All Episodes
Previous Next
March 29, 2022 - Epoch Times
21:00
Trump Files Federal SPYGATE Lawsuit; Uses Durham's Findings; Sues Clinton, DNC, British Spy
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is your daily Facts Matter Update, and I'm your host, Roman, from the Epoch Times.
And now let's begin today's discussion by talking about President Trump, who recently had a victory in court.
That's right, three days ago, after several years of legal back and forth, President Trump won the case against porn star Stormy Daniels, who has now been ordered to pay him $300,000 in legal fees.
And so, coming right off of that victory, just yesterday, President Trump filed a new lawsuit.
Specifically, he filed a federal lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, against Christopher Steele, who is the former British spy behind that infamous Steele dossier, as well as against about 30 other people.
And his lawsuit, it alleges that these individuals...
They carried out a national plot to weave a false narrative that Trump somehow colluded with Russia.
Now, of course, that all took place about five or six years ago.
However, with the most recent developments in John Durham's investigation, we now have a much clearer picture of what was really taking place behind the scenes.
Here's in fact part of what his lawsuit, which by the way, this lawsuit is about 108 pages long, but here's what it says in relevant part, quote, Falsifying evidence, deceiving law enforcement, and exploiting access to highly sensitive data sources are so outrageous, subversive, and incendiary that even the events of Watergate pale in comparison.
Now, just to pause here for a quick moment, we here at the Epoch Times, we have been following this Spygate saga since about 2016.
And frankly, the details, including all of the different actors involved, are incredibly complex.
We, in fact, had to publish several large infographics in order to make sense of what was even happening.
You can, by the way, find all those infographics pinned in the description box below this video.
However, it was only recently that more details came out regarding exactly how this whole affair was playing out behind the scenes.
And so, just a few weeks ago, you had Mr.
John Durham, who is of course the special counsel leading the investigation into the spying.
He submitted a court filing which showed that the Democrats were allegedly paying money to infiltrate the servers of President Trump's private residence, his office, as well as the servers of the White House.
And this third point, it was occurring during the time when President Trump was already in office.
And so, piggybacking on these developments from John Durham's investigation, here's what President Trump's lawsuit had to say.
Quote, And a media frenzy it was.
You might already not remember it, just because so much has happened since then with so many crises coming out one after the other.
But back during President Trump's first two years in office, this whole Trump-Russia narrative, it was the biggest story across almost every mainstream news outlet.
Now, of course, Special Counsel Bob Mueller, he concluded that there was no actual evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
But the fact that there was no evidence did not stop many of the legacy media outlets in this country from propagating these false claims day and night for quite literally two years.
In fact, there was an analysis that was conducted by the Media Research Center and it found that during Trump's first year in office, The Trump-Russia collusion story was the number one most covered topic.
Major networks spent more time covering Russian collusion than on any other policy topic that was happening in the country.
Here's specifically what that Media Research Center analysis concluded.
From Inauguration Day, which was January 20th, 2017, through the end of 2017, meaning until December 31st, the three evening newscasts aired 3,430 stories that talked about either President Trump or his administration, totaling 99 hours, 3 minutes of airtime, about 34% of all evening news.
The tone of coverage has been incessantly hostile, 90% negative versus just 10% positive, with the Russian investigation alone accounting for one-fifth of all Trump coverage.
And furthermore, despite the massive coverage of Russian collusion, these networks, well, they devoted almost no airtime to questioning how this investigation actually began, meaning where did these allegations actually originate from, That was almost never discussed.
And so, what this means is that even though President Trump beat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, he was dogged by these collusion allegations for many years afterwards as president.
And thus, the agenda that he was actually elected to enact by the American people was heavily stalled.
However, although the media covered this topic extensively, the fact is that technically, they really should have known better.
And the reason that I can say that rather definitively is because back in May of 2017, at the same time that they were publishing their stories non-stop, we here at the Epoch Times, we looked into the actual evidence that was available, and we found that despite the allegations, there was no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
And that is exactly what we reported.
And ironically, because we reported the truth of the matter instead of just following along with the narrative, well, we were branded by those other legacy media outlets as being right-wing conspiracy theorists.
Which at the time, at that time at least, it really made me understand quite lucidly why most people cover stories the exact same way.
Because if you step outside of the preconceived narrative, well, you are prone to being attacked.
Regardless, though, that did not stop us here at the Epoch Times.
We kept investigating, and to our surprise, and it really was not something that we were expecting, what we found was a vast network of people who seemed to be working to take down President Trump behind the scenes.
