"So when we've met, when I came out of the plane and I said, 'Good afternoon, dear neighbor. Very good to see you in good health and to see you alive.' I think that is very neighborly."

"I think that's some kind words that we can say to each other. We're separated by the strait of Bering, though, there are two islands only between the Russian Island and the U.S. Island. They're only four kilometers apart. We are close neighbors, and it's a fact."

Said Vladimir Putin, quoted in "Here's the transcript of what Putin and Trump said in Alaska." 

I pulled that quote because it's very near the beginning and because it reminds me of "I can see Russia from my house and because "to see you alive" might be what he'd say if he had been behind the 2 assassination attempts.

But I want to read it all. I'm going to live-blog my reading of the transcript here. Sorry I missed the live event last night, but at the last second we realized we could get access to the baseball game by submitting to the plot to force us to subscribe to Apple TV. The home team extended its winning streak to 13. We're joking please, please it's too much winning, we can't take it anymore.

On to the transcript. Putin continues:

"It means that the Justice Department is prepared to go out and use its criminal powers, the power of subpoena, the power to compel witnesses to testify, the ability to go to a judge and try and get a search warrant.... the federal government's most powerful tools...."

Words intoned unironically on today's episode of the NYT "Daily" podcast, which is titled "The Sprawling Government Effort to Prosecute Barack Obama."

Transcript and audio at Podscribe, here.

I was out on my sunrise walk, listening with earbuds, and when I heard "get a search warrant," I had to restrain myself from voicing my sarcasm: Who could have thought that a former U.S. President would have a search warrant executed against him? Is there a plan to invade his home in the early morning hours? To root through the underpants and bras of the former First Lady? Inconceivable — wasn't it? — before this tyrant fought his way back into the White House.

Complicated business.

We found it. We declassified it.

Now Congress can see how classified info was leaked to shape political narratives - and decide if our institutions were weaponized against the American people. pic.twitter.com/PCpLFLuPmI

— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) August 12, 2025

AI is maddening, but also fascinating. This previously would’ve taken days of work, but Grok just did it in less than three minutes. pic.twitter.com/OH8wSqmrbH

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) August 12, 2025

"The Russiagate scandal has long been one of the most convoluted, hard-to-follow news stories of all time...."

"Those of us who covered the story from the start had a difficult time explaining to audiences what it was, as we ourselves didn’t know. Now we do.... Finally, it seems, we can explain.... It wasn’t the start of a corruption story about Trump, but the cover-up of a still-unresolved Hillary Clinton scandal. This is purely a Clinton corruption story.... With the help of the declassified Durham material, we can explain the whole affair in three brushstrokes. One, Hillary Clinton and her team apparently hoped to deflect from her email scandal and other problems via a campaign tying Trump to Putin. Two, American security services learned of these plans. Three — and this is the most important part — instead of outing them, authorities used state resources to massively expand and amplify her scheme.... Hillary Clinton got in a jam, and the FBI, CIA, and the Obama White House got her out of it by setting Trump up. That’s it...."

Writes Matt Taibbi, in "No Doubt Left: Russiagate Was a Cover-Up/The most infuriatingly complex scandal of all time has just been reduced to a page or two, thanks to another declassified release" (Substack).

More from Taibbi at "The New York Times Can't Stop Sucking/How many times can one newspaper screw up a story?" (Substack).

ADDED: This post is really a place-holder. It marks my own nonfollowing of the story. Notice what I am quoting — Taibbi's acknowledgment that the story is too hard for people to follow. And it's not as though he's solving the problem for us. The quoted material is conclusory assertion. For someone who isn't already pro- or anti-Trump, you still have no way to sort out what's true. I also read The New York Times, and here's Taibbi telling me The New York Times is systematically screwing it up. Maybe. How am I supposed to know? 

"Trump just wants the media to cover the story."

I'm reading "Getting media to cover Obamagate/Crazy Like A Fox Trump did it again with a fake but accurate video" by Don Surber, at Substack.

The media refused this weekend to cover the story of the century, in which Obama personally helped create and promote Russiagate which tied the first presidency of Donald Trump up in knots for years and also served as a cover story for Obama using the FBI to spy on Trump....

President Trump knows beating the media better than anyone. He did what no one would ever believe possible when he forced Disney’s ABC to admit it lied about him, He collected legal fees and a $15 million donation to the Trump Presidential Library. He also collected $16 million for the library from CBS for making Kamala Harris sound intelligent in a heavily edited 60 Minutes story. You’re gonna need a bigger library. Trump forced NBC to give him equal time for Kamala’s appearance on Saturday Night Live. His time was on Sunday Night Football, which has 10 times the audience.

