Scott
Verified User
I just got the free part of the article that shares the title of this thread from Aaron Mate today in my email today. I know that Aaron Mate has been Russiagate for years and I've found his work to be very compelling. Just last month, I made another thread with information on the subject. It can be seen here:
So, considering Aaron's expertise and the fact that Trump is set to meet Putin today in Alaska, I decided to get a 1 month paid subscription to see the rest. Quoting the free part, as well as the conclusion to Mr. Mate's article below:
**
August 15, 2025
Three days before the first summit meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in July 2018, FBI Special Counsel Robert Mueller accused Russian intelligence officers of hacking and leaking Democratic Party emails to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.
Mueller’s suspiciously timed indictment inflamed the all-consuming controversy over Trump’s suspected “collusion” with a “Russian interference” plot to install him in office. The innuendo reached a fever pitch when Trump stood by Putin at a Helsinki news conference. Before a Russiagate-crazed room of corporate journalists clamoring for him to confront his Russian counterpart, Trump instead said that he believed Putin’s “extremely strong and powerful” denial of meddling in the 2016 election.
Trump’s refusal to accept what was widely portrayed as a US intelligence consensus on “Russian interference” triggered a political and media establishment meltdown. CNN anchor Anderson Cooper and Republican Sen. John McCain both agreed that Trump had delivered “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president” in US history. A former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, declared that with Trump’s comments, the US was now “in the midst of a national security crisis.” CIA Director turned MSNBC analyst John Brennan decreed that Trump’s heresy was not only impeachment-worthy, but “nothing short of treasonous.”
With a new Trump-Putin summit beginning today in Alaska, a newly declassified document adds to a growing body of evidence showing that the US president’s skepticism of “Russian interference” was in fact shared at the highest levels of US intelligence.
[snip]
Piecing these declassifications together, the picture is clear: Given that the NSA had already expressed “low confidence” in the Russian hacking allegation back in September, Brennan and Clapper knew that their “paltry” and “second hand” intelligence would not suffice to change the NSA’s mind come December. Therefore, to now assert that the intelligence community had “high confidence” of Russian hacking and leaking, as their January 2017 report would claim, Brennan and Clapper ensured that the NSA was denied access to the evidence.
This explains what Clapper told Rogers in response, which has also been newly disclosed.
“We will facilitate as much mutual transparency as possible as we complete the report, but, more time is not negotiable,” Clapper wrote. “We may have to compromise on our ‘normal’ modalities, since we must do this on such a compressed schedule.” (emphasis added)
The top US intelligence official was telling the NSA Director that complete “transparency” was not “possible,” and that “normal” standards of evidence would have to be “compromised.”
Clapper then appeared to admit that this “compromise” was necessary to weave a false narrative. He added: “It is essential that we (CIA/NSA/FBI/ODNI) be on the same page, and are all supportive of the report—in the highest tradition of ‘that’s OUR story, and we’re sticking’ to it.’”
Ultimately, Clapper’s appeal for a unified “story” – evidence and transparency be damned -- was successful. Despite the NSA’s voicing of at least two major dissents (in September and then December) on the core Russian hacking claim, Rogers still signed on to the ICA and kept his agency’s objections private. Asked about the new revelations by email, Rogers did not respond by the time of publication.
After getting Rogers to stick to the story for the January 2017 report, Clapper and Brennan received a multi-year assist from a credulous US political and media establishment (not to mention many alternative outlets) that parroted their baseless “Russian interference” allegations and shunned dissenting voices who pointed out the evidentiary holes.
That climate of Russiagate stenography and Cold War fearmongering helped push US-Russia relations to historic lows. With Trump and Putin attempting a new round of diplomacy in Alaska, their summit offers a new opportunity to undo the damage of those national security officials who manipulated intelligence, misled the public, and lobbed baseless allegations of treason for questioning their deception.
**
Full article (with paid subscription):
www.aaronmate.net
Constructive feedback welcome.
