Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has released two emails that are significant not only for their content but for their timing, coming just two days before the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska. The emails reveal that in late 2016, then-DNI James Clapper pushed the fraudulent narrative that Russia had hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC), overriding pointed objections from then-National Security Agency chief Admiral Mike Rogers.

The timing matters because this very narrative — the claim that Russia had hacked the DNC to help President Trump — was used to sabotage the 2018 Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki. Just three days before that meeting, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted 12 Russian nationals on charges of hacking the DNC. The indictment was designed to create political chaos. Mueller knew that the 12 Russians were located in Russia and would never stand trial, meaning he would never need to prove the case. The result of the indictments was exactly what Mueller, his team, and any yet-to-be-identified co-conspirators intended: to sabotage the summit and effectively criminalize diplomacy with Russia.

Many years ago, Bill Whittle gave me the sharpest definition you might ever read for the proper role of journalism in a healthy republic: "They're the antibodies of the body politic." But we do not live in a healthy republic — and journalists too often are part of the cancer we're trying to eliminate.

Case in point: So-called journalists who, instead of investigating Russiagate claims, performed as marionettes for the Obama-era intelligence community, determined to rig and then undo a presidential election.

And now we have at least two names.

I'll get to those in just a moment, but first, this important reminder.

At the center of the Obama White House's fabricated Russia collusion narrative is Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) — currently under investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Maryland for mortgage fraud.

As Ukraine's defeat becomes undeniable, Zelensky resorts to desperate provocations - risking wider conflict to block peace talks between Russia and the US

The war in Ukraine is no longer balanced on a knife's edge, as some might have thought during the Kursk invasion. The outcome is now visible to anyone willing to look past the headlines: Kiev's forces are depleted, morale is collapsing, and the long-promised 'turning points' have come and gone without materializing. Even Western officials, once confident in endless military aid, are now speaking in guarded tones about "realistic expectations." On the battlefield, the momentum has shifted irreversibly.

Against this backdrop, the recent statement from Russia's Ministry of Defense should not be dismissed as mere rhetoric. Moscow alleges that Ukrainian forces are preparing a major provocation - an attack designed to sabotage the upcoming Russia-US peace talks. For those who understand the stakes, the logic is disturbingly clear.

Author's note: This article will be relatively short compared to my standard offerings, but I wanted to get some thoughts on paper as the situation north of Pokrovsk develops. Ukraine is facing one of the worst operational crises of the war and the situation is liable to change rapidly. We clearly do not have a perfectly comprehensive picture of how the front is moving, but I think taking the pulse in real time is still valuable.

After three years of war, with the commentariat on both sides eagerly predicting the looming collapse of the enemy, it behooves one to develop a prudent aversion to histrionic predictions. However, it seems fairly obvious that the war in Ukraine is at a critical juncture, and August 2025 will receive considerable play in retrospective accounts of the conflict, as perhaps the last opportunity for Ukraine to cut a deal and slither out of its strategic grave.

On Friday, August 15, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are slated to meet in Alaska to discuss steps to end the war. Whether those talks will be productive remains to be seen, although Trump's acknowledgement that Ukraine will have to cede territory to Russia signals that the White House is at least drifting towards a realism. Predictably, the Alaska meetings are being decried by the Europeans and the Professional Fascism Noticers as a redux of Chamberlain's Munich Agreement with Hitler, but this does not really matter. In the same sense that, for the alcoholic it is always five o'clock somewhere, for a certain type of person it is always 1938. For these people, World War Two is the only thing that ever happened, it is always happening, and it is always just about to happen.

The Russia-US summit could reshape the Ukraine war - and leave Europe watching from the sidelines.

On Friday, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump will meet in Alaska. This will be the first full-scale Russia-US summit since June 2021 in Geneva, and the first official visit by a Russian president to American soil since Dmitry Medvedev's trip in 2010 at the height of the "reset."

It will also be the first time the leaders of Russia and the US have met in Alaska, the closest US state to Russia, separated only by the narrow Bering Strait, and once part of the Russian Empire. The symbolism is obvious: as far as possible from Ukraine and Western Europe, but as close as possible to Russia. And neither Zelensky nor the EU's top brass will be in the room.

The message could not be clearer - Moscow and Washington will make the key decisions on Ukraine, then inform others later. As Trump has said, "they hold all the cards."

As Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin prepare for a summit in Alaska on August 15, supporters of the old order are trying to sabotage it. There's no question of peace in Ukraine, Gaza, or elsewhere. War has given them power and fueled their industries. Alfredo Jalife, however, sees some hopeful situations:

Faced with the almost apocalyptic interview with Scott Ritter, former Marine and nuclear inspector in Iraq [ 1 ], I noted four situations which could constitute opportunities to calm heated tempers [ 2 ]:

1) Trump said it was appropriate to renew the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) which expires in February [ 3 ];

2) Trump announced that he was sending Steve Witkoff on a fact-checking and/or appeasement mission to the Kremlin. Steve Witkoff is in Gaza to end the starvation of the Palestinians. It would be absurd to worry about the grim situation there for the past 22 months and at the same time deploy 4 submarines (Scott Ritter dixit) near Russia;

3) Less exasperated, Trump said he deployed them in response to Medvedev's threat - a situation that Scott Ritter says was misinterpreted;

4) Fortunately, Foreign Ministers Sergei Lavrov and Marco Rubio maintained the dialogue [ 4 ].

