Trump, Tulsi are Right – Obama Started It

Chapter Three – Russiagate

“If you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

Those were the words of U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in January 2017. He said them on MSNBC to Rachel Maddow, in response to a question about President-elect Donald Trump, who was publicly mocking the so-called “intelligence community” for claiming that Russia had “hacked” the 2016 election.

That wasn’t a throwaway comment. That was a U.S. Senator — on national TV — warning the incoming President not to mess with the spies. Not exactly democratic, is it?

Trump, for once, was right to be flippant. The whole thing was a media-fabricated conspiracy.

For months, the media and Democratic Party had been insisting Trump’s win was due to Russia “hacking” the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and leaking their emails to WikiLeaks. It was a preposterous accusation.

WikiLeaks had released the emails in July 2016, and yes, they had a major political impact. They showed the DNC was corrupt, undemocratic, and colluding with the media to help Hillary Clinton defeat Bernie Sanders in the primary. Several senior DNC officials resigned. So did Donna Brazile at CNN, after the emails revealed she’d fed debate questions to Clinton’s team in advance.

But no evidence was ever provided that Russia was behind the leak.

As Trump pointed out repeatedly, the FBI never even saw the DNC servers. They relied entirely on a report from CrowdStrike — a private cybersecurity firm hired by the DNC. That alone should raise every red flag. The chain of custody was broken at the source.

Julian Assange has always insisted the source wasn’t Russia. In an August 2016 Dutch TV interview, Assange made a chilling implication.

“WikiLeaks never sits on material. Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks. There’s a 27-year-old, who works for the DNC, who was shot in the back, murdered, just a few weeks ago for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington. So…”

The interviewer jumped in: “That was just a robbery, I believe, wasn’t it?”

Assange shot back: “No. There’s no finding.”

Pressed further on whether Seth Rich was WikiLeaks’ source, he said: “We don’t comment on who our sources are.”

FBI Director Robert Mueller — the man later tasked with investigating Russiagate — said, “WikiLeaks and Assange made several public statements apparently designed to obscure the source of the materials that WikiLeaks was releasing,”. [Source]

Farcical, isn’t it?

What do you call it when a man is shot in the back, his wallet, keys, money, credit cards and phone are untouched, and no arrests are made?

A failed robbery? Or first-degree murder?

The FBI denied for years that it had Seth Rich’s laptop. Then they admitted they did. A federal judge ordered them to release its contents — only for the Bureau to lose the motion and appeal the ruling, requesting a draconian 66-year production timeline to drag it out [source].

Are you suspicious yet?

The media smeared anyone who questioned this story as a conspiracy theorist. Talking about Seth Rich was taboo. But pushing the Russia narrative? That got you Pulitzers.

Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), called the journalists at the New York Times “Pulitzer propagandists.” He explained in our interview that the 2017 “intelligence community assessment” blaming Russia was based on a handpicked group of analysts claiming only “moderate confidence.”

These handpicked analysts reported to James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence. But that didn’t stop the media from spinning it into headlines like: “All 17 intelligence agencies agree!”

Even Bill Maher repeated the lie. Sorry — line. Sad.

It’s important to note that James Clapper, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, played a pivotal role in shaping the entire Russiagate narrative. He hand-picked a small group of analysts from the CIA, FBI, and NSA to produce the January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. This report concluded—with “high confidence” in parts, but only “moderate confidence” from the NSA—that Russia interfered to help Donald Trump. Dissenting analysts were excluded from the process entirely, casting doubt on the objectivity of the final report.

Not long after delivering that narrative to the public and Congress, Clapper was hired by CNN on a lucrative contract as an “analyst”, where he spent the next year reinforcing the very story he helped construct. The revolving door between intelligence and media didn’t just spin—it kicked into overdrive.

Then came the Steele Dossier.

Compiled by former British MI6 agent Christopher Steele and paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign via Fusion GPS, the dossier was a bizarre collection of unverified claims, including one infamous tale: that Trump, while staying at a Moscow hotel, learned Obama had once stayed in the same room and hired prostitutes to urinate on the bed.

The legacy media went berserk. Trump was labelled a “Putin puppet.” The second season of the legal drama The Good Fight revolved entirely around fictional lawyers trying to find the alleged “pee tape.”

It didn’t matter that none of it was backed by evidence. The story penetrated the public mind. Trump’s presidency was tainted before it began. [source]

BuzzFeed published the full dossier. CNN and MSNBC ran wall-to-wall coverage. The New York Times and Washington Post published a series of 20 breathless reports — most based on anonymous intelligence sources — and won a Pulitzer Prize for it.

