Monday, August 25, 2025

‘No evidence’: Several campuses nationwide hit with false reports of active shooters

 
By Jennifer Kabbany - Fix Editor  |  August 25, 2025  |  The College Fix

Key Takeaways

  • Multiple universities received false reports of active shooters, causing panic and temporary lockdowns as classes resumed for the fall semester.
  • No evidence of any actual threats was found in the reported incidents.
  • False reports occurred at the University of South Carolina, Iowa State University, University of Tennessee, Villanova and University of Arkansas.

As campuses nationwide welcome students and faculty back to school, several universities across the nation have had to deal with false reports of active shooters.

On Monday, Fayetteville police announced there is no evidence of an active shooter at the University of Arkansas despite earlier reports.

The news came a few hours after students received a text alert warning of an active shooter situation at Mullins Library that stated: “RazALERT Emergency Notification: Avoid the area of Mullins Library due to an active shooter reported. Avoid. Deny. Defend.”

“The shooter reports at the University of Arkansas come days after ‘hoax’ active shooter reports at Villanova University and the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga led to panic and temporary lockdowns at the two campuses as they kicked off their fall semesters,” ABC reported.

Villanova dealt with two separate false claims as it kicked off the fall semester.

“For the second time in a week, an active shooter report turned out to be fake,” reported Fox 29 on Monday.

Officers had responded to reports of an active shooter at Villanova’s Austin Hall just before noon on Sunday, a few days after an anonymous report of an active shooter in the Charles Widger School of Law, the outlet reported, adding: “Both incidents are being investigated, but no further details about the false reports have been released at this time.”

What’s more, University of South Carolina students were told to shelter in place Sunday after an active shooter was reported near the school’s library, but “a campus alert later stated that there was no evidence of a shooter as police continued to investigate, and an all-clear was issued,” USA Today reported.

Similar incidents occurred at Iowa State University and the University of Tennessee.

“Police converged on the University of Tennessee at Knoxville campus Aug. 25 in response to a report of a gunman at Hodges Library, but found no threat. A university spokesperson and Knoxville police told Knox News it turned out to be a false report,” Knox News reported.

And in Iowa, police are investigating what they say is a false report of an active shooter at Iowa State University in Ames, KCCI news reported.

“Iowa State University police chief Michael Newton said the initial call came in reporting a person with a rifle at Friley Hall, a 5-story residence hall on campus. Authorities responded swiftly, he said, and conducted a search of the hall and checked video for any truth to the report. They also received a second call about an ‘active shooter’ at ISU’s Parks Library,” the news outlet reported.

“This is really frustrating,” Newton said of the hoax. “It brings an element of potential danger that doesn’t need to be there.”

MORE: FBI withholds details about suspects in bomb threats targeting HBCUs

Image CAPTION & CREDIT: Iowa State University campus; EQ Roy/Shutterstock

Gavin’s Limpy Bluster


California’s Governor Gavin Newsom took to Instagram this week with his trademark smirk and a warning shot at Washington: maybe California should withhold resources from the feds. His boast rested on a well-worn talking point—that California pays more into the federal treasury than it gets back. Newsom postured as if this made him the master of the federal purse. In his mind, California can flip the switch and bring Washington to its knees.  

But peel back the slick delivery, and you find bluster as empty as the boarded-up storefronts of San Francisco. Yes, California’s taxpayers send more money to Washington than the state receives in federal spending. So do other states with large economies, like New York and New Jersey. That imbalance has existed for decades. But the claim that California can simply “withhold” those funds is constitutional nonsense. The Sixteenth Amendment provides for the collection of federal income taxes, not state discretion. Sacramento cannot hijack IRS collections. Newsom knows this. He also knows most viewers of his reel don’t.  

What California can do—and too often does—is obstruct cooperation with the federal government. By declaring California a “sanctuary state,” Newsom has already limited law enforcement collaboration on immigration and terrorism. In 2017, California withdrew from the Joint Terrorism Task Force, depriving local police of coordination with anti-terror specialists. That wasn’t about protecting civil liberties; it was about virtue-signaling to the far left. The cost was public safety.  

Newsom’s record at home makes the idea of him “teaching lessons” laughable. California once housed corporate giants by the dozens. Tesla, Oracle, Hewlett Packard, and hundreds of mid-sized firms have moved to Texas, Florida, and Tennessee. Why? Punitive taxes, suffocating regulation, and skyrocketing costs of living. The state bleeds talent and jobs because Newsom’s government views private enterprise as a piggy bank.  

Walk the streets of Los Angeles or San Francisco and you’ll find tents, open drug use, and human waste on sidewalks. Billions have been spent on “solutions,” yet the problem worsens each year. California’s urban centers now double as cautionary tales of progressive policy. Newsom famously locked down his citizens—shutting businesses, schools, and churches—while breaking his own rules for fine-dining at the French Laundry. He forced Californians to comply with “standards” he never followed himself. Worse, he embraced Anthony Fauci’s shifting advice as gospel, demanding masks long after evidence discredited their effectiveness.  

Despite its size and wealth, California can’t even keep the lights on. Rolling blackouts are now a way of life. Newsom insists on racing toward “green” goals, banning gas cars by 2035, while Californians already pay the nation’s highest gas prices and some of its highest utility rates. This is the résumé of the man claiming he can flex fiscal power against the federal government.  

Contrast Newsom’s record with states like Florida and Texas—two destinations for the millions fleeing California. In the past few years, more than half a million Californians have relocated, voting with their feet against high taxes, rampant crime, and eroding freedoms. The U-Haul index doesn’t lie: California residents are desperate to leave, while red states are overwhelmed by inbound demand. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis famously cleaned Newsom’s clock in their televised debate, hammering him on crime, education, and economic freedom. The numbers were not on Gavin’s side. Californians endure higher poverty rates than Floridians despite higher taxes and supposedly greater “investment.” Businesses and families simply thrive better elsewhere.  

