As Cypress Hill once warned: When the shizz goes down, you better get ready. According to current CIA director John Ratcliffe, the shizz may come down sooner than some authors of the Russia-collusion hoax think. Thanks to the precedent-breaking lawfare of the Joe Biden Regency, a few of them will have nowhere to hide when it does, too.
According to Ratcliffe, multiple top figures in the hoax have set themselves up for prosecution for lying to investigators and/or Congress about the hoax and their roles in it. That includes John Brennan, but he's not the only potential target (via Twitchy):
🚨 BREAKING: CIA Director Ratcliffe confirmed MORE evidence in the Russia Collusion Hoax is about to drop, and it DIRECTLY IMPLICATES Hillary Clinton
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) July 27, 2025
LOCK. HER. UP.
“What intelligence shows is that part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan, but part of it was an FBI plan to be an… pic.twitter.com/F7S4OfOVez
“What intelligence shows is that part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan, but part of it was an FBI plan to be an accelerant to that fake Steele dossier, to those fake Russia collusion claims by pouring oil on the fire, by amplifying the lie and [burying] the truth of what Hillary Clinton was up to.”
The presumption thus far has been that the efforts to expose the Russia-collusion hoax have been primarily hygienic rather than prosecutorial. All of the conspiring Ratcliffe discusses took place in 2016 and 2017, while the statute of limitations on federal crimes is five years in almost all cases outside of murder. Brennan testified to Congress in 2022 and denied relying on the Hillary-campaign-generated Steele Dossier as the basis for conclusions that Trump may have colluded with the Russians, so he might be the only figure in the scandal with potential criminal liability.
Hold the phone, Ratcliffe argues. Brennan's not the only one to run that risk. And even if he were, that testimony essentially reset the statute of limitations for everyone involved:
Ratcliffe claimed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former CIA director John Brennan, and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper could be prosecuted for their role, claiming that they were still involved in a criminal conspiracy against Trump.
He said there was “no doubt in my mind” that Clinton, Brennan, and Clapper “conspired.”
“They conspired against President Trump, they conspired against the American people. So, I’ll leave it to Pam Bondi and our DOJ and Kash Patel and our FBI to investigate the conspiracy to do what, and what charges that they’re capable of bringing,” Ratcliffe said on Fox News.
“I don’t think statute of limitations are going to impact, because in a conspiracy, Maria, the statute of limitations doesn’t start to run until the last act in the furtherance of that conspiracy,” Ratcliffe said. “Part of why this is so important is that the people behind this are still furthering the conspiracy.”
Is 'conspiracy' too strong? Not according to the documents emerging from the classified vaults. The CIA data shows that the claim that Putin was assisting Trump was based on an ambiguous sentence fragment from an unreliable source without any corroboration. Brennan apparently ordered the change in the analysis in the immediate aftermath of the 2016 election under orders from Barack Obama himself:
On the eve of the 2016 election, Brennan sent a "Fusion Cell" memo to Obama summarizing all the most secret, compartmented intel gathered on Trump and Russia. According to the House report declassified and released by DNI Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday, that memo " made no mention of Putin 'aspiring' for a Trump victory." Although the Russian defector had shared his thoughts about Putin with Brennan in July, the CIA director’s Nov. 6 memo concluded, "Putin expected [Clinton] to win."
But then in early December, after Obama ordered a new assessment, Brennan dusted off the informant's second-hand hearsay, which had been shelved as unreliable. The CIA director, who had previously worked for Obama in the White House, suddenly insisted it underpin the new conclusion about Putin's motives.
"The major 'high confidence' judgment of the ICA rests on one opinion about a text fragment with uncertain meaning," the House report found. "This text – which would not have been published without [Brennan's] orders to do so – is cited using only one interpretation of its meaning and without considering alternative interpretations," in violation of Intelligence Community Directive 203. One alternative was that Putin was "counting on" Trump winning the primary and nomination at the GOP Convention that July, just two weeks after the informant provided the tip, not the general election in November [2016].
Matt Taibbi elaborated on Friday about just how far Brennan went in cooking this intelligence community assessment (ICA):
When the Intelligence Community Assessment was published in January of 2017, the first bullet point supporting the idea of a “clear preference” for Trump read:
As early as February 2016, a Russian political expert possessed a plan that recommended engagement with [Trump's] team because of the prospects for improved US-Russian relations, according to reporting from service.
Even the intelligence professionals later tasked with reviewing the ICA could not let this slide without editorial comment. The passage, they wrote, “omits critical report context which, had it been made available to the reader, would show the report to be implausible — if not ridiculous — and missing so many key details as to be unusable.”
Why unusable? Because “‘the plan’ was just an email with no date, no identified sender, no clear recipient, and no classification. CIA could not vouch for the ultimate source’s vetting, validation, or access.”
John Brennan pulled from the trash a 10-month-old “anonymous email proposal” by an unknown person to place “a well-known pro-Kremlin official” on Trump’s “election team” in order to “formulate a mutually acceptable agenda between Trump and Putin.” It appears that this “idea” came not from Russia but perhaps another foreign service, perhaps Ukraine’s. Hilariously, the identity of the country of origin for this email was redacted from everyone’s eyes, including Barack Obama’s.
So it does seem as though a conspiracy could be proven, with Brennan and Comey as its action men and the rest of the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton et al as collaborators. But is that enough to reset the statute of limitation on the attempt to conduct a soft coup on an elected president? Federal prosecutor Shipwreckedcrew validates Ratcliffe's argument, even in the case of Barack Obama, whose presidential immunity under Trump v US stopped after he left office -- while the conspiracy continued:
To the extent there is a continuing pattern of conduct over many years to keep Congress from knowing all the specifics and seeing all the source material relevant to the issues under investigation, that would be a continuing conspiracy because the illegal acts — either obstructive acts or acts in contempt of Congress — were engaged in for the purpose of keeping hidden what it was the co-conspirators wanted to keep hidden. The success of the conspiracy depended on Congress not obtaining all the records and information that Congress was seeking.
Overt acts done for that purpose continually reset the five year statute of limitations under federal law on a criminal conspiracy charge. The individual act itself might be a crime — but not necessarily so — but only individual acts taken within the past 5 years can be prosecuted as substantive offenses rather than simply serve as overt acts in furtherance of an ongoing conspiracy.
But every time an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy is taken, all members of the conspiracy are subject to prosecution even if their own involvement was more than five years earlier.
So, that’s over 1000 words and I haven’t mentioned Barack Obama yet — and my guess is that is why you are all here.
Click over to read what Ship has to say about Obama's potential criminal liability. I suspect that Pam Bondi will not go so far as to charge Obama, but she may make him an unindicted co-conspirator if she indicts Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and Hillary. But when the shizz goes down, Obama had better get ready, too. Joe Biden and his regents knocked down all of the precedents about prosecuting previous administrations, and it's too late to cry now about partisan politics.
Editor's Note: The Trump administration is exposing Barack Obama and his administration's Russian Collusion Hoax. The Protection Racket Media has already begun to circle the wagons to keep this information from the American public, and to suppress it in other sources as much as possible.
Help us continue to report on their blatant corruption and attacks on President Trump. Join Hot Air VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member