Tulsi’s Come to the Party

Introduction by DM

Volcanic disclosures.

Obama, Clapper, Comey and others plotted the coup of a president. DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard has exposed that Obama et al., manipulated the intelligence and began a years-long hoax to undermine a sitting president and con the people of America. Is this Treason?

We are so used to Deep State manipulation and lies, that it is difficult to fully comprehend how serious these treasonous actions are.

This is proof you cannot believe a single thing from the MSM and from established political actors. I’m sure Covid was brought in early to undermine the 2020.

The first report:

As an EMERGENCY, I am putting this donation request out there… for KIDS / FAMILY XYZ. I am publicly unable to describe their predicament, but I will most definitely be publishing their story at the right time. Donations thru The Jammed. Thanks.

DONATION LINK

Gen Flynn praises Tulsi Gabbard

Kerri Lane’s report revealing some old footage of Obama and Comey. Whoooaaa!

Some more reports

Professor Nez

Sourced from Professor Nez:

STEP 1: PRE-ELECTION COVER-UP – IC KNEW RUSSIA COULDN’T HACK THE VOTE, BUT HID IT FROM AMERICANS Before the November 8, 2016 election, multiple IC reports concluded Russia lacked the intent and capability to manipulate vote counts via cyber attacks. Yet, officials “softened” language and withheld findings to avoid contradicting the emerging anti-Trump narrative. ● August 31, 2016: DHS Official Warns Clapper – “No Indication of Russian Threat”: A DHS email to then-DNI James Clapper explicitly stated: “There is no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count through cyber means.” It emphasized that any cyber activity would mainly erode public confidence, not alter results (e.g., theft of voter PII). Clapper’s team worked with CIA on a President’s Daily Brief (PDB) submission echoing this low-risk assessment.

● September 2, 2016: FBI Demands “Softening” of Intel: The FBI, uncomfortable with definitive statements that Russia didn’t intend to disrupt elections, requested changes to a pre-election ICA draft. The lead PDB author agreed, diluting the language from firm conclusions to vague warnings.

● September 12, 2016: IC Publishes Damning ICA – Foreign Adversaries “Will Probably Not Obtain Capabilities”: The unclassified ICA judged with moderate confidence that “foreign adversaries do not have and will probably not obtain the capabilities to successfully execute widespread and undetected cyber attacks” on U.S. election infrastructure. A follow-up PDB two days later reinforced: adversaries couldn’t “covertly overturn the vote outcome.”

● October 7, 2016: ODNI/DHS Press Release Suppresses Key Facts: Despite low-confidence attributions from FBI and NSA linking DNC/DCCC hacks to Russia, the joint statement claimed “confidence” in Russian direction—omitting the IC’s internal doubts and the September findings of no vote manipulation capability.

Severity Amplified: This pre-election suppression kept voters in the dark, allowing media hysteria about “Russian hacking” to flourish unchecked, potentially swaying public opinion against Trump.

STEP 2: TRUMP WINS – POST-ELECTION PANIC SETS IN, IC BURIES EXONERATING EVIDENCE Trump’s victory on November 8, 2016, triggered a scramble. IC drafts confirming no Russian impact were killed, while leaks pushed false narratives of election interference.

● December 7, 2016: New PDB Draft – “No Evidence of Cyber Manipulation”: DNI Clapper’s office prepared talking points: “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome” and “We have no evidence of cyber manipulation of election infrastructure intended to alter results.” It noted minimal targeting by cyber criminals, not state actors, and unattributed DDoS attacks with no impact.

● December 8, 2016: PDB Confirms “Russian and Criminal Actors Did Not Impact” Results: The draft PDB assessed: “Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.” Due to “high administration interest,” it was slated for publication the next day—but FBI Director James Comey withdrew coordination, drafted a dissent, and a senior PDB official killed it “based on some new guidance.” The PDB was never published.

● Same Day: Deep State Leaks False Intel to Media: IC officials leaked to the Washington Post that Russia used “cyber means” to “influence the outcome of the election”—directly contradicting the unpublished PDB. Another leak claimed CIA concluded Russia helped Trump win, despite no official ICA existing yet. ● December 14, 2016: More Leaks Escalate Hoax – “High Confidence” in Putin’s Involvement: Media reported IC believed with “high level of confidence” that Putin personally directed the “U.S. Election Hack”—pure fabrication, as prior assessments showed no such capability or intent.

● December 16, 2016: Obama Fuels Narrative Despite Admitting No Tampering: Obama publicly stated no “evidence of machines being tampered with,” but claimed concern over hacks that could “affect the actual election process.” Reality: Multiple IC products confirmed no credible Russian intent or capability.

Severity Amplified: These actions buried proof of a clean election, igniting the “Russia stole the election” myth that poisoned Trump’s presidency from Day 1.

STEP 2: TRUMP WINS – POST-ELECTION PANIC SETS IN, IC BURIES EXONERATING EVIDENCE Trump’s victory on November 8, 2016, triggered a scramble. IC drafts confirming no Russian impact were killed, while leaks pushed false narratives of election interference.

● December 7, 2016: New PDB Draft – “No Evidence of Cyber Manipulation”: DNI Clapper’s office prepared talking points: “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome” and “We have no evidence of cyber manipulation of election infrastructure intended to alter results.” It noted minimal targeting by cyber criminals, not state actors, and unattributed DDoS attacks with no impact.

● December 8, 2016: PDB Confirms “Russian and Criminal Actors Did Not Impact” Results: The draft PDB assessed: “Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.” Due to “high administration interest,” it was slated for publication the next day—but FBI Director James Comey withdrew coordination, drafted a dissent, and a senior PDB official killed it “based on some new guidance.” The PDB was never published.

● Same Day: Deep State Leaks False Intel to Media: IC officials leaked to the Washington Post that Russia used “cyber means” to “influence the outcome of the election”—directly contradicting the unpublished PDB. Another leak claimed CIA concluded Russia helped Trump win, despite no official ICA existing yet. ● December 14, 2016: More Leaks Escalate Hoax – “High Confidence” in Putin’s Involvement: Media reported IC believed with “high level of confidence” that Putin personally directed the “U.S. Election Hack”—pure fabrication, as prior assessments showed no such capability or intent.

● December 16, 2016: Obama Fuels Narrative Despite Admitting No Tampering: Obama publicly stated no “evidence of machines being tampered with,” but claimed concern over hacks that could “affect the actual election process.” Reality: Multiple IC products confirmed no credible Russian intent or capability.

Severity Amplified: These actions buried proof of a clean election, igniting the “Russia stole the election” myth that poisoned Trump’s presidency from Day 1.

STEP 4: YEARS LATER – WHISTLEBLOWER UNCOVERS DOSSIER’S ROLE, FOIA CONFIRMS HOAX Fast-forward to 2019: The whistleblower learns the Dossier’s true influence, exposing the long-term cover-up.

● September 18, 2019: FOIA Request Reveals Dossier “Was a Factor” in ICA: An IC official asked the whistleblower to search for Steele Dossier material, admitting it “was a factor” in the Obama ICA. This shocked the whistleblower, who recalled Clapper viewing it as “untrustworthy.” Emails confirm no prior NIC use of Dossier in credible analyses.

Severity Amplified: This proves the ICA was tainted from the start, fueling a multi-year witch hunt that divided America and wasted millions in taxpayer dollars.