So why does Gavin Newsom posture with threats he cannot deliver? Because bluster is all he has left. His presidential ambitions, once floated eagerly by the media, withered in the spotlight. Democrats didn’t see a charismatic alternative to Biden; they saw a West Coast politician presiding over dysfunction. The Instagram reels are attempts at relevance, a digital smirk to reassure himself he still matters.  

But Californians see through it. They see their paychecks devoured by Sacramento’s insatiable appetite. They see their streets unsafe, their kids’ schools failing, their bills rising. They see a governor more concerned with attacking Trump than fixing the Golden State.  

Newsom’s talk of withholding funds is the epitome of “limpy bluster”—loud enough to sound tough, empty enough to reveal impotence. California cannot bully Washington into submission, and Gavin Newsom cannot escape the wreckage his policies have created. The governor should spend less time posturing on Instagram and more time picking up the pieces of the state he has broken. Until then, Californians will keep leaving, corporations will keep fleeing, and Newsom will keep smirking for the cameras, hoping no one notices the truth: his threats carry no weight, his record carries no pride, and his state carries the burden of his failures.



Podcast thread for August 25

 

Happy Monday!

The Godfather Presidency


When the FBI visited Deep Stater John Bolton early Friday morning, a line from The Godfather crept into my mind: “Today I settle all family business.”  Surely I wasn’t the only one who hoped cable news would soon be reporting similar raids at the homes of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Brennan, James Comey, Jim Clapper, Susan Rice, and all the other co-conspirators responsible for the Russia Collusion Hoax, the Ukraine impeachment, the Hunter Biden laptop cover-up, and all the fraudulently predicated criminal investigations into President Trump and his associates.

Alas, Bolton was the only fish dumped out of his sanctuary bowl for the time being.  Still, with the farcical half-a-billion-dollar civil fraud judgment against Trump recently overturned and the Supreme Court slowly but surely ruling in his favor on a host of executive orders intended to streamline the federal government, I feel as if we’re getting closer to a time when a great deal of “family business” will be settled swiftly.

That thought sparked another thought: President Trump’s entire governing philosophy has a lot in common with some of the better wisdom from the Godfather movies.  Consider some of these jewels from Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola:

(1) “Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.”

Does it drive you nuts that Trump seems to quickly forgive people who wrong him?  He lets left-wing “journalists” interview him.  He gave Hillary Clinton a pass for illegally transferring highly classified government documents to a private and unsecured computer server.  He even considered Mitt Romney — a “man” who repeatedly stabbed him in the back — for the position of secretary of State!

At the same time, though, Trump has no problem rumbling with those he brings near.  After all, he made Bolton his chief national security adviser before firing the warmonger a year later.  Trump likes having his adversaries where he can see them.  That reminds me of something Sonny Corleone once said: “You gotta get ’em close like this, and badda-bing, you blow their brains all over your nice Ivy League suit.”

(2) “I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse.”

Most of the celebrity economists on television hate tariffs because they primarily benefit American workers and Main Street businesses, while threatening the bottom line of multinational corporations and Wall Street investment firms.  For years, the pundits have said that Trump’s tariffs would destroy both the economy and relations with allies.  What Trump and his economic policy team have known all along, though, is that no nation on the planet can afford to be closed off from the American market.

American consumers are the wealth-creating engine for the entire world.  When Trump insists that other nations treat America fairly, he does so while holding a giant stick.

(3) “Don’t ever take sides with anyone against the family again.”

Notice to all Democrat-run “sanctuary cities”: Your days of aiding and abetting illegal aliens, harboring criminals, and putting the American people in danger are over.  How many times have we heard Democrats describe foreign nationals who broke into our country more favorably than they describe American citizens?  How often have we seen Democrats fighting tooth and nail to keep foreign robbers, rapists, and murderers in the United States?

President Trump is absolutely committed to removing invaders from Democrat “sanctuaries” and preventing future harm to Americans.  He will assume control over criminal enforcement operations in Democrat-run cities if he must.  The era of taking sides against the family has come to an end.

(4) “It’s not personal; it’s strictly business.”

Trump’s done with North American trade “deals” that enable Canada and Mexico to operate as pass-through entities for China and other adversaries flooding American markets with cheap goods.  Whether it’s illegal drugs or finished products from foreign companies exploiting trade loopholes, the U.S. will no longer subsidize Mexico’s cartel government or Canada’s “Green New Deal” unicorn economy.  America must be self-resilient and have an economy more diverse than Wall Street bankers and taxpayer-funded NGOs.  It’s not personal, Prime Minister Carney.  It’s economic security.

(5) “Hold on to your friends, but make peace with your enemies.”

The Russia Collusion Hoaxers can push for war with Russia all they want.  President Trump knows that America loses if it gets stuck in a European civil war over Russian-speaking lands in Ukraine whose people have repeatedly voted to be a part of the Russian Federation.  Sending money and weapons to Ukraine until every last able-bodied man dies prolongs useless slaughter.  From the Arctic to the Middle East, the U.S. and Russia have much more to gain by working together.  Both also correctly view communist China as a serious adversary.  As Sollozzo tells Tom Hagen, “I don’t like violence. ... I’m a businessman.  Blood is a big expense.”

(6) “Revenge is a dish best served cold.”

Hillary, Obama, the lawfare operatives at the DOJ, or the gangsters manipulating global affairs in the espionage agencies — take your pick.  With Bolton getting his home and office tossed and ongoing criminal investigations heating up with regards to Senator Adam Schiff, New York attorney general Letitia James, and many others, those who abused their offices to defraud the American people and overthrow President Trump in a Deep State-engineered coup d’état should be afraid.  How many Establishment figures in D.C. are unlawfully in possession of classified materials?  How many have profited in quid-pro-quo arrangements with foreign nations?  How many have committed fraud when signing mortgage documents?  How many are guilty of insider trading?  Perhaps we will soon know.