The media wants the Obamagate story to go away, but Trump figured out a way to make them admit there is a story. He posted an AI video of Obama being arrested. This is his post on Truth Social....

Crosshairs!

I see Matt Taibbi has a piece titled "Barack Obama Now Squarely in Russiagate Crosshairs/New disclosures from a Tulsi Gabbard-led working group point directly to the top, as the legacy of 'Hope and Change' begins a plunge to the ocean floor."

I do not like the overheated metaphor, especially the evocation of assassination.

And the use of "begins" before "plunge to the ocean floor" shows how silly it is. What is the beginning of "a plunge to the ocean floor"? Breaking the surface? It calls to mind a tumble from a paddleboard. How far down is "the ocean floor"? 8 feet?

"Unpopular opinion but I don’t care about this unless they actually arrest and prosecute the culprits, including Obama."

"You cannot allege a 'treasonous conspiracy' and then do nothing about it. The typical pattern by Republicans since forever is to make these kinds of claims (which I don’t doubt by the way), but to make them on Twitter and Fox News, and never actually bring it to a court of law so that the parties responsible can be held accountable for their crimes. I’m tired of it. Go arrest these people and bring them to justice. Then I’ll care. If you won’t do that then what does any of this matter?"

Writes Matt Walsh, responding to that thread Tulsi Gabbard posted.

Yeah, I'm tired of it too. Of that and a few other things.

"I’m not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin..."

"... and this despite the Radical Left’s Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I’m going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT’S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don’t make a 'deal,' and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let’s get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It’s time to 'MAKE A DEAL.' NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!"

Writes President Trump, at Truth Social.

That made me want to quote this passage from Trump's inaugural address:

"This is firing the F.B.I. director.... It is extremely dangerous to have a change in an F.B.I. director just after a change in administration."

Said an anonymous "law enforcement official," quoted in "Trump Says He Will Nominate Kash Patel to Run F.B.I./President-elect Donald J. Trump turned to a firebrand loyalist to become director of the bureau, which he sees as part of a ‘deep state’ conspiracy against him" (NYT).

Mr. Patel laid out his vision for wreaking vengeance on the F.B.I. and Justice Department in a book, “Government Gangsters,” calling for clearing out the top ranks of the bureau, which he called “a threat to the people.” He also wrote a children’s book, “The Plot Against the King,” telling through fantasy the story of the investigations into Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign’s possible ties to Russians.... 

In planning to remove Mr. Wray from atop the nation’s premier law enforcement agency, Mr. Trump would be echoing one of the most defining acts of his first term, his dismissal of James B. Comey as F.B.I. director as investigations of Trump associates began to heat up. That act led to the appointment of the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who spent nearly two years examining the Trump campaign’s possible ties to Russia....

ADDED:

Do you guys even understand how amazing this Kash appointment is?!

Let me remind you pic.twitter.com/nLo4aIFuDF

— Defender of the Republic 🇺🇸 (@realdefender45) December 1, 2024

AND:

🧵 of MSNBC Meltdowns tonight over Kash Patel 🤣

“The most dangerous nominee we’ve seen yet to our democracy” pic.twitter.com/QRhzfFUNOT

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 1, 2024

PLUS:

This is Kash Patel, Trump's nominee for FBI Director. The Deep State is f*cked. pic.twitter.com/cejy7hhioP

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) December 1, 2024

"The whole thing is hard for me to write. I couldn't sleep for two years after the election. I was so angry, I wasn't fit to be around."

"I apologize to all those who endured my outbursts of rage, which lasted for years and bothered or bored people who thought it pointless to rehash things that couldn't be changed...."

Writes Bill Clinton in his new book, quoted in "Bill Clinton makes stunning confession about his bizarre behavior after Hillary's defeat in America's 'darkest election'" (Daily Mail).

Presumably, he means he didn't sleep well. The assertion that he couldn't sleep for 2 years is patently untrue. He's still alive.

Clinton also writes in a mode that would be called "election denialism" if it were pro-Trump: "Almost two years after the election, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a highly regarded social scientist said Russia's cyber attacks piled on top of Comey's interventions were effective enough to persuade voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to vote for third parties or stay at home. If so, Putin's enablers were Comey and the political press."

What about the Russia hoax that Hillary participated in?! Shouldn't that balance the effect of "Russia's cyber attacks"?