That's when we published the Insurance Policy Infographic, detailing how a piece of opposition party research, the so-called Steele dossier, which was once described by former FBI Director James Comey as being both salacious and unverified, became the driving force behind the Trump colluding with Russia allegations.
And from that point on, we just continue to dig, we continue to do our research, and we continue to uncover the details regarding all the spying that was done on the Trump campaign, such as the methods that Obama-era officials used to spy on the Trump campaign, how a high-level FBI official had vowed to stop a Trump presidency, how Mueller's report found no collusion how a high-level FBI official had vowed to stop a Trump presidency, how Mueller's report found no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, nor any obstruction, how a former CIA contractor working for the firm that created the Steele dossier frequently sent Russian research to DOJ officials,
how a former CIA contractor working for the firm that created the Steele dossier frequently sent Russian research to DOJ officials, how the FBI, under Andrew McCabe, tried to actually re-engage with Christopher Now, my point here is not to say how great we are or something like that,
Rather, what I believe this means is that these other legacy media outlets, which have many, many, many times more resources to investigate the stories than we do, they somehow missed the mark.
Perhaps they wanted the story to be true so much that they were blinded to the obvious facts, but who knows, we of course cannot actually know what's going on inside their heads.
However, once it was revealed that these allegations were not true, the big question became where did they actually originate from and who can be held responsible for them.
Well, in the six years since the election, we have been able to map out a relatively clear picture of what took place behind the scenes.
A lot of it came from the John Durham investigation.
Essentially, Mr.
Christopher Steele, who is the former British spy, he compiled a dossier based on what he claimed were sources inside of Russia.
However, eventually it was revealed that his main source was a man named Igor Donchenko, who's been investigated by federal agents as possibly being a Russian spy.
And then furthermore, Christopher Steele himself was paid to produce the dossier by the DNC, as well as by Clinton's campaign.
After taking the money and producing these salacious dossiers, he released it to reporters ahead of the 2016 election and started that media firestorm that we discussed earlier, which is exactly what President Trump is now suing against.
Here's specifically what his lawsuit says, quote, Now,
as I mentioned earlier, besides Hillary Clinton and Christopher Steele, defendants in the lawsuit include the DNC, the Democratic National Committee, John Sullivan, who is currently the National Security Advisor, but back then he was Hillary Clinton's campaign advisor, A company called Fusion GPS, who helped to produce and distribute the dossier, Mr.
Igor Donchenko, who is the Russian national charged with lying to the FBI as part of John Durham's investigation, as well as several former FBI officials like James Comey and as well as Andrew McCabe.
However, the tone of the defendants in their public comments against this lawsuit are, as you kind of expected them to be, rather dismissive.
For instance, Mr.
John Podesta, who is both the chairman of the Clinton 2016 campaign as well as one of the defendants in this lawsuit, here's what he wrote on Twitter.
Do you think Trump filed this case with the hope of calling Vladimir Putin as a character witness?
Trump deposition ought to be a hoot.
Likewise, the lawyer representing FBI official Peter Strzok, well, he released this as a part of his statement.
We haven't had a chance to read the complaint, but knowing the former president, there's probably very little in there that's true.
However, unlike previously, when the truth was decided by the media, well, in this case, it'll be a court of law that'll have to decide whether the facts contained in this particular lawsuit are true or not.
Now, in terms of damages, President Trump's lawsuit is seeking more than $24 million in costs and damages, as well as a jury trial.
And so perhaps as this federal lawsuit is going to be working itself through the court system, especially with the process of discovery, more of the facts will actually come to light.
And who knows?
Perhaps several years from now, we'll have a headline like this, but in regards to this case.
Now, if you'd like to read the details of this case for yourself, which I would actually recommend that you do if you have the time, it's a little bit long, but you can consider reading it because it lays out the details pretty well, point by point, and it details exactly what the spying allegations are rather rationally.
I'll throw a link to the PDF version of this lawsuit.
It'll be found in the description box below.
And all I ask in return is that you take a super quick moment to smash both that like button as well as that subscribe button.
That way, not only can this video be shared out ever more widely, but also you can get honest news delivered directly into your newsfeed every single weekday.
As long as YouTube doesn't kick us off.
And now, let's shift gears just a little bit and discuss the guerilla war tactics that are currently being employed over by the civilians in Ukraine.
What's this?
Well, that's a great question, Roman.
And it is today's sponsor, which is an awesome messaging and email service provider called Secure.
And it's awesome if you're the type of person that actually cares about their privacy.
Because, I mean, it's no big secret that these big tech companies are mining and remining our data all the time.
