If you haven't seen it yet, you won't believe it:

So who is behind social activist and beloved actor Morgan Freeman's ominous claim that Russia is at war with the United States? A group called the Committee to Investigate Russia (CIR). And exactly who are the people behind the CIR? A strange alliance of neocons, Hollywood bigwigs and Hillary supporters, as well as discredited liar and former Obama Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper, that's who.

Big Hollywood names have helped found the Committee to Investigate Russia, a nonprofit aiming to spread information about Russia's role in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and create debate about possible threats to the country's institutions. The committee launched Tuesday in the U.S., with director Rob Reiner on the advisory board and actor Morgan Freeman featured in an introductory video. [...] Among other members of the organization's advisory are former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, conservative commentator Charlie Sykes and scholars Max Boot and Norman Ornstein.

Some info on the people who are involved in this non-profit, non-partisan neo-McCarthite anti-Russia committee.

Max Boot

Boot is the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and the Los Angeles Times, and a regular contributor to other publications such as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The New York Times.[1] He has blogged regularly for Commentary Magazine since 2007,[6] and for several years on its blog page called Contentions.[7] He serves as a consultant to the U.S. military and as a regular lecturer at U.S. military institutions such as the Army War College and the Command and General Staff College.[1] [...] Boot wrote for the CFR through 2010 and 2011 for various publications such as Newsweek, The Boston Globe, The New York Times, and The Weekly Standard among others. He particularly argued that President Obama's health care plans made maintaining the U.S.' superpower status harder, that withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq occurred prematurely while making another war there more likely, and that the initial U.S. victory in Afghanistan had been undone by government complacency though forces could still pull off a victory. [...] In September 2012, Boot co-wrote with Brookings Institution senior fellow Michael Doran a New York Times op-ed titled "5 Reasons to Intervene in Syria Now", advocating U.S military force to create a countrywide no-fly zone reminiscent of NATO's role in the Kosovo War. He stated first and second that "American intervention would diminish Iran's influence in the Arab world" and that "a more muscular American policy could keep the conflict from spreading" with "sectarian strife in Lebanon and Iraq". Third, Boot argued that "training and equipping reliable partners within Syria's internal opposition" could help "create a bulwark against extremist groups like Al Qaeda". He concluded that "American leadership on Syria could improve relations with key allies like Turkey and Qatar" as well as "end a terrible human-rights disaster".[28]

In short, Boot is a neo-conservative to the core, with a preference for increasing America's use of its military to achieve regime change, and an anti-Russia propagandist and Trump/Putin conspiracy theorist.

Rob Reiner, Hollywood director and producer who is a a long-time Hillary supporter, donor and fundraiser. He has also prominently promoted an alleged Russia-Trump connection since shortly after Hillary's 2016 election loss to Trump. Reiner founded CIR with David Frum.

David Frum

Frum ... was an editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal from 1989 until 1992, and then a columnist for Forbes magazine in 1992–94. In 1994–2000, he worked as a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, as a contributing editor at neoconservative opinion magazine The Weekly Standard, and as a columnist for Canada's National Post. He worked also as a regular contributor for National Public Radio. [...] Frum served as special assistant to [President George W. Bush] for economic speechwriting from January 2001 to February 2002. Conservative commentator Robert Novak described Frum as an "uncompromising supporter of Israel" and "fervent supporter of Ariel Sharon's policies" during his time in the White House.[14] Frum is credited with inventing the expression "axis of evil", which Bush introduced in his 2002 State of the Union address.[16] During Frum's time at the White House, he was described by commentator Ryan Lizza, as being part of a speechwriting brain trust that brought "intellectual heft", and considerable policy influence to the Bush Administration. [...] Shortly after leaving the White House, Frum took up a position as a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, a neo-conservative think tank. During the early days of his stint there, Frum coauthored An End to Evil with Richard Perle, which was a bold presentation of the neoconservative view of global affairs and an apologia of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. [...] In a Newsweek column (March 2009), Frum described his political beliefs as follows: I'm a conservative Republican, have been all my adult life. I volunteered for the Reagan campaign in 1980. I've attended every Republican convention since 1988. I was president of the Federalist Society chapter at my law school, worked on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and wrote speeches for President Bush—not the "Read My Lips" Bush, the "Axis of Evil" Bush. I served on the Giuliani campaign in 2008 and voted for John McCain in November. I supported the Iraq War and (although I feel kind of silly about it in retrospect) the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I could go on, but you get the idea.[41]

As the man said, you get the idea . Another neo-con psuedo-intellectual sophist who supports endless war.

The Notorious James Clapper

Barack Obama’s intelligence chief is said to be in frequent and unusual contact with a military intelligence officer at the center of a growing scandal over rosy portrayals of the war against the Islamic State, the Guardian has learned. James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, is said to talk nearly every day with the head of US Central Command’s intelligence wing, Army Major General Steven Grove – “which is highly, highly unusual”, according to a former intelligence official. Grove is said to be implicated in a Pentagon inquiry into manipulated war intelligence.

More on Clapper from Wikipedia:

On June 5, 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Clapper to replace Dennis C. Blair as United States Director of National Intelligence. Clapper was unanimously confirmed by the Senate for the position on August 5, 2010. Following the June 2013 leak of documents detailing NSA practice of collecting telephony metadata on millions of Americans’ telephone calls, two U.S. representatives accused Clapper of perjury for telling a congressional committee that the NSA does not collect any type of data on millions of Americans earlier that year. One senator asked for his resignation, and a group of 26 senators complained about Clapper’s responses under questioning. In November 2016, Clapper resigned as director of national intelligence, effective at the end of President Obama's term. In May 2017, he joined the Washington, D.C.-based think tank the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) as a Distinguished Senior Fellow for Intelligence and National Security.

Clapper's role in Russiagate is often confusing, but it seems clear he has an agenda.

From the Harvard Crimson dated May 3, 2017:

Both Clapper and [former U.S. Representative Michael J. Rogers] agreed that Russia aimed to undermine American democratic institutions this past election. Clapper said that according to the information he had, he believed Russia had been initially interested in “sowing doubt” in American democracy, but became increasingly interested in supporting President Donald Trump against former Secretary of State and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton as the election went on. “In my view, the evidence for it was overwhelming,” he said. Clapper described what he saw as “irrefutable” proof that Russia had meddled in the election through cyberattacks, hacking, and propaganda dispersed throughout social and traditional media.

From Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone Magazine, dated May 15, 2017:

Clapper back in March told Meet the Press that when he issued a January 6th multiagency intelligence community assessment about Russian interference in the election, the report didn't include evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, essentially saying he hadn't been aware of any such evidence up through January 20th, his last day in office. On Sunday, he said that didn't necessarily mean there was no such evidence, because sometimes he left it up to agency chiefs like former FBI Director James Comey to inform him about certain things. "I left it to the judgment [of] Director Comey," Clapper said, "to decide whether, when and what to tell me about counterintelligence investigations." Clapper said something similar when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last Monday. In prepared remarks, he essentially said that there was nothing odd about his not being informed about the existence of an FBI counterintelligence investigation involving Donald Trump's campaign. Speaking generally, Clapper seemed to imply that the Trump-Russia-collusion scandal, the thing colloquially known as #Russiagate all over the world now, may have originated in information gleaned by the intelligence community, who in turn may have tipped off the FBI.

All these people have something in common. They hate Trump and his stated position to soften the Obama administration's confrontational policy toward Russia, and they either believe Russia colluded with Trump to defeat Hillary Clinton or they want us to believe that is the case. That Morgan Freeman lowered himself to lend his fame, name and reputation in support of this highly dangerous anti-Russia, New McCarthyism, is beyond disappointing and shocking. It's also highly dangerous to keep adding fuel to the intelligence community's psyops campaign directed at the American people, one that could end in a nuclear calamity very easily, as this heroic man clearly knew.

Stanislav Petrov was a lieutenant colonel in the Soviet Union's Air Defense Forces, and his job was to monitor his country's satellite system, which was looking for any possible nuclear weapons launches by the United States. He was on the overnight shift in the early morning hours of Sept. 26, 1983, when the computers sounded an alarm, indicating that the U.S. had launched five nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles. [...] It was already a moment of extreme tension in the Cold War. On Sept. 1 of that year, the Soviet Union shot down a Korean Air Lines plane that had drifted into Soviet airspace, killing all 269 people on board, including a U.S. congressman. The episode led the U.S. and the Soviets to exchange warnings and threats. Petrov had to act quickly. U.S. missiles could reach the Soviet Union in just over 20 minutes. [...] After several nerve-jangling minutes, Petrov didn't send the computer warning to his superiors. He checked to see if there had been a computer malfunction. He had guessed correctly. "Twenty-three minutes later I realized that nothing had happened," he said in 2013. "If there had been a real strike, then I would already know about it. It was such a relief." That episode and the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis are considered to be the closest the U.S. and the Soviets came to a nuclear exchange.

Why anyone would want to resurrect the Cold War with a drastically weakened but still nuclear armed Russia to risk the destruction of all human life on earth is beyond my comprehension. But then I'm not a butt-hurt Hillary diehard supporter nor a Neocon warmonger, both groups that have a cult-like fervor among their members.