PLOT TWIST Chapter One: The Real Collusion Story and Why It Happened

Follow the white rabbit…

Everyone is so angry nowadays, and if they’re not angry, they’re confused. Spend any time watching the news or scrolling through social media and the division is palpable. Suddenly, it seems we can’t agree on anything and everyone is determined to force others to see things the way they do, or they just don’t know what to think at all. 

Unfortunately, we aren’t talking to each other, we’re talking over each other. Across each other. Past each other. There is plenty of finger pointing and name calling, but very little actual conversation.

The election of President Trump revealed a very deep divide in the country most hadn’t even realized was there. Now it seems that everyone must pick a side, whether they want to or not. But the truth is, we have all been the victim of a huge mass deception designed to pit us against each other, to keep us occupied and looking the other way while our freedoms are steadily eroded. Or worse, to make us complicit in their erosion.

In our courts, activist judges have become commonplace; the judicial branch has been clearly abused by political operatives using bureaucracy to obstruct the proper function of government. Congress seems entirely incapable of passing legislation or a budget. They are too busy investigating the minority party, whichever it happens to be, putting on a circus show to trigger whatever emotion will get you to the polls to vote for them, or pushing the agenda of the lobbyists who control absolutely every decision on The Hill. 

When it comes to foreign policy, it’s easy to point the finger at President Bush for missing intelligence that would have prevented 9/11, or for the war in Iraq. It’s easy to point the finger at President Obama for the rise of ISIS and destabilization in the world and especially the Middle East. It’s easy to point the finger at regimes for fostering terrorists, or at Islam itself. It’s easy to pick a side and insist everyone else was at fault. In reality, they all are.

For decades, the US has been running a foreign policy platform of waging proxy wars with its enemies through the Middle East and around the world, using local conflicts as the staging ground for international warfare. This policy has remained consistent no matter which color team was in the White House.

Now this deception has come home in the form of the war against Donald Trump, waged in tandem by the Democrats and elements of the Republican Party, and the media. The war was designed firstly to prevent his election, and when that failed, to remove him from power because he is a threat to the status quo.

Why Trump? The waging of proxy wars is a function of the deep state – what Trump calls ‘the swamp’ – which needs ongoing conflict to keep its massive crony capitalism / high tax racket rolling. The players in the swamp want two things: your tax money lining their pockets, and the power to keep the conflicts that make them rich rolling. They claim that ‘our enemy’s enemy is our friend.’ But there is a huge difference between supporting local groups in conflict with a common enemy, and providing support to your nation’s enemies for your own corrupt purposes. The latter is more commonly called ‘treason.’

Uniquely, President Trump has not engaged in these tactics. Instead, we have a President who, rather than filling the swamp with his chosen species of monster, is actively engaged in draining it. He owes no favors. And he is using the power of the office to restore the proper constitutional authorities of all three branches. 

Now the monsters are fighting back. They are angry about the loss of the intelligence apparatus because he is going to expose the abuse by both parties of this power going back for decades. He is cutting off the ability of the swamp monsters to get rich on proxy wars they create. His fellow world leaders are so angry because every country’s swamp has been playing the same sick game. 

Yet the people fighting back aren’t really fighting President Trump. He is merely an elected official. He is our figurehead. In reality, they are fighting you – the person who put him in the White House. It is you that the system is supposed to serve, not the other way around. Elected officials and public servants alike have forgotten that the government obtains its power from the consent of the governed.

How has this happened? How did the American Republic, built upon the principles of freedom, democracy, and true equality, slide into what we have now: a corrupted system built on lies which serves only those in power and turns against the whistleblowers to their sick game? 

Somewhere along the line, WE, THE PEOPLE fell asleep. The divide has been laid bare because Trump has begun to wake us up again.

This video blog and its attached document is a wake-up call of its own. In it, we detail how the deep state took the reins of the country and has been steering it against the interests of the American people, because only when we know the roots of a problem can we begin to solve it.