In fact, in the year 2020, it was found that over 155 million Americans, likely including you and me, have suffered some form of data breach.
And by the way, that's only what's publicly known.
However, what's happened in the past?
Well, that can stay in the past because with Secure, Your data and your messages can remain private.
And that's because Secure has all of their data centers located over in Switzerland rather than in the US or in China.
And the reason that's so important is that Switzerland has some of the strictest data privacy laws in the entire world, and they are not subject to the intrusive cloud act.
And if you want to know what the cloud act is, head on over to secure.com and watch their video on the homepage or on the video tutorials page, which is under their support section.
Now, the thing that I personally love the most about the Secure app Is the privacy aspect of it.
They don't mine my data.
They don't mine my phone number.
They don't mine the phone numbers or data of my friends and family who I chat with.
But best of all is that if your friends and family don't actually use the secure app themselves, it doesn't matter.
Because the way that it works is that when you use their secure send email technology, all of your emails and your messages route to Switzerland, and then the recipient can reply using their secure reply technology.
And so everything remains private no matter what.
And the same actually goes for their messaging app as well.
And they're always coming up with new features.
In fact, the most recent one they told me about, they sent me an email here, was that they're coming up with a new feature called text to chat by invite.
So they're an innovative company and they really do care about your privacy.
And so what they're doing doesn't work with your existing big tech email account.
So check them out.
You can head on over to secure.com.
I'll throw the link into the description box below.
And when you use promo code Roman, you can get 25% off.
And the rates are not even that expensive to start with, by the way.
It's only $5 for the messenger and $10 for the email and messenger combo.
And they even offer a seven-day free trial.
So head on over to their website.
Again, it'll be linked in the description box below.
Use promo code Roman to save some money.
And now Roman in the studio, back to you.
Now, regardless of the politics surrounding the conflict, what I believe everyone seems to agree on right now is that the actual civilians who are fighting for their homeland in Ukraine are quite heroic.
They are, after all, just ordinary people who are taking up arms against an invading organized military.
And so, while I was down in Florida about two weeks ago, I took the unique opportunity and I sat down with Mr.
Brady Duke, who is a former U.S. Navy SEAL, and I asked him, based on his experience over in the Middle East, what kind of defense we can actually expect to see from the Ukrainian civilians as they're up against an organized Russian military.
Take a listen.
Yeah, so my name is Brady Duke, as you said.
I was in the SEAL teams for 10 years out on the West Coast.
I was deployed to Afghanistan and a few other places serving my country and started to teach in close quarters combat after that as a civilian and doing that for law enforcement and SWAT teams across the United States.
And, you know, I run a ministry with my wife.
We teach on reconciliation and forgiveness as well, and so that's a little bit about my background.
I was a sniper and a breacher in the SEAL team specifically, so...
So I guess before we head into what's happening today, let's talk about what happened in Afghanistan.
So when you saw the sort of haphazard evacuation, you can call it, how did you feel after having actually been on the ground fighting close quarters?
Yeah, this keeps coming up.
People, there's not even words to describe, I think, the level of failure that we saw.
And I usually articulate that as a retreat of sorts because we just walked away from the enemy.
We welded the gates shut on Americans, on our allies.
And so that was just a sickening thing to watch, having fought there, having fought really on behalf of people there who are trying to have healthy lives.
And we were there to fight the enemy, but there's a lot of innocent people there that want to have lives and grow farms and Have regular life there.
When you were watching that and you saw that a lot of the Afghans who helped Americans that were being left behind, what did you think?
Do you feel like it could have been done better?
And if so, how?
Absolutely it could have done better.
You know, Biden was quoted as even saying this could not take six months, and he did it in that timeline.
We should have done this in a strategic way.
Nobody wants to stay in war any longer than we have to.
And yes, we could have been making movements to do that, but we did that so expediently that we had left behind people.
We have done this in a way that I think dishonors those lives that we had lost.
It dishonors our allies, and it really, I think, undermines the trust that we have with our allies.
I think there are strategic things that should have been done in place.
We could have kept those certain airfields in place longer To ensure that we evacuated all Americans that were on the ground and ensure that we stay there until they were all evacuated, for sure.
We should never leave a man behind.
So that actually ties in pretty neatly to what's happening now, right?
Because that seemed to have lowered America's standing on the world stage, which likely at the very least contributed to what's happening in Ukraine right now.
So can you, from your own history and experience, can you give the audience an idea of what the Ukrainians are currently facing with the Russian invasion?