(7) “A man who doesn’t spend time with his family can never be a real man.”

Out with the “transgender” madness.  In with the traditional nuclear family.  Have you noticed that the winds of American culture are shifting after twelve years of Obama-Biden delusions during which we were told that families are “oppressive” and “systemically racist”?  Obama’s “Life of Julia” campaign promised women that they did not need men or children because the government would be their perfect “partner” for life.  Biden’s DOJ harassed parents for opposing school districts’ obsession with sexualizing childhood education.  The Democrat party argues that teachers should secretly “transition” children away from their biological sex and assist young girls in obtaining abortions without parental notification.  Trump is putting an end to all that.  

Children need moms and dads.  Adults need spouses.  America needs more children.  Families grow the economy and foster strong communities.  As the Trump administration shows every day, there is nothing more critical for America’s success than promoting healthy American families.

(8) “Great men are not born great; they grow great.”

There are many similarities between Donald Trump and Winston Churchill.  Despised by the Establishment of their respective times, they changed the course of history through sheer force of will.  They share an exuberant energy and tenacious spirit.  Churchill reportedly remarked, “Success is going from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm.”  After surviving an assassin’s bullet, Trump clenched his fist and shouted, “Fight!  Fight!  Fight!”  These two imperfect men perfectly personify this lesson in leadership: Never give up!  You are not bestowed with that kind of greatness upon birth.  You must suffer and fall and get back up — again and again — until everyone — including your opponents — marvels at your fearlessness.

(9) “I believe in America.”

Not since Ronald Reagan have we had a president who is so unabashedly pro-American.  Trump’s enemies call his “Make America Great Again” slogan “imperialist” or “racist.”  He calls it a mission statement.  You are either part of the monumental effort to secure peace, prosperity, and freedom for the people of the United States, or your loyalties lie elsewhere.  You have to really love something to sacrifice everything for it.  President Trump loves America.



Trump Won’t Let Pinko Jerks Who Hate America Define American History


President Trump was already scaring the hell out of the leftists, but they’re absolutely terrified now that he’s taking aim at their control of the institutions that manage our history; the skinsuit is coming off, and the castrated commie emperorhas been exposed as having no clothes. They hate America, and they hate our history, and they want to twist it into a garotte to strangle our patriotism. No thanks. Our history is our history, not theirs, and from here on in, we’re going to tell our story, not them. 

So, this obviously means that Trump loves slavery, or at least that’s obvious to people who are either stupid or think you are stupid. It’s amusing how the Democrats always make it all about slavery, since the Democrats were the sole cause and perpetrators of American slavery. You wouldn’t know it from the fake history you’ve been fed, but American slavery is but a small footnote in the history of human bondage; however, between America and formerly Great Britain, the actions of those two nations are practically the whole story of eliminating it for the first time since humans walked upright. 

But hey, we’ve got to talk about it all the time because Democrats think that helps them. It doesn’t matter that slavery ended 160 years ago; the only thing that matters to them is power, and they think non-stop slave talk gives them moral leverage. But what matters to us is the truth, and the truth is that there is more to American history than that. Infinitely more. But they don’t want to talk about anything else because they hate America, and they hate you.

Donald Trump‘s decision to intervene in how the government-supported Smithsonian Institution portrays America – as a cross between Hannibal Lecter and Democrat icon Robert Byrd back in his Grand Imperial Cyclops days – has drawn the drearily predictable complaints. They’re calling Trump a Nazi again, which is something they haven’t done for almost 15 minutes. He loves slavery because he thinks there’s more to history than slavery. 

What scares them is that the left thought it had a monopoly on how we see ourselves, and then President Trump came along and challenged their bogus narrative. Donald Trump noticed something that all of us have noticed going to America’s historic places and museums, which is that these institutions – like almost all institutions – have strayed from their proper roles and become commie conformity factories pumping out anti-American filth of the kind that you’d expect from the liberal white women and the male-identifying capons who run them. 

Their version of American history is all about slavery, and everything is all our fault. But that’s a lie. I wasn’t born until about a century after my ancestors helped end slavery by fighting the Democrats during the First (as opposed to the possible Second) Civil War, and I’ve never owned slaves, but I am supposed to bear responsibility for it because of the color of my skin? To which I say, check out the pale color of my rear end when you bend down to kiss it, you Marxist worms. 

No, America is more than slavery. It’s also more than fighting Indians, another favorite bugaboo. Here’s some real talk – the Indians lost fair and square. We won our homeland the way every people have won their homeland – through war. And we have nothing to apologize for. The conquest of North America by Europeans was a glorious chapter in human history, one in which Stone Age warring tribes were forced to become peaceful. The conquest stopped the raiding, raping, torture, and murder that characterized life among the Noble Savages. Like everything else about America, we’re supposed to be ashamed of how our ancestors conquered our land from people who had conquered it from someone else, but in fact, we should celebrate it. The settling of this continent was a great achievement and an unequivocal boon to humanity, and the European conquerors were the good guys. 

The Smithsonian Institution is currently not about teaching us about who we are, but about teaching us how we suck. That’s unacceptable. We’ve all seen the Smithsonian’s cartoonishly racist handout on the evils of whiteness, which includes such horrible attributes as competence and punctuality. Oh no, the evil people o’ pallor embrace that wicked Protestant work ethic, you know, the one that made America the most prosperous civilization ever! Left unspoken is what work ethic, or lack thereof, is supposed to replace it. This is typical of our garbage ruling class – score points among the hip crowd for trashing the very things that made their lives soft, comfortable, and prosperous. How about a little gratitude for the people who built and defended our country, you creeps? 