And the time has come to solve it. It’s time we took back our Republic. It’s time we reclaimed our freedom. We do this by being aware and knowing the truth.

If we’re going to stop being angry and confused, we need to stop pointing fingers and stop being manipulated by false narratives and political talking points. We don’t have to agree on everything. We do have to work together to get the government to function as it was designed to.

The only way to do that is to recognize that there is a rot in our government that has taken away the power of WE, THE PEOPLE, and that it festers across party lines. The Russia Hoax is the perfect framework within which to examine this rot because the participants in the seditious plot have been participating in criminal abuses of power and violating the rights of American citizens for decades and we simply were unaware. So we’ll start there. The participants are from both parties, and are intricately bound together in so many events that it becomes impossible to ignore the coordinated actions they have taken to cover their crimes.

While the country waits for the declassification of the FISA documents or the imaginary smoking gun evidence that President Trump is a Russian agent, news breaks every day that nods towards the corruption and criminality of our government officials, and the dangerous misleading of the public by the mainstream media. Will you be scared? Angry? Confused? Or will you be relieved? That all depends on how comfortable you are with the truth.

The Real Russia Collusion

By now, it’s obvious that the whole Trump / Russia collusion accusation is unfounded, and that Putin did not manipulate the American public to get Trump elected. The whole plot was based upon a fake document called the Steele Dossier.  

The Steele dossier is a 35 page collection of research memos written by Christopher Steele, a former British Intelligence agent, alleging a conspiracy between Donald Trump and Russia to sway the 2016 Presidential election in Trump’s favor. The dossier claimed there was communication between servers in Trump Tower and Alfa Bank in Russia, among other things. This information was not true.

The memos were compiled into the dossier by a company called Fusion GPS. They bill themselves as a commercial ‘intelligence firm’ based in Washington D.C. They ‘provide’ (their word) research and strategic advice for political inquiries, such as opposition research. The “GPS” stands for “Global research, Political analysis, Strategic insight.” 

According to the New York Times: “After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and the DNC [Democratic National Convention] by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates — including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.”

In 2017, Perkins Coie acknowledged that the DNC funded the debunked dossier, after Rep. Devin Nunes of California, the most senior Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, subpoenaed their bank records. So in actuality, it was the Clinton campaign, not Trump, who collaborated with the Russians in a desperate, and ultimately failed, attempt to steal the election. 

This prompted a lawsuit in 2018 alleging that Hillary Clinton’s campaign broke election laws with the dossier. According to The Washington Times, “though not stated outright, the lawsuit argues that Democrats violated an admonition issued […] by Federal Election Commission Chairman Ellen L. Weintraub [who] decreed that political campaigns cannot accept “anything of value” from foreign nationals.” It named Christopher Steele, the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Perkins Coie as respondents. 

On May 17, 2017, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller was instructed to investigate the affair. Twenty-two months later, on March 22, 2019, Mueller sent his ‘Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election’ (commonly known as the Mueller Report) to the Justice Department. 

At the time of the appointment he was praised by both the Democrats and the Republicans as being impartial and just. The mainstream media also lifted Mueller up as a sort of angelic bringer-of-justice. That he was lauded in this way illustrates how politicians and the media collude to keep the public in the dark, because, in truth, he is nothing of the sort. 

Mueller eventually found no conspiracy, but it is important to note here that he knew within months of his investigation that the conspiracy was unmerited. In fact, the mainstream perpetuated the Russian collusion hoax hysteria even as Mueller himself had sufficient evidence that the whole thing was a farce. 

In the wake of the release of Mueller’s report, there were indications that prosecutors knew by the end of 2017 that Trump was not collaborating with Russia. Mueller clearly spent a lot of time on Volume Two of his report — which makes a case that Trump obstructed justice — but on the most explosive and consequential allegation in the Trump / Russia affair, the Mueller investigation was essentially over long before it officially ended.

“By early December 2017, [Mueller] had exhausted all of the evidence and the witnesses,” said John Dowd, Trump’s lawyer for the first 10 months of the investigation. After the public knew of the debunked collusion attempt, the New York Times and other mainstream news outlets attempted to disassociate themselves from the fake news stories. 

President Trump said of the Mueller report, in April 2019: “It was an illegal investigation, it was started illegally. Everything about it was crooked. […] There were dirty cops. These were bad people. […] This was an attempted coup, this was an attempted takedown of a President.”

So does that mean there are no illicit links between the Russian and American governments? Unfortunately, no. There has, and continues to be collusion between players in Russia and the US, but the corrupt elements were never linked to Trump. Rather, it was the Clinton campaign which held and maintained links to Russia. They were merely trying to cover their tracks by casting aspersions on Trump. Hillary was never supposed to lose the Presidential election. That she did, has opened the whole corrupt network up to exposure. 

In short, the Russia collaboration story was nothing more than a scam, a group of crooks attempting to take the Oval Office and obstruct their crimes from being exposed, aided and abetted by the media, and landing the taxpayer with a 30 million dollar bill in the process. 

However, a closer look into the events that led up to the 2016 hoax reveals that their intentions go far beyond merely trying to win the 2016 presidential election.  Every time Hillary Clinton and her team pursued the false claim that Russians collaborated with Trump, she and all the perpetrators were in actuality still pursuing mutual interests for other foreign powers, including Russia, China and the transnational Islamist group known as the Muslim Brotherhood.  

Uranium One

On June 8, 2010, Rosatom, Russia’s State Atomic Energy Corporation, announced a $1.3 billion bid for a majority stake in Canada’s Uranium One, a Canadian uranium mining company with headquarters in Toronto, Ontario. Its assets included 20 percent of American reserves of uranium, the main ingredient in atomic bombs. Rosatom had already been buying up stock in the company since 2009.

By January 2013, according to Russia Today, Rosatom had paid almost $2.8 billion for 48.6% of Uranium One Inc, a price which RT said was “30% above market price to take over completely the Canadian uranium producer.” 

The New York Times reported of the deal that it “made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.”

However, as uranium is considered a strategic asset, the deal had to be cleared by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The committee primarily comprises the heads of nine governmental departments. 

Among those is the U.S. State Department, which was, at the time, led by none other than one Hillary Rodham Clinton. Also on the committee was Attorney General Eric Holder, who at the time headed up the Department of Justice (DOJ). That department’s lead agency is the FBI.

In addition to the nine departments and some White House departments, the Director of National Intelligence also serves on CFIUS as a non-voting, ex-officio member, according to the US Treasury’s website. At the time, the Director of National Intelligence was James R. Clapper (serving August 5, 2010 – January 20, 2017). 

As Director, Clapper’s role was to serve as head of the seventeen-member United States Intelligence Community, and as an advisor to the President. He also had responsibility for directing and overseeing the National Intelligence Program. The Intelligence Branch, a division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), is one of the seventeen agencies under his remit. 

At the time the Rosatom takeover of Uranium One was going through, the FBI was actively investigating Rosatom’s ongoing U.S. based racketeering, extortion, and money-laundering schemes and therefore must have been aware that the deal was not in America’s interests. 

The extent of the corruption required to pass the Uranium One deal later prompted the Washington Times to bill the deal as “a prime example of how key government agencies have been criminalized.”

FBI and court documents show that, in 2009, Federal Agents were already tracking illicit payments made by a U.S. informer to a subsidiary of Rosatom, and were therefore already aware that the Russian nuclear giant was engaging in illegal practices on American soil in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

The corruption case centers around Vadim Mikerin, Russia’s main contact overseeing Putin’s nuclear expansion inside the United States. Mikerin had been running the Rosatom subsidiary Tenex in Moscow since the early 2000s, but in 2010 was granted a visa by the Obama administration to establish a USA-based arm: Tenam USA.