Of course it's all about Alaska. Here's what's in play. But it's the shadowplay that's even more exciting.

Across the world, for those who grew up in the Cold War Swingin' Sixties, the temptation is irresistible to cast Donald Trump as Goldfinger (but who would play Oddjob? Hegseth?)

Goldfinger, after all, is a powerful, ruthless gambler. His 21st century motto would be "Obliterate & Plunder". In fact, sequentially, an orgy of obliteratin' and plunderin' if the occasions present themselves. Everything subjected to the search for the Golden Deal. My way. The only way.

Yet now it's possible that Goldfinger may have met its appropriate - collective - match.

This is what happened the last time a summit took place in Alaska, in this particular case US-China in a shabby hotel in Anchorage. That shook the geopolitical chessboard to the core. Trump-Putin might - but only under quite specific conditions.

There's only one realistic, optimal endgame for Alaska: a joint declaration of intent, pointing to a follow-up, as in the next meeting to be held in Russian territory. A sort of starter for the long and winding road towards a real reset of US-Russia relations, including a possible settlement in the proxy war in Ukraine.

Essentially, they may agree to keep talking. Yet what really matters is what may be implied by the promise: Goldfinger refrains from imposing secondary sanctions on Russia's partners.

That will constitute a tremendous BRICS victory (Iran excluded. Actually, two strategic allies of Russia would be excluded: Iran and the DPRK).

BRICS are actively building a coalition to stare down Goldfinger. The key players are Bear, Dragon, Toucan and Elephant - all four original founders of BRIC. Nightingale should be added later, as it is linked via geopolitical/geoeconomic strategic partnerships with Bear, Dragon and Elephant.

When it comes to the Alaska nitty gritty, the top Bear needs to consider all the ramifications of what is an imperative for the Russian General Staff and the vast intel apparatus in Moscow: unless Goldfinger minions stop weaponizing and providing precious intel to Ukraine is all its forms, the mythic "ceasefire" that Goldfinger and the pack of toothless chihuahuas in Europe desperately want will be just an intermission to allow Ukraine to rearm to the hilt.

That's a tough call for the top Bear: he has to placate his domestic, radical critics who blast him for sitting down with the enemy, and at the same time he must deliver the goods to his under-siege BRICS allies.

With Trump talks looming, Russia's army punches through exposed Ukrainian defences

Russia is racing to seize as much Ukrainian territory as possible ahead of peace talks with Donald Trump on Friday.

In what may prove to be a major breakthrough for Vladimir Putin, Russian sabotage and reconnaissance units punched through exposed defences in eastern Ukraine, slipping as far as six miles behind the front line in just 48 hours, according to battlefield reports.


Kyiv has diverted special forces units to confront the insurgents on the ground in an attempt to prevent any more of Ukraine falling under Russia's control before the summit in Alaska.

Schiff allegedly stated the information would be used "to indict President Trump."

A career intelligence officer who spent over ten years working for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee repeatedly warned the FBI, starting in 2017, that then-Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) authorized leaking classified information to damage Donald Trump during the now-debunked Russiagate scandal.

According to newly revealed FBI memos obtained by Just the News, the whistleblower, a Democrat by party affiliation that described himself as a friend to both Schiff and former Republican House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, called the leaking "unethical," "illegal," and "treasonous." But he told agents he was reassured by Schiff and others that there was no risk of prosecution because the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause would shield them from legal consequences.

No public record exists showing the Attorney General or Solicitor General ever issued an opinion endorsing that interpretation. DOJ officials allegedly showed little interest in pursuing the matter, citing the same excuse Schiff had offered, the outlet reported.

The choice of America's northern frontier is as much about politics as it is about geography.

The choice of Alaska as the venue for the August 15, 2025, bilateral summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin carries a rare blend of symbolism. It reaches deep into the past, reflects the current geopolitical balance, and hints at the contours of future US-Russia relations.

From the standpoint of historical memory, there is hardly another place in the United States that so clearly embodies the spirit of neighborliness and mutually beneficial cooperation lost during the Cold War. From 1737 until 1867, this vast, sparsely populated land was known as Russian America - a semi-exclave of the Russian Empire, separated from its Eurasian heartland yet sharing a border with another state.

Tsar Alexander II's decision to sell Alaska to the United States for $7.2 million was one of the most debated diplomatic transactions of the 19th century. In St. Petersburg, it was clear: if left unattended, Alaska would likely fall into the hands of Russia's main rival at the time - the British Empire. Handing it over to Washington was not an act of weakness, but a calculated investment in future relations with a nation whose Pacific ambitions did not yet collide with Russia's.