What they are facing right now is something extremely ugly and extremely terrifying.
When I heard the news that they were being invaded by Russia, I just was saddened to hear the families and the children that were being evacuated.
And right now, they are fighting for their lives.
You know, we're getting reports that they're fighting in a way that the Russians were not anticipating.
You know, they have a good stronghold there.
And my background in close-quarters combat and urban warfare, it is a very, very dangerous thing.
It is a very confusing thing at times.
And so I think this undermines as well our need for the Second Amendment here in the United States, is we need to ensure that those rights are never infringed upon because we need to be able to defend ourselves as civilians no matter what.
So it is a very scary thing.
It's disorienting.
When you're under levels of stress like that, it can be very disorienting and you need to ensure that there's organized teams working effectively and communicating well to ensure that you're mounting a good resistance.
And so I'm encouraged to hear what level of readiness the Ukrainians seem to have had.
With recruiting civilians to join their fighting force.
I mean, they're shooting down Russian helicopters and, you know, hitting these guys as they're hitting the ground.
And that's really what it takes.
It's an ugly thing.
And so, you know, to me it brings passion to my heart to know that they're fighting for their country and they're doing it to defend their country.
But it's also very sad because it's never pretty.
It is never pretty.
And I would not wish war upon anyone.
What do you think is the even chance of them being able to hold Russia off?
Because like you said, it's civilians, right?
Now they're arming civilians, sometimes even old people, very young people, maybe who've had no military training.
If they want to defend the homeland, they're giving them arms so that they can fight back.
But on the flip side, they're fighting against skilled Russian troops, your essentially Russian counterparts, who know all these tactics, who know underground warfare.
What do you think realistically is their chance?
I don't know for sure, but I think there is a really profound psychological effect that takes place if you are encountered in a way that you were not anticipating.
And I think that's what the Russians are encountering right now, is when you meet resistance that was not something that you had foreseen by intelligence, that has something...
To offer on the battlefield.
When we would get into engagements overseas, we would hit people with such an immense amount of violence of action that it was a psychological effect on the enemy to where it was a defeating...
There was a mindset that you could then implement into the opposing force that would defeat them internally and remove their drive to fight as hard as they would have otherwise.
So do you think that's what the Ukrainians are going to wind up doing to the Russians, or vice versa?
Well, I think if the Ukrainians are supplied well enough, you know, I think that they can fight for a while, but Russia has resources that outnumber them greatly.
And so that's something that really makes this a sad thing to watch.
Frankly, this was avoidable.
I'm praying for their country, because I don't know what the end is going to look like, to be honest.
Yeah, a lot of people I spoke with, even some, actually every lawmaker I spoke with said something along the lines of, well, Russia will take over quite soon and they'll install a puppet government.
However, and this is something I'd really like to get your opinion on, what if the Ukrainians continue their resistance?
They just won't give up.
So like what we saw in Iraq, right, where it's like you're going to have these skirmishes nonstop, you're going to have a resistance for, let's say, years.
Do you think that's something that's sustainable for Russia, or would eventually they have to throw their hands up in the air and just retreat?
What's your opinion on that?
I think it's something that is sustainable for Russia, which is scary.
I think Putin is in a place where we have to really see that he is determined to take this land as his.
And I don't know exactly how long that will take, but to me it's unavoidable.
I wish that they were not in this position.
Now, if you'd like to read more about the on-the-ground fighting that's actually taking place, I'll throw the links to several resources into the description box below this video for you to check out.
And now lastly, since we're talking about a relatively small militia fighting a giant army, I'd like to mention that recently we published a phenomenal movie over on Epic TV called Washington's Armor, which is a rather heroic story of a young George Washington, how he was shaped to become the man who eventually helped to found America.
Here's a trailer for that movie.
Where, madam, do you get your facts?
It's in your journal, sir.
It is all in your journal.
Some would have you to believe today that all of this is the work of chance and not that of divine providence.
They butchered him, confronted his wife and children so that no perpetual nor Indian, not loyal to the French, would dare venture to go where you and the governor would have us go.
Many in the house believe your trip to the French Commandants to be theatrics, to induce public sentiment both here and abroad for war.
How George do you respond to this indictment that some would say to be unreasonable reasoning in the age of reason, sir?
If you'd like to check out that movie, I will throw a link to Epic TV.
It'll be down there in the description box right below this video.
And by the way, there are a ton of great movies on there, so it's not only a fantastic way to entertain yourself and your family, but it's a great way to support our journalism.
Again, that link will be right there in the description box below.
And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epic Times.
▲
Export Selection