Their incessant trashing of America and its history is both ridiculous and morally illiterate, and frankly, I’m kind of tired of pointing it out. I don’t want to spend my time explaining such things as why their navel gazing over the righteous nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is bad – both my grandparents were in the Pacific, and the fact that college professors and historians don’t have the testosterone to do what’s necessary to win is no big revelation. Well, we’re past arguing and debating. We now have the political power to force the institutions to do their jobs, and we’re going to use it. We tried doing it the easy way, by talking about our concerns and asking the elite to reconsider, but the elite told us we were stupid racists and that we ought to shut up. Well, now we’re going to do it the hard way, and it’s going to hurt. Just ask the hacks from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 

This raises the question of who properly controls our history. The left assumes it does, but why is that? Don’t we citizens get a say on how we tell our own story, since we’re paying for it? Aren’t we citizens supposed to be able to govern ourselves? What happened to Our Democracy? The unspoken premise of the outraged elites is that history belongs to their preferred experts who have been carefully curated by the same institutions that the communists have long-marched through, and that we peasants have some moral obligation to defer to them because of their credentials. But their credentials are trash, and everything they say is a lie. These experts deserve our contempt, not our deference. These are academic hacks and DEI mediocrities trying to make their bones running down the United States of America. Like most other institutions, those that curate our history have been taken over by people who have absolutely no interest in honest history, but who see it as a propaganda cudgel they can use to club Americans into submission. They want Americans to hate America and themselves, because these pinko bastards hate America and Americans. 

Somebody’s got to decide how we present our history, and I say it should be the citizens through the guy who got elected by the American people. We decline to cede the ability to define who we are as a nation, and what we’ve done over our comparatively short history, to a bunch of screeching ninnies who would love nothing more than to see us disenfranchised, if not defenestrated. 

You don’t manufacture a history of a people that consists entirely of slanders, calumnies, and accusations if you love and respect that people. And no, I’m not going to include the hackneyed qualifier that “Oh my goodness, we have some dark things in our history, and we should be sad about them.” We’ve spent enough time on self-loathing. We’ve done enough self-flagellation. We will spend the foreseeable future talking about the glory of America, and it is glorious. When we walk into an institution that our taxpayers support with our dollars, we should see the historical evidence that conclusively demonstrates the indisputable truth – America is the greatest country in the history of humanity. 

There is no meritorious argument to the contrary. I’ve had the questionable opportunity to live on three continents in my life, spending my time overseas helping referee stupid arguments between garbage foreigners who are barely capable of running their own countries. Do I look down on foreigners? Oh yes, because I know them, and I’ve seen what they do, and how they are much, much worse than us. To trash America, as the exhibits in the Smithsonian currently do, is worse than a lie. It’s an attempt to destroy our morale, to undermine who we are as a country, to leverage the ignorance of young people who have been indoctrinated by a leftist public school system and a communist academia into hating what they should be proud of. 

No more. You leftist swine will not nag, browbeat, or whine us into giving you our legacy to treat like the prettiest new boy on the cellblock. 

America deserves better than the kind of cesspool history foisted upon us by alleged experts. The people making the decisions at the Smithsonian and in other institutions right now are not impressive, accomplished scholars. There are a bunch of pinko twerps who despise the very people who subsidize their pathetic lives. 

Enough. The Smithsonian belongs to us, and it’s going to do what we want – not vice versa. Donald Trump must aggressively and ruthlessly reassert the control of the American people over their own past. We’re no longer going to give it away to people who have squandered the trust we placed in them and manufactured a narrative of lies and slanders in an effort to make us hate ourselves. We shouldn’t hate ourselves. We should be proud of ourselves. We should be patriotic. We are the greatest people who have ever existed on Earth. We are smart, brave, courageous, and strong. What we conquered and built here is a testimony to our glory. We’re not going to dwell on errors or mistakes or when we fell short – that’s all been played out, and if you want to hate yourself, the leftists will always be happy to pass you the ammunition. The purpose of our historical institution should be to reaffirm and reassert what is an indisputable truth: America is the best, and the best is yet to come. 



🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 


Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


One Supreme Court Justice Has Nosedived Into Irrelevance; Can You Guess Who?


 RedState 

Thursday, the Supreme Court announced its opinion in National Institutes of Health v. American Public Health Association. The case involved the fate of approximately $783 million in NIH research grants that were tied to DEI initiatives rather than to general scientific research. By a 5-4 vote, the court ruled that a single federal judge could not compel the federal government to spend nearly $1 billion on nonsensical pseudo-research it no longer wished to fund.

This case may ultimately prove more important than the money it saved because it indicated the Supreme Court was losing patience with inferior courts and with one of its members.

Neil Gorsuch used a concurring opinion that effectively read the Riot Act to lower courts.

Lower court judges may sometimes disagree with this Court’s decisions, but they are never free to defy them.  In Department of Ed. v. California, 604 U. S. ___ (2025) (per curiam), this Court granted a stay because it found the government likely to prevail in showing that the district court lacked jurisdiction to order the government to pay grant obligations. California explained that “suits based on ‘any express or implied contract with the United States’” do not belong in district court under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), but in the Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act. Id., at ___ (slip op., at 2) (quoting 28 U. S. C. §1491(a)(1)).  Rather than follow that direction, the district court in this case permitted a suit involving materially identical grants to proceed to final judgment under the APA. As support for its course, the district court invoked the “persuasive authority” of “the dissent[s] in California” and an earlier court of appeals decision California repudiated. Massachusetts v. Kennedy, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, ___ (Mass. 2025), App. to Application 232a (App.).  That was error. “[U]nless we wish anarchy to prevail within the federal judicial system, a precedent of this Court must be followed by the lower federal courts no matter how misguided the judges of those courts may think it to be.”  Hutto v. Davis, 454 U. S. 370, 375 (1982) (per curiam).

