Smoking Gun in the DNI’s Criminal Charges Against President Obama

The report issued by Tulsi Gabbard about Barack Obama’s and his top staff’s “treasonous conspiracy” is not more of the same or merely an interpretation. There is new information that Matt Taibbi calls very significant. And we still have to hear from the whistleblower.

Tulsi personally accused former President Obama in the charges.

Russia Did Nothing Unusual, Compared to Other Elections

Overwhelmingly, reports about Russian interference in the 2016 election pointed to Russia doing what they usually do, acting like menaces to cause chaos. There was nothing new.

Megan Kelly and Matt Taibbi discussed the timeline and the implications of the US intelligence communities assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

They Did a 180

Kelly and Taibbi discussed the New York Times article from October 31st stating that the FBI knew of no link between Russia and Trump. It contrasted markedly from the administration meeting of December 9 2016, where they decided without any evidence that Russian interference was aimed at helping Trump.

There was no revised intelligence assessment and the FBI had decided to issue its own but Clapper paused the process. Obama then directed the intelligence community to produce an assessment which said the opposite and was leaked immediately to the media before any work had begun. To most sane people this would suggest a predetermined conclusion and a sham process.

Without any new intel, President Obama’s top, top people met in December to plan a new intelligence assessment.

A few weeks ago, John Ratcliffe revealed that Brennan overrode the objections of his deputy director of analysis and two of his hand- picked Russia experts to include the obviously ridiculous Steele dossier material in this assessment. They suppressed dissent in the later ICA that said that Russia was actually hesitant about Trump. They considered him mercurial and unreliable, and saw that Hillary Clinton represented continuity and was manageable, and they weren’t so concerned about her being president.

All of this was suppressed,” Taibbi said, “and Brennan was the person who was most aggressive in pushing the other line, so the fact that he was in charge of divining Russia’s motives, and remember, motive is a key thing here. It’s not just that Russia interfered. It’s that Russia interfered specifically to help Donald Trump.”

In other words, they conjured up a story that was a 180 from the reality most intel officials agreed upon. Brennan was the most aggressive with Clapper appearing more doubtful. They should get him to turn state’s evidence.

But…But…No Evidence

Top officials working on the analysis went to Brennan and said there was “no evidence” and “we shouldn’t say Russia interfered to help Trump.” Kelly said quoting Mollie Hemingway’s analysis at The Federalist. They had NO intelligence to support this as a “key judgment.”

There was NO evidence that Russia was trying to get Trump elected.

At a later meeting, Brennan called the essential officials into his office and repeated Obama’s directives. He told them what the assessment must say: Russia wanted Trump to win. The fake report then regurgitated this false information with “higher confidence” even though they had no evidence.

It was also an “unusually rushed timeline,” Kelly said.

Brennan overrode the CIA, NSA, and FBI in coming to that conclusion. That is why they had to resort to using the Steele dossier.

Andy McCarthy’s Illogical Article Diminishing the Conclusion

Andy McCarthy tried to debunk the dossier piece as key to the change in the ICA, saying that they were using the Steele dossier in September of 2016. However, Taibbi explained that was simply an internal issue. They could only come up with Carter Page as the alleged contact with Russia and the Steele dossier was the only thing they could use to get the FISA surveillance warrant.

What happened in December 2016 was a far more important use of the dossier. Before that, they said it was Internet rumor. They knew it was BS.

This is why the press was able to write about it – the Obama administration was behind it.

This so-called evidence came forth in an annex instead of the main ICA. The smoking gun is these fake conclusions leaked within 24 hours before a single thing was done, before any investigation. The result was exactly what Obama wanted. They had zero evidence for it. And, most importantly, it came out in the New York Times within 24 hours without any cause for the change. The piece led with the dossier and claimed Russia wanted Trump to win.

All of these reporters won Pulitzer Prizes for these rudderless stories. All of the sources were anonymous and could not be sourced. Everyone piled on. Matt Taibbi said he never saw anything like it.

They became stenographers for the corrupt intel agency.

Reporters years ago would never put out a story without any support. These reporters had no evidence and made this “enormous conclusion.” That would never have happened in the past, Taibbi said. Now, these kinds of mistakes get you promoted.

Mike Rogers, the Worst Republican

Mike Rogers gave an interview to the NY Times and repeated the Obama line. This was the next day.

The false report was then built brick by brick but the media knew how it would turn out before it was investigated and written.

The Entire Media Echoed the Administration Version Robotically

They were all in bed together and reporters printed wholesale whatever they were fed.

Watch the entire segment: