No Result
View All Result
Monday, July 27, 2026
Patriot TV Defenders Members
Patriot TV
  • Home
    • About
  • Posts
  • Home
    • About
  • Posts
No Result
View All Result
PatriotTV
No Result
View All Result
Home Opinions
Tulsi Gabbard (1)

Fox News Posts Former Biden Deep State Spokesman’s “Debunking” of Tulsi Gabbard’s Bombshells

by JD Rucker
July 24, 2025
Listen to "Patriot TV" on Spreaker.

(Substack)—Fox News, owned by the anti-Trump Murdoch family, spotlighted an article on Thursday by Ned Price. It was intended to debunk the bombshell reports being dropped by DNI Tulsi Gabbard regarding the Obama regime’s involvement in the Russiagate conspiracy.

Price is the former spokesman for Joe Biden’s State Department, a role he took after his career as a CIA officer. Those facts alone should ring alarm bells about the veracity of his op-ed. Many members of the Biden administration have been named in Gabbard’s drops, and while Price is not among them, he has worked closely with them as a “Deep State Spokesman” for many years.

What makes it worse is that the article is a pure propaganda piece. It’s not a straight-up op-ed that expresses Price’s views about Gabbard’s motivations or integrity. It’s a carefully written smear that states as “facts” what are clearly ambiguous and easily debunkable pieces of disinformation.

For example, the first “big” piece of “evidence” that Barack Obama was not involved in the plot to subvert the Trump administration is that he congratulated President Trump after the election.

Wow. Definitive.

He then applies the demonstrably effective CIA propaganda techniques of framing Gabbard’s claims as “not substantiated” and “sleight of hand” and “conflating” terms. In tradecraft circles, this is dropping a rhetorical smoke grenade. They don’t deny the report. They deny the interpretation of the report in hopes that the audience never actually reads it.

Most won’t.

But those of us who did read it are aware that there is no “sleight of hand” being used. It’s crystal clear based on the facts gathered by the United States Senate oversight investigation that Obama and his senior team knew the Russia interference claims were likely false before releasing them. As a matter of fact, both Price and legacy media are doing the “conflating” by saying Russia “hacked” the 2016 election when the report indicates they were simply sowing chaos, just as they do in every election.

Vladimir Putin appears to have not only prepared for a Hillary Clinton victory, but actually preferred it. Why? Because the report indicates Russia has “dirt” on Clinton and could have used it to influence American foreign policy.

Price then went on to disparage Gabbard’s character. This is the same technique they’ve used in the latter days of her political career when it was clear she was not going to be an obedient Democrat puppet. They wanted her out then and they want her out now.

And, of course, Price brought up Jeffrey Epstein. Because… why not?

I asked Grok to test the veracity of Price’s article. Here’s what the AI came up with…

Unpacking the Fox News Hit Piece: Why Tulsi Gabbard’s 2016 Election Revelations Are Grounded in Evidence, Not Revisionism

The recent Fox News opinion article, penned by a former CIA officer from the Obama administration, accuses Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard of peddling “revisionist history” and creating a “dangerous distraction” by highlighting declassified documents that challenge the narrative of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The piece claims Gabbard conflates “hacking” (altering votes) with “influence” (propaganda efforts), insists the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of January 2017 was accurate and unbiased, and dismisses her allegations of a “treasonous conspiracy” by Obama-era officials as unsubstantiated.

However, a closer examination of declassified materials, investigative reports, and historical context reveals that Gabbard’s disclosures are far from conspiratorial fiction—they expose legitimate flaws in the ICA and evidence of politicization within the intelligence community.

Gabbard’s core claim—that Obama administration officials “buried” intelligence showing Russia did not intend or achieve election hacking while manufacturing a broader conspiracy narrative—is supported by declassified documents. In 2020, then-DNI John Ratcliffe released Russian intelligence notes indicating Hillary Clinton approved a plan in July 2016 to fabricate a scandal linking Trump to Russian election interference as a distraction from her email controversies.

These notes, briefed to Obama and top officials like John Brennan, suggest the “Russia hoax” originated as a Clinton campaign tactic, not organic intelligence. Recent declassifications under Gabbard, including over 100 pages from late 2016, reveal consistent pre-election assessments that Russia “probably not trying to influence the election by using cyber means,” yet the January 2017 ICA flipped this to portray a directed Kremlin effort. A declassified House report from July 2025 further details how the ICA suppressed contradictory intelligence, politicizing findings to fuel investigations like Crossfire Hurricane.

The John Durham report, released in 2023, substantiates these criticisms by exposing FBI misconduct in launching the Russia probe based on unverified tips, including the Steele dossier, without proper scrutiny. Durham found the FBI ignored exculpatory evidence and relied on biased sources, echoing Gabbard’s assertion of weaponized intelligence. Even the Senate Intelligence Committee’s bipartisan review, while endorsing the ICA’s core findings, acknowledged procedural concerns and noted the assessment could have better contextualized prior elections.

Critics from across the spectrum, including former CIA analysts, have questioned the ICA’s high-confidence claims on Putin’s preferences, with NSA expressing only moderate confidence. Snippets from diverse sources indicate the “influence” campaign’s scale was often exaggerated; for instance, Russian troll farms reached limited audiences, and studies show minimal impact on voter behavior.

The Fox piece dismisses Gabbard’s motives as a distraction from Trump administration scandals like the Epstein files, but this ignores her consistent stance on the issue. In 2024 statements, Gabbard highlighted declassified evidence of Obama-era manipulation, aligning with her 2025 releases as DNI. Recent X posts reflect ongoing discussions, with users like @VigilantFox amplifying her claims of a “Russia Collusion Hoax” tied to Obama.

While left-leaning outlets like FactCheck.org label her “coup” rhetoric misleading, they concede no direct vote alteration occurred, focusing instead on defending the ICA’s influence conclusions. Balanced views from Wikipedia and NPR acknowledge the “hoax” narrative as a counter to investigations but note Soviet-era precedents and U.S. involvement in foreign elections, complicating claims of unprecedented Russian meddling.

Ultimately, Gabbard’s revelations aren’t revisionist—they build on established criticisms from Durham, Ratcliffe, and internal reviews, exposing how the 2016 narrative may have been inflated for political gain. Dismissing them as distraction ignores substantiated evidence of intelligence politicization, undermining trust in the very institutions the Fox author defends. As Gabbard has urged, these documents deserve scrutiny, not scorn, to safeguard future elections from real manipulation—domestic or foreign.

Not bad, Grok.

Here’s the article. It’s exceptionally well-written from a propaganda perspective. Why is Fox News not only posting it but shining a spotlight on it? Because they hate President Trump, they hate Tulsi Gabbard, and they envision an America under permanent Democrat rule.



Donation

Buy author a coffee

Donate
Christian and Conservative news hand-curated the way it’s supposed to be. Stay full-MAGA despite the so-called “civil war” waged by the Islam-loving “woke right”.
Listen to "Patriot TV" on Spreaker.





Two Storms, One Harvest

Empty Shelves

Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.

What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.

Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.

This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.

Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.

Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.

The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running

While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.

The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.

Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.

The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.

Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.

The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?

The System Has No Slack Left

The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.

Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.

There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.

The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.

What Joseph Knew

Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.

Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.

Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.

Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.

None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.

Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.

  • About
  • Politics
  • Conspiracy
  • Culture
  • Financial
  • Geopolitics
  • Faith
  • Survival
© 2026 Patriot TV.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
    • About
  • Posts

© 2026 Patriot TV.