So, considering Aaron's expertise and the fact that Trump is set to meet Putin today in Alaska, I decided to get a 1 month paid subscription to see the rest. Quoting the free part, as well as the conclusion to Mr. Mate's article below:
**
In Dec. 2016, the NSA complained that it was denied access to the intelligence used to accuse Russia of hacking and leaking Democratic Party emails. US intel chief James Clapper urged "compromise."
August 15, 2025
Three days before the first summit meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in July 2018, FBI Special Counsel Robert Mueller accused Russian intelligence officers of hacking and leaking Democratic Party emails to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.
Mueller’s suspiciously timed indictment inflamed the all-consuming controversy over Trump’s suspected “collusion” with a “Russian interference” plot to install him in office. The innuendo reached a fever pitch when Trump stood by Putin at a Helsinki news conference. Before a Russiagate-crazed room of corporate journalists clamoring for him to confront his Russian counterpart, Trump instead said that he believed Putin’s “extremely strong and powerful” denial of meddling in the 2016 election.
Trump’s refusal to accept what was widely portrayed as a US intelligence consensus on “Russian interference” triggered a political and media establishment meltdown. CNN anchor Anderson Cooper and Republican Sen. John McCain both agreed that Trump had delivered “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president” in US history. A former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, declared that with Trump’s comments, the US was now “in the midst of a national security crisis.” CIA Director turned MSNBC analyst John Brennan decreed that Trump’s heresy was not only impeachment-worthy, but “nothing short of treasonous.”
With a new Trump-Putin summit beginning today in Alaska, a newly declassified document adds to a growing body of evidence showing that the US president’s skepticism of “Russian interference” was in fact shared at the highest levels of US intelligence.
[snip]
Piecing these declassifications together, the picture is clear: Given that the NSA had already expressed “low confidence” in the Russian hacking allegation back in September, Brennan and Clapper knew that their “paltry” and “second hand” intelligence would not suffice to change the NSA’s mind come December. Therefore, to now assert that the intelligence community had “high confidence” of Russian hacking and leaking, as their January 2017 report would claim, Brennan and Clapper ensured that the NSA was denied access to the evidence.
This explains what Clapper told Rogers in response, which has also been newly disclosed.
“We will facilitate as much mutual transparency as possible as we complete the report, but, more time is not negotiable,” Clapper wrote. “We may have to compromise on our ‘normal’ modalities, since we must do this on such a compressed schedule.” (emphasis added)
The top US intelligence official was telling the NSA Director that complete “transparency” was not “possible,” and that “normal” standards of evidence would have to be “compromised.”
Clapper then appeared to admit that this “compromise” was necessary to weave a false narrative. He added: “It is essential that we (CIA/NSA/FBI/ODNI) be on the same page, and are all supportive of the report—in the highest tradition of ‘that’s OUR story, and we’re sticking’ to it.’”
Ultimately, Clapper’s appeal for a unified “story” – evidence and transparency be damned -- was successful. Despite the NSA’s voicing of at least two major dissents (in September and then December) on the core Russian hacking claim, Rogers still signed on to the ICA and kept his agency’s objections private. Asked about the new revelations by email, Rogers did not respond by the time of publication.
After getting Rogers to stick to the story for the January 2017 report, Clapper and Brennan received a multi-year assist from a credulous US political and media establishment (not to mention many alternative outlets) that parroted their baseless “Russian interference” allegations and shunned dissenting voices who pointed out the evidentiary holes.
That climate of Russiagate stenography and Cold War fearmongering helped push US-Russia relations to historic lows. With Trump and Putin attempting a new round of diplomacy in Alaska, their summit offers a new opportunity to undo the damage of those national security officials who manipulated intelligence, misled the public, and lobbed baseless allegations of treason for questioning their deception.
**
Full article (with paid subscription):
As Trump and Putin meet, new evidence that 'Russian interference' was US intel deception
In Dec. 2016, the NSA complained that it was denied access to the intelligence used to accuse Russia of hacking and leaking Democratic Party emails. US intel chief James Clapper urged "compromise."
www.aaronmate.net
Constructive feedback welcome.