What were the "cyber attacks"? Here's Kathleen Hall Jamieson's book, "Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a President: What We Don't, Can't, and Do Know" (Amazon Associates link). From a 2018 New Yorker article about that book:

JD Vance versus Jake Tapper.

NEW: JD Vance shuts down a very emotional Jake Tapper over CNN’s constant coverage of hoaxes.

Tapper, who was very emotional throughout the interview, sat as Vance roasted CNN for their biased coverage.

Vance: Ask yourself a basic question about network integrity. You guys… pic.twitter.com/0Ce84sWrH3

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 27, 2024

And this montage works as a fact-check on Tapper:

 

BREAKING: JD Vance called out Fake Tapper for the lies he pushed about Russiagate earlier this morning

Tapper denied telling any lies

So here are 3.5 minutes of Jake Tapper spreading Russiagate conspiracy theory pic.twitter.com/qeiFMtimx9

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) October 27, 2024

"I mean, like, what I think probably happened on January 6th where they withheld the police presence? If something happens, well, this will sink Trump forever."

"I mean, Pelosi, her people knew about this. They knew about possible plans to breach the Capitol. And according to J. Michael Waller, there was not one law enforcement officer present on the west side of the Capitol. How can that possibly be? But of course, the Senate Committee, they didn't investigate that. The House January 6th committee obviously didn't investigate that. I mean, those were also just whitewashes, committees designed to not get to the truth, but to cover up what probably happened. Okay. To get Trump. So I completely understand the suspicion that's out there. It's legitimate suspicion, and that's why this has to be fully investigated. I'm not going to rest until we uncover things. "

Said Senator Ron Johnson (text and audio at Real Clear Politics), asked about the assassination attempt.

"And let's face it, I uncovered an awful lot. I know firsthand how corrupt the FBI's investigation was. I've been a target of their corruption - the recipient of unsolicited briefings where they talked about being a target of Russian disinformation to try and obviously sabotage the revelation of the Hunter Biden laptop. But it kind of worked because we didn't take possession that when it was first offered to us. We went to the FBI to find out what they knew about it. They wouldn't tell us for weeks until the computer shop guy turned it over to Rudy Giuliani's attorney. The rest is history. So, no, these guys know what they're doing. They pre-sabotaged the Hunter Biden laptop. They completely, it was a complete corruption of the Russian collusion hoax. And by the way, has the Washington Post, have these guys given back the Pulitzer Prizes they earned or won for a complete false story, the narrative they promoted that put America in political turmoil, that it's still present to this day. I mean, where's the mea culpas in the media? You'll never get it. Because they're active advocates for the left themselves. That's the problem. Trump is not up against Kamala Harris. He's up against the leftist media."

"If it is felony 'election interference' for a candidate to try to keep private the details of a seamy relationship, what other candidate concealments — of a lawful and entirely personal nature — must be reported?"

"Must the out-of-pocket settlement for that fender-bender be disclosed, since it conceals a candidate's bad driving skills? How about plastic surgery, since it masks the true ravages of age or health?... The Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016 paid an opposition-research firm to produce a bogus dossier that accused Mr. Trump of collusion with Russia. They fed it to the FBI and leaked it to the public prior to the 2016 election. The DNC and Mrs. Clinton's campaign reported the expenditures to the Federal Election Commission but concealed their true nature by describing the payments as 'legal' services, as Mr. Trump did with his NDA. The FEC fined them for the deception, but under Mr. Bragg's theory it should count as criminal election interference."

Writes Kimberley A. Strassel, in "Alvin Bragg and Democrats' 'Election Interference'/His theory in New York state’s Trump case is crazier than you think" (Wall Street Journal).

Mary Katharine Ham crushes Bill Maher and Sam Harris. Great job — pithy and theatrical!

Mary Katharine Ham tries to cure Bill Maher and Sam Harris from their Trump derangement syndrome. pic.twitter.com/J51lcATOxO

— Turncoat Don (@TurncoatD) October 1, 2023

Ron DeSantis tells Bill Maher "don't act like" it was a "unique thing" to say that the election was stolen...

... and gets applause from the "Real Time" audience:

"Let's go back to 2016. Your friends in Hollywood were cutting ads telling the Electoral College to vote against Trump... because the election was stolen. They said Russia stole the election. For years they said that."

"Many in America are asking why President Trump is being prosecuted for doing the very same thing Democrats like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton have done..."