He concluded with this summary:

If the district court’s failure to abide by California were a one-off, perhaps it would not be worth writing to address it. But two months ago another district court tried to “compel compliance” with a different “order that this Court ha[d] stayed.” Department of Homeland Security v. D. V. D., 606 U. S. ___, ___ (2025) (KAGAN, J., concurring) (slip op., at 1).  Still another district court recently diverged from one of this Court’s decisions even though the case at hand did not differ “in any pertinent respect” from the one this Court had decided. Boyle, 606 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 1). So this is now the third time in a matter of weeks this Court has had to intercede in a case “squarely controlled” by one of its precedents.  Ibid. All these interventions should have been unnecessary, but together they underscore a basic tenet of our judicial system: Whatever their own views, judges are duty-bound to respect “the hierarchy of the federal court system created by the Constitution and Congress.”  Hutto, 454 U. S., at 375.


Gorsuch Smacks Lower Courts for Continuing to Defy SCOTUS Rulings


If anyone takes notice of Gorsuch's concurrence, in which he was joined by Justice Kavanaugh, then perhaps we'll see resistance-minded judges become more circumspect in creating their personal jurisprudence rather than following the lead of the Supreme Court.

The second salient feature was that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson again attacked the integrity of her colleagues, and her blistering 21-page dissent did not have a single justice sign on.

Justice Jackson, who seems locked in a cage match with Justice Sonia "the Wide Latina" Sotomayor for the most mediocre IQ on the Supreme Court, has previously made headlines for attacking her colleagues. In Trump vs. CASA, which covered the issue of nationwide injunctions by single judges, Brown wrote this snide comment:

To hear the majority tell it, this suit raises a mind-numbingly technical query: Are universal injunctions “sufficiently ‘analogous’ to the relief issued ‘by the High Court of Chancery in England at the time of the adoption of the Constitution and the enactment of the original Judiciary Act’” to fall within the equitable authority Congress granted federal courts in the Judiciary Act of 1789?  Ante, at 6. But that legalese is a smokescreen.  It obscures a far more basic question of enormous legal and practical significance: May a federal court in the United States of America order the Executive to follow the law? 

To ask this question is to answer it.  In a constitutional Republic such as ours, a federal court has the power to order the Executive to follow the law—and it must.  It is axiomatic that the Constitution of the United States and the statutes that the People’s representatives have enacted govern in our system of government. Thus, everyone, from the President on down, is bound by law. By duty and nature, federal courts say what the law is (if there is a genuine dispute), and require those who are subject to the law to conform their behavior to what the law requires.  This is the essence of the rule of law. 

To which Justice Barrett replied:

We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary. No one disputes that the Executive has a duty to follow the law. But the Judiciary does not have unbridled authority to enforce this obligation—in fact, sometimes the law prohibits the Judiciary from doing so. See, e.g., Marbury v. Madison[.] 

Note the reference Barrett used to make her point. Even Justice Kagan did not sign onto Jackson's dissent, but five justices did sign onto Barrett's zingers.

KBJ Did Something So Stupid Even Sonia Sotomayor Couldn't Let It Slide

ACB's Stinging Rebuke of KBJ in Injunctions Ruling Lights Up X

ACB Rightfully Blasts KBJ's Dangerous Rejection of Constitutional Order

Skinny on SCOTUS - The Final Installment (for Now)

The rift between Jackson and her colleagues became much more pronounced in the NIH decision. Here, she continued her allegations that the majority of the Court was hopelessly compromised and letting President Trump get away with murder.

In a broader sense, however, today’s ruling is of a piece with this Court’s recent tendencies.  “[R]ight when the Judiciary should be hunkering down to do all it can to preserve the law’s constraints,” the Court opts instead to make vindicating the rule of law and preventing manifestly injurious Government action as difficult as possible. Id., at ___ (JACKSON, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 21).  This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules.  We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.

Note that Jackson quotes from her own dissent in this dissent. This may be a first in the history of the Supreme Court.

The real question is whether Jackson is any longer an effective member of the Supreme Court. The fact that Barrett got six justices to join a scathing put-down of Jackson's outcomes-based jurisprudence indicates that Rubicon may have been crossed. The Justices, save Sotomayor, seem to ignore Jackson and let her write whatever she wishes.

As a secondary issue, I think the wisdom of Trump's Justice Department in obeying court orders and fighting them out in court rather than open defiance has been proven correct. Open defiance would have united the circuit courts and the Supreme Court to defend district court judges. Now, the Resistance judges can't keep from ruling against Trump any more than a cat can resist catnip...or a laser pointer. This extends even to cases decided by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court now has to defend its position or let it be run over roughshod by TDS-infected judges. The only person not getting the SCOTUS unity message is Jackson, and she has lost whatever influence she may have had by lambasting her colleagues for the sake of social media clout.



Outline #5 – The Full Spectrum Criminal Surveillance Conducted by The United States Government


I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is the fifth.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.

What is the bigger threat to our nation?

♦ Russiagate, where the Hillary Clinton campaign manufactured a dirty political story during a presidential election that was supported by Barack Obama and the DOJ/FBI?

OR…

♦ Spygate, where full spectrum political surveillance was conducted on all political opposition using government access to the NSA database that contains the private metadata of every American citizen?

If you are a person of stable and reasonable mindset, you likely identify the second issue as a much bigger threat.  Not only is using the NSA database to conduct illegal surveillance a bigger threat; but it is also a threat that remains as current declassified FISA court statements show the NSA database is still being exploited.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, I would argue the first issue, Russiagate, is intentionally being leveraged as a shiny thing to stop people from realizing the second, much more unlawful issue took place.

Focusing on “Russiagate” leads you to a political storyline that is: harder to outline as unlawful, easily obfuscated, downplayed and subsequently dismissed.  Focusing on the use of the NSA database to spy on people is simple to understand, completely unlawful and in stunningly unconstitutional when contrast against 4th amendment protections.

This brings me to the point where I am specifically calling out those who are intentionally operating to keep the American public distracted from the bigger scandal by their focusing everyone’s attention on the thing that, given the contrast to the other, really doesn’t matter.