His activities in this role constituted a serious national security breach as he used his position to run a racketeering scheme.

“As part of the scheme, Mikerin, with the consent of higher level officials at Tenex and Rosatom (both Russian state-owned entities) would offer no-bid contracts to US businesses in exchange for kickbacks in the form of money payments made to some offshore banks accounts. Mikerin apparently then shared the proceeds with other co-conspirators associated with Tenex in Russia and elsewhere,” FBI Agent David Gadren later testified, according to The Hill.

As part of his activities, Mikerin gave a contract to an American trucking firm called Transport Logistics International which held the sensitive job of transporting Russia’s uranium around the United States, in return for more than $2 million in kickbacks from some of its executives.

The kickbacks from that deal and others were laundered through shell companies and secret offshore accounts. As The Washington Times noted, on November 14, 2017: “The American companies that participated in this criminal extortion scheme not only compromised their integrity but made themselves subject to Russian blackmail, potentially compromising our national security.” 

His scheme was undone by an American nuclear executive, Douglas Campbell, who became nervous and turned FBI informant. With the knowledge of the Bureau, he began making kickback payments under Mikerin’s direction, recorded by the FBI, as well as collecting information. The first payment was dated November 27, 2009.

This was not the only compromising aspect of the deal. At the same time as the deal was going through, Hillary and Bill Clinton’s ‘Clinton Foundation,’ ostensibly a charitable trust, was cultivating links with Russia.  

Shortly after Rosatom announced their intentions to take control of Uranium One, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 by a Russian investment bank with Kremlin links that was promoting Uranium One stock, in exchange for giving a speech in Moscow, the New York Times reported. 

And during the time the Russians were gradually seizing control of the Canadian company, between 2019 and 2013, the chairman of Uranium One made four donations to the Clinton Foundation totaling $2.35 million. 

Author Peter Schweizer, in his book Clinton Cash, calculates that before, during, and after CFIUS’s review of the deal, “shareholders involved in this transaction had transferred approximately $145 million to the Clinton Foundation or its initiatives,” according to the National Review.  

Commenting on these events, Trump stated: “That’s your real Russia story. Not a story where they talk about collusion and there was none. It was a hoax. ​Your real Russia story is uranium​.” 

The FBI’s Complicity 

The FBI is America’s domestic intelligence and security service, analogous to MI5 in the UK or Russia’s Federal Security Service, which succeeded the KGB. According to its website, it employs some 30,000 agents, analysts and other professionals who are tasked with protecting the U.S. from terrorism, espionage, cyber attacks, and major criminal threats. Although it is primarily a domestic agency, it also maintains staff in 60 Legal Attaché (LEGAT) offices and 15 sub-offices in U.S. embassies and consulates across the globe. Their core mission, according to the agency, is to establish and maintain liaison with principal law enforcement and security services in designated foreign countries. 

In its capacity as an intelligence gatherer, the Bureau, and in particular it’s director, therefore has a clear duty to warn the legislation and presidential branches of government of any wrongdoing that could harm the state. 

The FBI had ample opportunity to warn CFIUS that the Uranium One deal was bad for America. As detailed above, it was linked to the committee in two ways: both through Attorney General Eric Holder, and through Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Yet the deal was cleared regardless.  

As we have seen, by early 2010, when the Uranium One deal came into play, the FBI already had enough evidence to prove a case of racketeering and money laundering against Mikerin, and were aware that Russian officials were cultivating relationships with the Clintons. 

Yet it wasn’t until 2014 that Mikerin and executives at Transport Logistics International were arrested and charged. Mikerin’s scheme ran between 2004 and 2014, but when it finally came to court it comprised of a single charge of money laundering, and although there was clear evidence of wrongdoing since at least 2009, federal prosecutors only cited a handful of transactions which took place in 2011 and 2012, long after the Uranium One deal had been approved by CFIUS, according to the report by The Hill

The court case also failed to bring to light conversations witnessed by the FBI informant which linked Russian nuclear officials to the Clintons. This despite agents collecting documents proving that millions of dollars had been transferred from Russia’s nuclear industry to an American entity which had donated to the Clinton Foundation.