"... and the answer is very simple. Like a third-world corrupt dictator, Biden will use any means necessary to stop the one Republican he knows he can't beat."

So ends an effective 10-minute ad from the Trump campaign, which you can view at "Trump Campaign: Democrats "Violently Claimed The Last Three Republican Presidential Wins Were Stolen" (RCP).

I don't see the factual basis for "Violently Claimed." But maybe that's the point. To get people — including Trump opponents — to react, thus upping the virality of the video. And it's predictable what the answer will be: Trump is accused of violence, when his claims about the election were not violent. It's just the fair play of turnabout. 

What I like about that 10-minute video is the meaty montage of prominent Democrats claiming — over and over — that the 2000, 2004, and 2016 presidential elections were stolen. Every time, in this century, that the Republican won, Democrats persisted in claiming they'd actually won. They firmly voiced their belief — real or fake — that the election was stolen. And some of that was clearly fake. They knew the claim that the Russians colluded was a lie. How could they not?

By the way, I'd embed that 10-minute video here if I had the code, but RCP doesn't offer embed code, and I've looked elsewhere. I couldn't find it at Truth Social, it's not at Trump's YouTube account, and I've tried Googling.

"Those 51 intel agents that signed a letter that said the Hunter Biden information was all wrong, was Russia collusion, many of them have a security clearance."

"We’re going to bring them before a committee. I’m going to have them have a hearing​,​ bring them and subpoena them before a committee. Why did they sign it? Why did they lie to the American public?... Why did you use the reputation that America was able to give to you … but use it for a political purpose and lie to the American public?"

Said Kevin McCarthy, the likely Speaker of the House, come January, quoted in the NY Post.

Glenn Greenwald will never stop talking about this and doesn't care if it's annoying.

I'll never stop talking about this and don't care if it's annoying.

This is a huge journalistic scandal: almost every major news outlet ratified an outright lie to manipulate the 2020 election and - to this day - not one of them, not one, has apologized, explained or retracted. pic.twitter.com/O6ooGGlWHz

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) October 14, 2022

"Wall Street Journal investigative report this week underlines just how frivolous were the claims in the Steele dossier, and how nonexistent was the attempt..."

"... by Christopher Steele, the vaunted British ex-spy, to verify or even vet them. The sources for many of the Steele allegations consisted of three people 'brought together over a minor corporate-publicity contract,' not one of whom had any inside knowledge of Kremlin politics or the Trump campaign.... To be emphasized with extreme prejudice is Mr. Steele's studious incuriosity about the sourcing of the garbage he passed on to the Clinton campaign, with the only interesting question being how cognizant was the Clinton campaign or did it also not care.... Whatever the Kremlin's own six-figure investment in Facebook and Twitter memes or even its trafficking in stolen Democratic emails, nothing in Vladimir Putin's bag of tricks inflicted one-millionth the damage on American life that the Steele fabrications did.... Mr. Trump may be a compendium of human vices but he will always be the president who withstood the most insidious, organized slur in modern memory. His enemies did that for him, not least among them a largely cretinous media that showed its true colors, which turned out to have nothing to do with fearless and searching concern for the truth...."

Writes Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. in "What Did the Steele Dossier Hoax Cost America? Along with the press, what about the Russia ‘experts’ who played along or failed to oppose the collusion lie?" (Wall Street Journal).

Annoyingly, the WSJ has the wrong link for the investigative report. It goes to a column Jenkins wrote in 2017, something he refers to elsewhere in this new column. But it should go to the May 9th article, "Three Friends Chatting: How the Steele Dossier Was Created/Report that rattled the political world often echoed talk among three acquaintances, including the main investigator and an old schoolmate."

"Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign paid an internet company to 'infiltrate' servers at Trump Tower and the White House in order to link Donald Trump to Russia, a bombshell new legal filing alleges...."

"Special Counsel John Durham filed a motion related to potential conflicts of interests in connection with the case of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who is charged with lying to the feds.... Sussmann allegedly told the FBI he was not working on behalf of Clinton when he presented the agency with documents that supposedly linked the Trump Organization to a Kremlin-tied bank two months before the election.... Durham’s motion reportedly alleged Sussmann 'had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign.' Records showed he 'repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations,' which involved an investigative firm, a tech executive, cyber researchers and numerous employees at internet companies, the motion reportedly stated."

The NY Post reports.

ADDED:

Another one for the “Trump was right” jar.

pic.twitter.com/N0y4Skk2GK

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) February 13, 2022