Hillary Clinton made up a false story about Trump-Russia collusion and the DOJ-NSD/FBI helped her.  That’s bad.

However, President Barack Obama weaponized the unlawful use of the NSA database to conduct surveillance on all of his political opposition.  That’s infinitely, heck, exponentially worse.

Oh, and Hillary Clinton likely then received the opposition surveillance results to assist her 2016 campaign strategy.

Now, let’s look at this John Solomon report as an example of reporting that is intentionally distracting the American public.  Solomon has been promoting the story of Russiagate using irrelevant but sexy information from the DOJ and FBI that will never be used in criminal cases.

Watch how Solomon shares a significant moment in March of 2017, then deflects and obfuscates the value of what is really being outlined (Spygate), into something that is entirely disconnected from the context (Russiagate).

From a recent interview with Jan Jekielek: (emphasis mine)



Solomon had just returned from a Fox News hit outlining a story about the surge in “unmaskings”—where American citizens’ private communications were exposed without warrants. Solomon was discussing the Rosemary Collyer report on NSA database queries and unmaskings. Senior FBI and DOJ officials had already told him: Don’t waste your time on Russia collusion.

Late that night, he pulled into his driveway.

A blue sedan with yellow fog lights sat waiting by his mailbox.

Two men stepped out.

“‘We can’t tell you who we are, but you’re at the tip of a very large iceberg, and we hope you drill into it.’

‘What in God’s name are you guys talking about?’

‘Well, that thing you were reporting on television…’

‘Yeah, that’s a FISA court filing.’

‘It is the apex of a very large scandal, and you need to drill down in it.’

‘All right, walk me through this guys.’

‘We can’t tell you. It’s all classified.’

‘OK that’s not very helpful. Can you give me something of a more generic description?’

‘Yeah, we work in the intelligence community, and our agencies were asked to participate in one of the greatest political dirty tricks in history.

And if it isn’t stopped—and one day, when it is uncovered—we will lose the tools that keep you and I safe at night.

We won’t be able to find terrorists, and we won’t find spies, because these tools will be taken from us because we abused them in the last couple of years.’

John Solomon is a smart man.

John Solomon knows the issue they were talking about, the issue he was just discussing on Fox News, the issue that surrounds the “tools” they are concerned about losing, is the issue of conducting surveillance using the NSA database.

John Solomon knows this.  He is not obtuse or mistaken about the issue that was at the center of that weird contact.

However, notice how John Solomon then obfuscates that specific issue and jumps immediately to conflate it with the Clinton dirty tricks around Russiagate, the Trump-Russia collusion stuff.  Solomon is NOT doing this accidentally or by mistake.  Solomon is taking the viewer away from the main story on purpose.

Notice that nowhere in the larger or expanded interview [SEE HERE] does Solomon ever bring up the originating issue of surveillance of the Trump campaign or exploitation of the NSA database in the discussion.  Instead, he starts to immediately call attention to the Clinton campaign dirty tricks and the FBI collaboration therein.

Let us discuss how big a story is being professionally hidden.

We have significant research files on the 2015 and 2016 political surveillance program; which includes the trail evident within the Weissmann/Mueller report; in combination with the Obama-era DOJ “secret research project” (their words, not mine).  We are able to overlay the entire objective and gain a full understanding of how political surveillance was conducted over a period of approximately four to six years.

This is why there was panic after the 2016 election.

President Obama’s “Spygate” operation is what they are trying to hide by focusing on Hillary Clinton’s “Russiagate.”

Working with a timeline but also referencing origination material in 2015/2016, lets remind everyone how the program operated. This explains an evolution from The IRS Files in 2010 to the FISA Files in 2016.

More importantly, research indicates the modern political exploitation of the NSA database, for weaponized intelligence surveillance of politicians, began mid 2012.

The FISA-702 database extraction process, and utilization of the protections within the smaller intelligence community, was the primary process. We start by reviewing the established record from the 99-page FISC opinion rendered by Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer on April 26th, 2017; and explain the details within the FISC opinion.

I would strongly urge everyone to read the FISC report because Judge Collyer outlines how the DOJ, which includes the FBI, had an “institutional lack of candor” in responses to the FISA court. In essence, the Obama administration was continually lying to the court about their activity and the rate of fourth amendment violations for illegal searches and seizures of U.S. persons’ private information for multiple years.

Unfortunately, due to intelligence terminology Judge Collyer’s brief and ruling is not an easy read for anyone unfamiliar with the FISA processes outlined. The complexity also helps the media avoid discussing, and as a result most Americans had no idea the scale and scope of the issues. So, we’ll try to break down the language.

For the sake of brevity and common understanding CTH will highlight the most pertinent segments showing just how systemic and troublesome the unlawful electronic surveillance was.

Early in 2016 NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted of a significant uptick in FISA-702(17) “About” queries using the FBI/NSA database that holds all metadata records on every form of electronic communication.

The NSA compliance officer alerted Admiral Mike Rogers who then initiated a full compliance audit on/around March 9th, 2016, for the period of November 1st, 2015, through May 1st, 2016.

While the audit was ongoing, due to the severity of the results that were identified, Admiral Mike Rogers stopped anyone from using the 702(17) “about query” option and went to the extraordinary step of blocking all FBI contractor access to the database on April 18, 2016 (keep these dates in mind).

Here are some significant segments:

The key takeaway from these first paragraphs is how the search query results were exported from the NSA database to users who were not authorized to see the material. The FBI contractors were conducting searches and then removing, or ‘exporting’, the results. Later on, the FBI said all of the exported material was deleted.


Searching the highly classified NSA database is essentially a function of filling out search boxes to identify the user-initiated search parameter and get a return on the search result.

