, all of these arrests, right? They were not looking at politics. Jack Smith, the weirdo's special counsel, go. - Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice. And our nation's commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. We have one set of laws in this country and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws, collecting facts, that's what determines the outcome of an investigation. Nothing more and nothing less. - Oh yeah, no, what about poll numbers? What about a President Trump who's wildly popular in the Republican Party and just kind of running for the nomination and has a lock on it and you guys arrest him within a four month period, right? As the election year is really kicking into the high gear, is that the facts? Is that just following the law? Where it is, one of the reasons why Joe Biden did so poorly in that debate, he didn't think he'd even have to debate Trump, he was confident that he wasn't gonna be the nominee, that he might be in jail, did not work out that way, did it? Anyway, just remember, this is a doozy. They try to criminalize the singing of the national anthem and the pledge of allegiance, raising all kinds of questions about well, where did the money go and how did this happen and how did that happen? They, this is a classic example, show me the man, we'll find the crime.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.