When Mikerin was convicted, receiving a 48 month sentence and a fine of over $2.1 million, little fanfare was made of it. Consequently, many officials were unaware of the affair. 

The full extent of the FBI’s complacency in failing to sound alarm bells was laid bare in 2018, when the FBI informant, Douglas Campbell, made a written statement to three congressional committees. Among his allegations was the charge that Russian nuclear executives hired an American lobbying firm, APCO Worldwide, specifically because it was able to influence Hillary Clinton. 

Russian nuclear officials “told me [ie Campbell] at various times that they expected APCO to apply a portion of the $3 million annual lobbying fee it was receiving from the Russians to provide in-kind support for the Clintons’ Global Initiative,” the statement read, according to The Hill

He continued: “The contract called for four payments of $750,000 over twelve months. APCO was expected to give assistance free of charge to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of their effort to create a favorable environment to ensure the Obama administration made affirmative decisions on everything from Uranium One to the U.S.-Russia Civilian Nuclear Cooperation agreement.”

Campbell was also able to provide proof that the FBI had concerns over the Uranium One deal. He claimed that he handed the FBI evidence of Rosatom’s malfeasance months before the Obama Administration made a series of decisions in the Russian company’s favour, including the CFIUS sign-off.

“The emails and documents I intercepted during 2010 made clear that Rosatom’s purchase of Uranium One — for both its Kazakh and American assets — was part of Russia’s geopolitical strategy to gain leverage in global energy markets,” he testified. “I obtained documentary proof that Tenex was helping Rosatom win CFIUS approval, including an October 6, 2010 email … asking me specifically to help overcome opposition to the Uranium One deal.”

Astonishingly, Campbell’s undercover work also uncovered Russian collusion with Iran on nuclear matters. One of the pieces of evidence he handed to Congress was a memo addressed to the FBI dated April 16, 2010. 

“Tenex continues to supply Iran fuel through their Russian company,” he informed his handlers, adding: “They continue to assist with construction consult [sic] and fabricated assemblies to supply the reactor. Fabricated assemblies require sophisticated engineering and are arranged inside the reactor with the help and consult [of Russians]. The final fabricators to Iran are being flown by Russian air transport due to the sensitive nature of the equipment.”

Campbell told lawmakers he gave the FBI “documentary proof that officials in Moscow were obtaining restricted copies of IAEA compliance reports on Iranian nuclear inspections, a discovery that appeared to deeply concern my handlers.”

“My FBI handlers praised my work,” he added. “They told me on various occasions that details from the undercover probe had been briefed directly to FBI top officials. On two occasions my handlers were particularly excited, claiming that my undercover work had been briefed to President Obama as part of his daily presidential briefing.”

Despite this wealth of evidence that the FBI knew exactly what Russia was up to, American officials appear to have been kept largely in the dark. Ronald Hosko, who was assistant FBI director with the portfolio for criminal cases at the time of the investigation, told The Hill “I had no idea this case was being conducted,” claiming that he did not recall ever having been briefed on the case by counterintelligence agents.  

Similarly, former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chair of the House Intelligence Committee during the time the FBI investigation was underway, told The Hill that he was never given any information on the corruption case, despite many in congress holding serious concerns over the Uranium One deal. 

“Not providing information on a corruption scheme before the Russian Uranium deal was approved by U.S. regulators and engaging the appropriate congressional committees has served to undermine U.S. national security interests by the very people charged with protecting them,” he said. 

However, when we look at the people in charge of decision-making within the FBI at the time of the investigation, the motive to withhold briefings becomes a little clearer.