FISA-702(16) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (“702”); and the “16” is a check box to initiate a search based on “To and From“. Example, if you put in a date and a phone number and check “16” as the search parameter the user will get the returns on everything “To and From” that identified phone number for the specific date. Calls, texts, contacts etc. Including results for the inbound and outbound contacts.

FISA-702(17) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (702); and the “17” is a check box to initiate a search based on everything “About” the search qualifier. Example, if you put a date and a phone number and check “17” as the search parameter the user will get the returns of everything about that phone. Calls, texts, contacts, geolocation (or gps results), account information, user, service provider etc. As a result, 702(17) can actually be used to locate where the phone (and user) was located on a specific date or sequentially over a specific period of time which is simply a matter of changing the date parameters.

And that’s just from a phone number.

Search an ip address “about” and read all data into that server; put in an email address and gain everything about that account. Or use the electronic address of a GPS enabled vehicle (about) and you can withdraw more electronic data and monitor in real time. Search a credit card number and get everything about the account including what was purchased, where, when, etc. Search a bank account number, get everything about transactions and electronic records etc.

Just about anything and everything can be electronically searched; everything has an electronic ‘identifier’.

The search parameter is only limited by the originating field filled out. Names, places, numbers, addresses, etc. By using the “About” parameter there may be thousands or millions of returns. Imagine if you put “@realdonaldtrump” into the search parameter? You could extract all following accounts who interacted on Twitter, or Facebook etc. You are only limited by your imagination and the scale of the electronic connectivity.

As you can see below, on March 9th, 2016, internal auditors noted the FBI was sharing “raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information”.

In plain English the raw search returns were being shared with unknown entities without any attempt to “minimize” or redact the results. The person(s) attached to the results were named and obvious. There was no effort to hide their identity or protect their 4th amendment rights of privacy:


But what’s the scale here? This is where the story really lies.

Read this next excerpt carefully.

The operators were searching “U.S. Persons”. The review of November 1, 2015, to May 1, 2016, showed “eighty-five percent of those queries” were unlawful or “non-compliant”.

85% !! “Representing [redacted number]”.

We can tell from the space of the redaction the number of searches were between 1,000 and 9,999 [five digits]. If we take the middle number of 5,000 – that means 4,250 unlawful searches out of 5,000.


The [five digit] amount (more than 1,000, less than 10,000), and 85% error rate, was captured in a six-month period.

Also notice this very important quote: “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.”  They were searching the same phone number, email address, electronic “identifier”, or people, repeatedly over different dates. Specific people were being tracked/monitored.

Additionally, notice the last quote: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of” these non lawful searches “since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 coincided with an unusually high error rate”.

That means the 85% unlawful NSA database exploitation was likely been happening since 2012.

Again, remember that date, 2012.

Who was FBI Director? Robert Mueller.

Who was his chief-of-staff? Aaron Zebley.

Tens of thousands of searches over four years (since 2012), and 85% of them are illegal. The results were extracted for?…. (I believe this is all political opposition use; and I’ll explain why momentarily.)

OK, that’s the stunning scale; but who was involved?

Private contractors with access to “raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to FBI’s requests“:
And as noted, the contractor access was finally halted on April 18th, 2016.

[Coincidentally (or not), the wife of Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacoby, goes to the White House the next day on April 19th, 2016.]

None of this is conspiracy theory.

All of this is laid out inside this 99-page opinion from FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer who also noted that none of this FISA abuse was accidental in a footnote on page 87: “deliberate decisionmaking“:


This specific footnote, if declassified, would be key.  Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.

Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.

Summary of this aspect: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) authorization to search the NSA database.  The database was repeatedly used by persons with contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.

The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation; and we are not the only one to think that’s what this system is being used for.

Back in 2017 when House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was working to reauthorize the FISA legislation, Nunes wrote a letter to ODNI Dan Coats about this specific issue:


SIDEBAR: To solve the issue, well, actually attempt to ensure it never happened again, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers eventually took away the “About” query option permanently in 2017. NSA Director Rogers said the abuse was so inherent there was no way to stop it except to remove the process completely. [SEE HERE] Additionally, the NSA database operates as a function of the Pentagon, so they went one step further. On his last day as NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers -together with ODNI Dan Coats- put U.S. cyber-command, the database steward, fully into the U.S. military as a full combatant command. [SEE HERE]

There is little doubt the NSA database was used by Obama-era officials, from 2012 through April 2016, as a way to spy on their political opposition. Quite simply there is no other intellectually honest explanation for the scale and volume of database abuse that was taking place.

When we reconcile what was taking place and who was involved, then the actions of the exact same principal participants take on a jaw-dropping amount of clarity.

All of the action taken by CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, ODNI Clapper and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter make sense. Including their effort to get NSA Director Mike Rogers fired.

Russia-Gate, the Steele Dossier and even the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (drawn from the dossier and signed by the above) were needed to create a cover-story and protect themselves from discovery of this four-year weaponization, political surveillance and unlawful spying.

This is why President Obama was willing to push the Russiagate story with his activity in December of 2016 after the election.  Obama wasn’t only dirtying up President Trump, Obama was using Russiagate as a cover for the spying that took place using the NSA database.

Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense; Mueller was FBI Director when the use of the NSA database surveillance began. Aaron Zebly was his chief-of-staff.

The beginning decision to use FISA (702) as a domestic surveillance and political spy mechanism appears to have started in/around 2012. Perhaps sometime shortly before the 2012 presidential election and before John Brennan left the White House and moved to CIA. However, there was an earlier version of data assembly that preceded this effort.

Political spying 1.0 was actually the weaponization of the IRS. This is where the term “Secret Research Project” originated as a description from the Obama team. It involved the U.S. Department of Justice under Eric Holder and the FBI under Robert Mueller. It never made sense why Eric Holder requested over 1 million tax records via CD ROM, until overlaying the timeline of the FISA abuse:

The IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1-million-page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” The transaction occurred in October 2010 (link)

Why disks? Why send a stack of DISKS to the DOJ and FBI when there’s a pre-existing financial crimes unit within the IRS.