None of the articles proved a hack. None named sources. None addressed the obvious holes in the official story.

“Pulitzer propagandists,” indeed.

In fact, CrowdStrike President Shawn Henry admitted under oath to Rep. Adam Schiff in 2017 that:

“There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left.”

And also…

“There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There’s circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated.”

Let that sink in. No evidence that the emails were even taken — let alone hacked by Russia. Schiff kept promoting the narrative anyway.

Meanwhile, VIPS conducted a forensic analysis led by Bill Binney, former NSA Technical Director. They concluded that the transfer speed of the DNC data was far too fast to have been done remotely over the internet. It clocked in at roughly 22 megabytes per second — consistent with someone transferring files locally onto a USB thumb drive.

The timestamps on the files even showed modifications consistent with an East Coast time zone. Not Europe. Not Russia.

So once again — who had access to the server? Maybe a DNC staffer?

Those who pointed this out were smeared as conspiracy theorists or Russian assets.

Several Trump aides were prosecuted. Michael Flynn resigned as National Security Adviser after allegedly lying to the FBI. George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign aide, went to jail for 14 days after allegedly lying about a meeting.

That meeting — with shadowy professor Joseph Mifsud — was the alleged catalyst for the entire Russiagate investigation. Mifsud allegedly told Papadopoulos the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary. Papadopoulos then supposedly repeated it to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer. That gossip triggered the FBI probe.

But who is Joseph Mifsud? The Mueller team called him a Russian agent. But all independent investigations point to his ties being with Western intelligence. No proof of him being Russian has ever been shown.

Papadopoulos later claimed he was entrapped — and even blackmailed. He says $10,000 in cash was offered to him in Israel, and later photographed in his hotel room, laid out on his bed like bait. He refused to touch it. When he returned to the U.S., the FBI searched his luggage expecting to catch him with the cash.

And Alexander Downer? No ordinary diplomat. Former Australian Foreign Minister, longtime ally of the Clinton Foundation, and a deep-state fixture with close ties to Western intelligence. He claimed Papadopoulos casually mentioned the Russians having dirt on Clinton — and passed that “intelligence” to U.S. authorities. That alone triggered Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s Russiagate investigation.

The last of the Pulitzer-winning stories even questioned whether the Papadopoulos case held water at all.

But this wasn’t just an FBI operation. It was global — involving British intelligence, Australian diplomats, Israeli setups, and a transatlantic media machine singing from the same hymn sheet.

The Lie That Never Died

Russiagate wasn’t a scandal. It was an operation. And it didn’t start in 2016 — it started in the White House.

Ray McGovern told me, bluntly: “It’s important you realise that Obama ordered this.” The smear campaign, the leaks, the setup — none of it would’ve happened without Obama giving the green light.

Now, in 2025, the lie is being dragged back into daylight — and this time, by the government itself.

Tulsi Gabbard, as Director of National Intelligence, is overseeing the release of documents related to the origins of Russiagate. Former President Trump has openly called Barack Obama ‘treasonous’ for authorising the operation. That’s not noise. That’s a sitting U.S. President accusing his predecessor of orchestrating an intelligence-led coup against him.

While critics point to bipartisan investigations—such as the Senate Intelligence Committee’s findings and the Mueller report—as evidence that Russian interference in 2016 was real, that’s not the point here. Those reports may confirm interference, but if these newly declassified documents show that senior officials knowingly manipulated timelines, sources, or intelligence to manufacture a collusion narrative, then what we’re dealing with is not politics—it’s an information war waged on the public. Whatever else the intelligence said, it was fed through a weaponised pipeline, and the cost has been catastrophic.

Yes, many in the MAGA base believe it’s just another distraction — a controlled burn to keep attention off Epstein and the intelligence blackmail files we still haven’t seen. They might be right.

But the fact remains: this was a psychological operation directed from the top. It was a fabrication. And it worked.

It ruined Donald Trump’s first term. It turned half the country into conspiracy theorists who thought their President was a Russian agent. It poisoned every diplomatic channel with Moscow. It lit the fuse for the anti-Russian hysteria that paved the way for everything that followed — from Ukraine to censorship to NATO rearmament.

So even if it is a distraction — it still matters.

Because a government that can manufacture that lie, sell it at scale, and face no consequences… will do it again.

Julian Assange said: “If wars can be started by lies, peace can be started by truth.”

And as you will from the following chapters, exposing the Russiagate conspiracy is a gateway to the truth we all need to hear.