Back to episode — Episode 2927 CWSA 08/14/25
Context —
time, is on paper saying talking about the CIA analysis that was being put together that was going to say that Russia was helping Trump and apparently not all of the analysts agreed that there was evidence to make that case. So the people in charge were having a conversation that was on paper and we now know what they were saying. So apparently Clapper was writing this. He seemed to be aware that…
← Previous segment →things that they would not consider normally good form. We said it directly but it gets better.
And he said, as I said, he said this is one project that has to be a team sport. Now imagine if the top people say on this one it's got to be a team sport. If you were a lower level person, unless you were willing to go full whistleblower, and you probably wouldn't have the goods, you would just have suspicions. You would probably say all right, I don't want to ruin my career forever. So if it's got to be a team sport, I'll just shut up.
But it gets better. The following is a sentence that was actually written by James Clapper about this topic when he was telling people they should be on the same team and same page on it. He goes, quote, in the spirit of, and then this is also in quote, in the spirit of this is our story and we're sticking to it. When you say this is our story and we're sticking to it, doesn't that suggest that the story is not real? That's the whole point of that saying, right? That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Isn't the entire context of that that you know your story is not real, you're just sticking to it. Did he not tell them directly by saying this is our story and we're sticking to it? Did he not directly tell the people stop worrying about whether it's true? He did. Right? How else would you interpret that? I interpret it as he's telling them don't worry if this is true. It's more important that you agree. That's what I hear. I don't even know how to interpret it any other way. You know, I usually try to look for the generous interpretation on the other side just so you've heard it. I don't think there is one. I don't think there's a generous interpretation for this. This very clearly to me says we're going to lie and I need you all to back me. That's what I hear.
Anyway, but also separately, but maybe not that separate, sorry about the garbage trucks going wild outside. Apparently Kash Patel, director of the FBI, uncovered a bombshell, according to Just the News, a bombshell memo written in 2017 that showed the extensive political obstruction that career agents in three cities faced when their own bosses and the Obama Justice Department during the 2016 election told them to stop looking into the Hillary Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation.
So we know now that on three separate occasions there were entities in the FBI who believed they had enough information to move against Hillary Clinton and her f
Context —
oundation. Now the foundation, I think everybody understands, was a money laundering operation, right? Don't we all understand that to be obviously true? Some of it might have been donated money that ended up with charities, but that's the cover. What it really is is a way for the Clintons to monetize their connections and their offices and stuff. And when they were in office it received tremendou…
Next segment → →