Michael Schellenberger

Rank 25 of 47

Score 18

Everyone involved acknowledged the credibility of the source of the Russian intelligence reports and hacked emails, referred to as “T1,” which appears to have been the Netherlands’ General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD), which hacked into the Russian hacking group “Cozy

7/31/2025, 4:00:23 PM

In reply to:

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

42d

Another red flag for Baker was that Lynch had asked Comey to downplay the Clinton email investigation by referring to it as a "matter" rather than an investigation.

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

42d

One of those suspicious behaviors was Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton on a airport tarmac in Phoenix.

"As his wife is under federal investigation for her use of a private email server, former President Bill Clinton met privately with U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch at the

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

42d

What’s more, FBI General Counsel James Baker, “unlike his colleagues, did not dismiss the credibility” of the Russian reports that Obama had pressured Attorney General Loretta Lynch to pressure the FBI to drop the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, particularly given

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

42d

In contrast to the CIA, the FBI rejected the intelligence and invented flimsy reasons not to trust it. The FBI's dismissive attitude also contrasts sharply with the FBI's credulousness toward any evidence that implictated the Trump campaign.

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

42d

The newly declassified appendix to the Durham report is game-changing. It showed that the CIA believed Russian intelligence memos, which analyzed hacked emails and alleged a Clinton Plan to vilify Trump by linking him to Russia, were credible.

"The CIA prepared a written

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

42d

The newly declassified documents on the Trump-Russia collusion hoax are a "nothingburger," say the media. But now, newly declassified intelligence strongly suggests that the FBI helped the Clinton campaign orchestrate the hoax to distract from its investigation into her email.

The statement and accompanying images engage in public discourse by discussing the credibility of intelligence reports and the actions of public officials related to significant political events. The tone is investigative and critical, aiming to question the integrity of the involved parties and the handling of intelligence by government agencies.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement raises concerns about the credibility of intelligence sources and the actions of public officials, which could contribute to public skepticism and mistrust. However, it does not directly cause harm but rather questions the integrity of processes.
Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
The statement respects privacy by focusing on public figures and their professional actions rather than personal attacks. It does not engage in cyberbullying or hate speech. [+1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in criticism of public officials and agencies, but it does so by presenting evidence and questioning actions rather than resorting to personal attacks. [+1]