HELLO STRANGER: Russia tried to help Candidate Trump, the Republican solons said!

TUESDAY, JULY 29, 2025

But also, the dope on Kilimnik: We almost wish we didn't suspect that Chris Matthews has it right.

In our bones, we're forced to suspect that he isn't wrong. Over the weekend, he spoke to Charlie Rose on YouTube (who knew?)—and, as Mediaite reports, this is what he said:

Chris Matthews Bluntly Declares: ‘The Country is Moving Towards Trump!’

Former MSNBC host Chris Matthews delivered a head-turning take about President Donald Trump sure to stun many of his left-leaning fans.

In an interview with Charlie Rose posted to YouTube on Saturday, Matthews—the ex-host of Hardball—fired some chin music at liberals who believe, based on recent polls, that Trump is floundering.

“To be honest with you, the country is moving towards Trump!” Matthews said. “These polls, they come out and show him not doing well—I don’t buy that.”

“His strength is still greater than the Democratic strength,” Matthews said. “He is a stronger public figure than the Democratic people. Obama still has tremendous charisma—but Trump has strength. And I think that’s what all voters look for. They want a president who is a strong figure. And he’s got it. It’s just there. And half the country buys it.”

We almost wish we disagreed. That said, we're inclined to suspect that Matthews' view may be correct. 

Strangers keep come over the walls in the current war of the tribes. From our perch in Blue America, it's our guess that this war has already been won, by the other side.

In this latest "war of the all against all," there are the forces streaming over the walls—people who may typically seem a great deal like strangers to us. But then, it also seems to us that we Blues may be strangers to ourselves:

We don't understand who we actually are. We don't understand the way we look to many American voters.

Only a fool would try to predict the outcome of next year's scheduled midterm elections. But at this site, we have a hard time believing that historical patterns will prevail—that Blue America's forces will win.

"Everyone I met seemed to be a rank stranger!" So sang the Stanley Brothers, in their most famous song. 

("I knew not their names and I knew not their faces. I found they were all rank strangers to me.")

So it says, in a haunted song from the American song book. But so it frequently seems to us when we watch the endless array of proselytization shows aired by the Fox News Channel.

We find it very hard to picture who people like Greg Gutfeld and "Kennedy" are. We can't place their peculiar behavior within our own life experience.

Some of the messenger children on the channel strike us as recognizable stooges of a fairly familiar type. The fury of others seems extremely hard to place within our own life experience.

That said, we'll guess these strangers have already won the culture war that's currently under way—the culture war that's being fought with the tools of the Information Age.

Strangers are coming over the walls! This week, we're trying to show you one example of the way their furious war is (successfully) being fought:

Starting on Friday, July 18, Director Gabbard launched the latest "night assault." 

It's widely said that she may have grown up in a cult. We've long advised you to pity the child, but to fear the results which may be observed in the adult.

Director Gabbard came over the walls that day with the latest furious claims. As we noted yesterday, she repeated her claims on Wednesday, July 23, in a White House press event.

Director Gabbard repeated her claims. By the next night, the nuttiest little child of them all could no longer it hold in

Tomorrow, we're going to show you what he said on that evening's edition of Gutfeld! On Thursday, we'll show you what this collection of tools said when the furious little guy had ended his furious monologue:

Gutfeld!: Thursday, July 24, 2025
Joe Germanotta: owner, Joanne's Trattoria
Kennedy: former VJ
Guy Benson: Fox News contributor
Michael Loftus: comedian

There you see the "ship of tools" who magpied for Gutfeld that night.

Some of these panelists may have believed the various things they said. Some of them possibly didn't. To our eye, it looked like Benson may have tried to avoid saying anything at all.

That said, they all seconded the thrust of their furious host. Across the nation, millions of people were watching as this collection of "rank strangers" kept coming over the walls.

Tomorrow, we're going to show you what Gutfeld said that night in his monologue. For today, let's establish the background to his astounding prime time remarks.

The star of this ersatz "cable news" show could hold it in no longer! He set his "smart comedy" to the side as he ranted and railed and let the fury out.

His presentation that night was a road map to the war which has quite likely already been won. At issue that evening was a fairly straightforward factual question:

Did Russia act to help Candidate Trump during the 2016 election? 

Did the Russkies try to help Candidate Trump? On our own, we can't tell you—but like you, we're in luck!

In the wake of that election, a (Republican-led) Senate select committee spent three years investigating such questions. 

Did we mention the fact that this Senate committee was Republican-led? In one way, it isn't clear how much that mattered, since all the senators on the committee agreed with the basic findings of the committee's lengthy report.

In the course of three years of effort, what did that Senate committee find? The leading authority on the work of this Senate committee starts its report as shown:

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election

The Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference in the United States presidential election, officially titled Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election, is the official report in five volumes documenting the findings and conclusions of the United States Senate Intelligence Committee concerning the Russian attack efforts against election infrastructure, Russia's use of social media to affect the election, the U.S. government's response to Russian activities, review of the Intelligence Community Assessment, and counterintelligence threats and vulnerabilities. The redacted report is 1,313 pages long. It is divided into five volumes.