Between September 4, 2001 and September 4, 2013, a span of time covering the whole Uranium One deal, the FBI was under the direction of none other than Robert Mueller — of ‘Mueller Report’ fame.

His lead investigators into the Rosatom affair were the then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein. The special prosecutors instructed by the Justice Department to investigate “certain issues” pertaining to the Uranium One deal also reported to Rosenstein. Rosentein must therefore have been aware of the wrongdoing underlying the Uranium One deal. 

It is surely no coincidence that Mueller’s investigators into alleged Russian involvement in the Presidential election also reported to Rosenstein. 

Not only that, the The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act applications targeting former Trump campaign associate Carter Page under the investigation into collusion between Trump and Russia were signed off by — you’ve guessed it — Rosenstein. 

When Rosenstein testified in a House hearing on potential abuses by the DOJ and FBI within their investigation of Trump, he was forced to admit to Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) that he had never read the application before signing off on in.  

Gohmert was reportedly disturbed by this, telling Rosenstein: “Well, telling you, being a former felony state judge, if I had somebody like you come before me and now it was revealed later that the guy that signed and approved an application for a warrant had not even read the application that would allow spying on somebody, I would look at everything he signed from then on with a jaundiced eye. And, I’m telling you, I was a little concerned.”


Turning a blind eye to foreign wrongdoing on American soil is bad enough, but evidence shows that collusion with the Russians went further – into actively assisting both Russia and China in the arms race against America. This was done through the creation of Skolkovo, a government funded town in Russia. 

Viktor Felixovich Vekselberg, is one of Russia’s richest men. He is the owner and president of Renova Group, a Russian conglomerate. According to Forbes, in October 2019 his fortune was estimated at $11.4 billion, making him the 119th richest person globally. Vekselberg is the single largest owner of Fabergé eggs in the world, owning fifteen of them.

Vekselberg is one of dozens of Russian oligarchs named in a report to Congress dated January 29, 2018, submitted under the terms of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). The federal bill imposes sanctions on Iran, North Korea, and Russia, and was signed into law by President Trump on August 2, 2017.

Vekselberg’s firm Renova donated between $50,000 and $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation’s Clinton Global Initiative, the organisation’s own records show. Subsequently, despite many warnings, Hillary and her friends approved one of the worst deals in American history. 

In 2010, Vekselberg was appointed President of the Skolkovo Foundation, a non-profit organization funded by a mix of private investors and the Russian government, with the goal of building a technology research hub in Russia. 

According to the National Review, Hillary championed the establishment of Skolkovo as “a high-tech corridor in Russia modeled after our own Silicon Valley,” as she explained in Moscow in October 2009. Housing for 30,000 people was planned, as well as schools, shops, and parks, all government designed. The Russian government pledged $5 billion over three years toward the project.

Clinton boasts in her memoirs that she persuaded then-Russian President Dimitry Medvedev to visit Silicon Valley in order to sell him on the Skolkovo project, writing: “At a long meeting I had with Medvedev outside Moscow in October 2009, he raised his plan to build a high-tech corridor in Russia modelled after our own Silicon Valley. When I suggested that he visit the original in California, he turned to his staff and told them to follow up.” He was good to his word, visiting in June 2010.

In May 2010, Clinton’s State Department colleagues encouraged 22 top American venture capitalists to tour Skolkovo, while the department also convinced Cisco, Google, and Intel, among others, to set up offices in Skolkovo. They complied with gusto. 

A 2016 report by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) titled From Russia With Money details that “In 2010, Cisco pledged a cool $1 billion to Skolkovo.” All three companies are also donors to the Clinton Foundation – “as we will see, a significant factor for dozens of companies who became involved with Skolkovo,” the GAI report notes. 

A side note here: during the 2016 Presidential election there was much discussion over whether the Clinton Foundation was a legitimate charitable trust, or merely a cover for crony capitalism – what Investor’s Business Daily termed “a pay-to-play scam.” Following the election, the financial results came in – and proved the case decisively in favour of the latter. 

During Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, the Foundation averaged donations of $254 million a year. But they hit a cliff edge in 2016 when Hillary lost election, dropping from $216 million in 2016 to just $26.5 million in 2017 — a staggering 88% fall.

As Investor’s Business Daily noted on November 23, 2018: “If the Clinton Foundation was as good as defenders claimed, why did all its big-time donors suddenly lose interest? The only reasonable explanation is that donors weren’t interested in what the foundation supposedly did for humanity. They were interested in the political favors they knew their money would buy.”

Nonetheless, 17 of the 28 ‘key partners’ in the Skolkovo deal made donations​ to the Clintons totaling ​between $6 million and $24 million (exact donations are not publicly recorded by the foundation, only bracket figures)​.

In 2013, the US Army raised alarm bells over the project, warning: “Skolkovo is arguably an overt alternative to clandestine industrial espionage.” Apparently nobody in Washington DC had bothered to check out this potential threat. 

Although military activities are not an official part of the Skolkovo project, the Skolkovo Foundation has, in fact, been involved in defense-related activities since December 2011, when it approved the first weapons-related project: the development of a hypersonic cruise missile engine. 

The project is a response to the U.S. Department of Defense’s Advanced Hypersonic Weapon, part of the Prompt Global Strike program. After the 2016 election, ​the US Air Force released a report​ stating that the United States is vulnerable to future attack by hypersonic missiles from China and Russia and is falling behind in the technology race to develop both defensive and offensive high-speed maneuvering arms. 

The study was the first by the U.S. military to sound the alarm about an arms race​ quietly underway for several years to develop hypersonic missiles for both strategic nuclear weapons and conventional rapid strike systems, according to The Washington Free Beacon.

On July 31, 2016, Peter Schweizer wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he reported: “Research conducted in 2012 on Skolkovo by the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth declared that the purpose of Skolkovo was to serve as a “vehicle for world-wide technology transfer to Russia in the areas of information technology, biomedicine, energy, satellite and space technology, and nuclear technology.”

“Moreover, the report said: “the Skolkovo Foundation has, in fact, been involved in defense-related activities since December 2011, when it approved the first weapons-related project—the development of a hypersonic cruise missile engine. […] Not all of the center’s efforts are civilian in nature.””

Schweizer further noted: “Technology can have multiple uses—civilian and military. But in 2014 the Boston Business Journal ran an op-ed placed by the FBI, and noted that the agency had sent warnings to technology and other companies approached by Russian venture-capital firms. The op-ed—under the byline of Lucia Ziobro, an assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office—said that “The FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by their government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.””

He wasn’t the only person issuing warnings. Michael Carpenter was the Deputy Director of the State Department’s Office of Russian Affairs and later served as the Director for Russia at the National Security Council in 2013 and 2014. He is ​on record stating​ that “Skolkovo was one of the projects that was launched under the auspices of the reset. […] In particular it appeared to me to be an effort to gain intellectual property from U.S. firms and gain advantages […] that could come back to hurt us. That was my intuition,” NPR reported on May 11, 2018. 

This means that Hillary and her team acted as agents of a foreign power against the interests of the USA. Whether the Clintons were aware of how close they tread to the bounds of treason or not, it doesn’t negate the fact that there was some motive: whether ignorance, corruption, greed – or simply to disempower American interests. 

As Diane West, author of The Great Betrayal wrote on her website on March 3, 2017: “There is something much worse than the cronyism that Schweizer shows us. Knowingly or unknowingly, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton presided over the modernization and advance of Russian military, including nuclear, and intelligence capabilities. They did this through their “reset” with Russian which included massive technology transfers from the US and wider West through the establishment of the Kremlin’s Skolkovo “Silicon Valley” project. The Schweizer headline points to Clinton corruption. The worst implications for the American people in the report, however, point to treason.”