All of the evidence within this sketchy operation came directly to the surface in early spring 2012.

The IRS scandal was never really about the IRS; it was always about the DOJ asking the IRS for the database of information. That is why it was transparently a conflict when the same DOJ was tasked with investigating the DOJ/IRS scandal. Additionally, Obama sent his chief-of-staff Jack Lew to become Treasury Secretary; effectively placing an ally to oversee/cover-up any issues. As Treasury Secretary Lew did just that.

Lesson Learned – It would appear the Obama administration learned a lesson from attempting to gather a large opposition research database operation inside a functioning organization large enough to have some good people that might blow the whistle.

The timeline reflects a few months after realizing the “Secret Research Project” was now worthless (June 2012), they focused more deliberately on a smaller network within the intelligence apparatus and began weaponizing the FBI/NSA database.  If my hunch is correct, that is what will be visible in footnote #69:

How this all comes together:

Fusion GPS was not hired in April 2016 simply to research Donald Trump. As shown in the evidence provided by the FISC, the Obama administration was already doing surveillance and spy operations. The Obama administration already knew everything about the Trump campaign and were monitoring everything by exploiting the FISA database.

However, after the NSA alerts in/around March 9th, 2016, and particularly after the April 18th shutdown of contractor access, the Obama FBI needed Fusion GPS to create a legal albeit ex post facto justification for the pre-existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion GPS gave them that justification in the Steele Dossier.

That’s why the FBI small group, which later transitioned into the Mueller team, were so strongly committed to and defending the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content. The Steele Dossier was a tool needed to get a FISA Title-1 warrant, that became the cover and justification for a pre-existing surveillance operation.

The Steele Dossier becomes the investigative virus the FBI wanted inside the system. To get the virus into official status, they used the FISA application as the delivery method and injected it into Carter Page.

The FBI already knew Carter Page; essentially Carter Page was irrelevant, what they needed was the FISA warrant and the Dossier in the system {Go Deep}.

Fusion GPS was hired by Hillary Clinton to research Trump; however, the Obama administration was already doing surveillance and spy operations, using FBI contractors. The FBI needed Fusion GPS to give them something, a plausible justification for already existing surveillance and spy operations.

Fusion-GPS gave them the justification they needed for a FISA warrant with the Steele Dossier. Ultimately that’s why the Steele Dossier was so important; without it, the Obama administration was naked with their NSA database abuse.

Investigating ‘Russiagate’, as dirty and unseemly as it was, takes you to a place where politics infected the DOJ/FBI and every participant carries plausible deniability.  However, investigate the 2016 illegal surveillance of Donald Trump’s campaign via the NSA database and all of that activity can never be justified.

If you understand the distinction above, then you start to realize why John Solomon is focusing on Russiagate.  Beware the person who picks up the flag at the front of the parade, for they are likely steering the crowd for a reason.

If DNI Tulsi Gabbard focuses on the known FBI surveillance of the GOP candidates in 2016, by focusing on how FBI contractors exploited access to the NSA database to conduct political opposition research, then suddenly the entire story takes on a simpler to understand context.

Declassify the Rosemary Collyer 99-page FISA report and outline the FBI contractors doing the surveillance.

Stop focusing so much attention on Russiagate, it’s the shiny thing fraught with plausible deniability.  Focus instead on declassifying and releasing the real story of how the NSA database has been used to conduct political surveillance for over a decade.

Obama conducted full spectrum political surveillance and spying operations exploiting the NSA database from 2012 to 2016.

All republican candidates were under surveillance.

THAT is the BIG STORY that will shake up DC.

FOR CONTEXT:

♦ Heat Street (Louise Mensch) Dated November 7th 2016:

Two separate sources with links to the counter-intelligence community have confirmed to Heat Street that the FBI sought, and was granted, a FISA court warrant in October, giving counter-intelligence permission to examine the activities of ‘U.S. persons’ in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia. (link with multiple internal links)

♦ The New York Times (  ) Dated January 19th 2017:

[…]  The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House. (link)

♦ The New York Times (Charlie Savage) Dated January 12th 2017:

WASHINGTON — In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.  (link)

♦ National Review (Andrew McCarthy) Dated January 11th 2017:

[…]  To summarize, it appears there were no grounds for a criminal investigation of banking violations against Trump. Presumably based on the fact that the bank or banks at issue were Russian, the Justice Department and the FBI decided to continue investigating on national-security grounds. A FISA application in which Trump was “named” was rejected by the FISA court as overbroad, notwithstanding that the FISA court usually looks kindly on government surveillance requests.

A second, more narrow application, apparently not naming Trump, may have been granted five months later; the best the media can say about it, however, is that the server on which the application centers is “possibly” related to the Trump campaign’s “alleged” links to two Russian banks — under circumstances in which the FBI has previously found no “nefarious purpose” in some (undescribed) connection between Trump Tower and at least one Russian bank (whose connection to Putin’s regime is not described).  (link with more links)

♦ The Guardian (Julian Borger) Dated Wednesday January 11th, 2017:

The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The FISA court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation. (link)

♦ New York Times (  ) March 1st 2017:

WASHINGTON — In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.

[…]  More than a half-dozen current and former officials described various aspects of the effort to preserve and distribute the intelligence, and some said they were speaking to draw attention to the material and ensure proper investigation by Congress. All spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified information, nearly all of which remains secret, making an independent public assessment of the competing Obama and Trump administration claims impossible.

The F.B.I. is conducting a wide-ranging counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election, and is examining alleged links between Mr. Trump’s associates and the Russian government. Separately, the House and Senate intelligence committees are conducting their own investigations, though they must rely on information collected by the F.B.I. and intelligence agencies.  (link)