The first volume of the report was released on July 25, 2019, and the fifth and last volume was released to the public on August 18, 2020. The Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation extended more than three years, includes interviews of more than 200 witnesses, and reviews more than one million documents. Marco Rubio, acting committee head, said that "no probe into this matter has been more exhaustive.” On the stature of the report, the Senate Intelligence Committee said the report is "the most comprehensive description to date of Russia's activities and the threat they posed."

That's the way the leading authority starts. Senator Rubio (R-Fla.) was acting committee head, replacing the earlier chairman (Richard Burr, R-NC), because Republicans were in control of the Senate during the years in question.

By all accounts, the select committee hadn't been farking around. It had studied this topic for three years. 

Its report was issued in five volumes. As early as Volume II of its report, the committee was offering this as the first of its key findings:

FINDINGS

(1) The committee found that the [Internet Reseach Agency] sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election by harming Hillary Clinton's chances of success and supporting Donald Trump at the direction of the Kremlin.

Rightly or wrongly, that's what the senators said. In this case, they were talking about the Russian hacking operation directed at materials belonging to the Democratic Party, "at the direction of the Kremlin."

 All the Republicans affirmed that finding, as did all the Democrats.

All told, the committee's report was more than 1300 pages long. In all honesty, the leading authority presents a less than fully impressive report about what the committee found. 

At the very start of the leading authority's report, some of what follows may have been included because of its relevance to issues which are currently being debated. Be that as it may, here we go:

The report by the leading authority continues along as shown:

The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee submitted the first part of its five-volume report in July 2019 in which it concluded that the January 2017 Intelligence Community assessment alleging Russian interference was "coherent and well-constructed." The first volume also concluded that the assessment was "proper," learning from analysts that there was "no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions." 

The final and fifth volume, which was the result of three years of investigations, was released on August 18, 2020, ending one of the United States "highest-profile congressional inquiries." The Committee report found that the Russian government had engaged in an "extensive campaign" to sabotage the election in favor of Donald Trump, which included assistance from some of Trump's own advisers.

Oof! That "January 2017 Intelligence Community assessment" is currently being attacked by Director Gabbard. Rightly or wrongly, she regards its publication as a bit of treasonous conduct—or at least, she says she does. 

Rightly or wrongly, the select committee, in the final volume of its report, apparently concluded that the January 2017 assessment had not been treasonous! Along the way, starting with Volume II, the select committee did in fact, rightly or wrongly, state this general view:

The Committee report found that the Russian government had engaged in an "extensive campaign" to sabotage the election in favor of Donald Trump. 

We're not sure where that two-word quotation comes from. But that's a reasonably accurate summary of what the committee unanimously found.

Rightly or wrong, the (Republican-led) select committee found that the Russkies had tried to influence the 2016 election in favor of Candidate Trump! They might have been right about that, or they might have been wrong. But that's what the solons found.

We mention that because Director Gabbard and her enablers keep forgetting to mention that fact as they rant and rail about Barack Obama's treasonous conduct, along with the treasonous conduct of so many others. 

The strangers want them all locked up, and possibly Oprah too!

Director Gabbard claims to be very upset, as do the legions who echo her confusing amalgam of cries and whispers about three thousand concatenations. Along the way, they keep forgetting to mention what that (Republican-led) Senate committee concluded about the 2016 election after three years of study.

For today, we want to direct you to one more thing which the leading authority mentions. As its overview of the Senate committee continues directly, it now offers this:

Like the Mueller report that preceded it, the report does not find a criminal conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign, but it does go further than the Mueller report in detailing the many suspicious links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies. In particular, it describes Paul Manafort as "a grave counterintelligence threat." According to the report, "some evidence suggests" that Konstantin Kilimnik, to whom Manafort provided polling data, was directly connected to the Russian theft of Clinton-campaign emails. In addition, while Trump's written testimony in the Mueller report stated that he did not recall speaking with Roger Stone about WikiLeaks, the Senate report concludes that "Trump did, in fact, speak with Stone about WikiLeaks and with members of his Campaign about Stone's access to WikiLeaks on multiple occasions."

So true! In its final volume, the Senate committee reported that finding about Konstantin Kilimnik. Tomorrow, we'll show you what the furious Gutfeld said about Kilimnik when he melted down on the air, as he likes to do, on last Thursday's evening's "cable news" TV program.

It's a program we don't regard as "smart." Also, we wouldn't describe it as "comedy." 

Hello Stranger! In 1937, it emerged as a Carter Family standard. Its somewhat mysterious lyrics started off like this:

Hello stranger! Put your lovin' hand in mine.

Hello stranger! Put your lovin' hand in mine.

You are a stranger,

And you're a pal of mine.

To hear that recording. click here.

At the present time, it's hard to imagine being pals with the strangers coming over the walls of our failing Blue America. In his nightly conduct, we often see Greg Gutfeld as a deeply puzzling, and remarkably strange, TV human type.

It's hard to imagine him as a pal, but then, we've also asked this question:

As these strangers come over the walls, are some of us in Bue America strangers to ourselves?

Tomorrow: What he said last Thursday night

The discography: The Stanley Brothers' fuller lyrics ran exactly like this:

Everybody I met seemed to be a rank stranger

No mother or dad, not a friend could I see

They knew not my name and I knew not their faces

I found they were all rank strangers to me.

For complete lyrics, just click here. To hear a recording, click this.