Tag Archives: intelligence community

Tulsi Gabbard Unleashes Storm Over Secret Obama-Era Plot Against Trump

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Gabbard releases 100+ declassified documents alleging a post-election conspiracy under the Obama administration.
Claims suggest intelligence narrative shifted after Trump’s win, allegedly without new evidence.
Former top officials named, including Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and Rice.
Documents claim no Russian interference in vote counts was found before 2016 election.
Whistleblowers reportedly coming forward after document release.
Gabbard sending materials to DOJ and FBI for criminal referral.
Rep. Jim Himes and other Democrats reject the claims as unfounded.

In a development drawing intense scrutiny across the political spectrum, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has released a trove of declassified documents that, according to her, outline what she describes as a coordinated operation led by former Obama administration officials to influence the post-2016 political narrative surrounding Donald Trump and alleged Russian interference.

The documents—over 100 in total—were released on Friday and have already ignited a firestorm of debate in Washington. Speaking on Sunday Morning Futures, Gabbard emphasized the gravity of the materials, calling the implications “nothing short of historic.”

“Over 100 documents that we released on Friday really detail and provide evidence of how this treasonous conspiracy was directed by President Obama just weeks before he was due to leave office after President Trump had already gotten elected,” Gabbard stated during the interview.

Framing her remarks beyond party lines, she added:

“This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an issue that is so serious it should concern every single American because it has to do with the integrity of our democratic republic.”

According to the documents made public by Gabbard’s office, prior to the 2016 presidential election, U.S. intelligence reports had concluded there was no direct evidence suggesting Russia had attempted to manipulate or alter vote counts. Yet, in the final days of the Obama administration and immediately following Trump’s election, a shift reportedly occurred in how intelligence officials presented Russia’s involvement.

Gabbard asserts this shift was not rooted in new evidence but was instead a deliberate recalibration for political purposes. She claims that senior intelligence leaders began promoting a new narrative suggesting that Russian President Vladimir Putin had intended to help Donald Trump win the presidency.

“Creating this piece of manufactured intelligence that claims that Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected contradicted every other assessment that had been made previously in the months leading up to the election,” Gabbard argued. “Those assessments said exactly the opposite—that Russia had neither the intent nor the capability to try to ‘hack the United States election.’”

She further alleged that the actions taken by President Obama and his national security team following the election had a far-reaching effect—one that, she claims, fundamentally undermined American democratic norms.

“The effect of what President Obama and his senior national security team did was subvert the will of the American people,” Gabbard said. “They enacted what would be essentially a years-long coup against President Trump, who was duly elected by the American people.”

Among those named in the documents are several high-profile figures who held powerful intelligence and national security positions during the Obama administration. The list includes former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice. According to Gabbard, these individuals were directly involved in shaping what she described as a false intelligence narrative.

Gabbard also revealed her intent to formally send the newly released documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI for review, seeking a criminal referral.

“We’re not just stopping at disclosure,” she explained. “We are forwarding all materials to the DOJ and FBI. There must be accountability.”

When asked if she anticipates prosecutions, Gabbard did not offer specifics but affirmed her commitment to pursuing justice:

“We have whistleblowers, actually, coming forward now after we released these documents,” she said. “There are people who were around, who were working within the intelligence community at this time who were so disgusted by what happened. We’re starting to see some of them come out of the woodwork here because they want to see justice delivered.”

According to Gabbard, the emergence of whistleblowers is a signal that the revelations may only be the beginning. She believes the consequences should be significant.

“There must be indictments,” she stated. “Those responsible, no matter how powerful they are and were at that time, no matter who was involved in creating this treasonous conspiracy against the American people—they all must be held accountable.”

Despite the weight of the allegations, not everyone in Washington is convinced. Some Democratic leaders have already rejected the claims. Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, dismissed Gabbard’s statements as “baseless.”

Gabbard’s office has reportedly reached out to representatives of former President Obama, James Clapper, John Brennan, James Comey, Susan Rice, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. At the time of publishing, none had issued a response.

While reactions remain sharply divided along partisan lines, the release of these documents is expected to fuel further investigations, inquiries, and national debate in the months to come. Whether these revelations will lead to formal indictments or merely fade into the fog of political controversy remains to be seen.

As Tulsi Gabbard’s revelations echo through political and intelligence circles, the controversy surrounding the alleged Obama-era conspiracy has reignited sharp national debate over the boundaries of power, truth, and accountability. While her claims draw both whistleblowers and critics into the spotlight, the road ahead appears set for deeper investigations and growing public scrutiny. Whether these documents lead to legal consequences or remain a flashpoint in partisan warfare, the questions they raise about democratic integrity and institutional trust may leave a lasting imprint on America’s political landscape.

Appreciating your time:

We appreciate you taking the time to read our most recent article! We appreciate your opinions and would be delighted to hear them. We value your opinions as we work hard to make improvements and deliver material that you find interesting.

Post a Comment:

In the space provided for comments below, please share your ideas, opinions, and suggestions. We can better understand your interests thanks to your input, which also guarantees that the material we offer will appeal to you. Get in Direct Contact with Us: Please use our “Contact Us” form if you would like to speak with us or if you have any special questions. We are open to questions, collaborations, and, of course, criticism. To fill out our contact form, click this link.

Stay Connected:

Don’t miss out on future updates and articles.

DOJ Sources Confirm FBI Targets Brennan and Comey in Explosive Turn

📌 STORY HIGHLIGHTS

DOJ sources confirm criminal investigations into Brennan and Comey
Brennan allegedly supported inclusion of Steele Dossier in 2017 Russia report
Officials flagged potential false statements made before Congress
Internal review cited political bias and breach of intelligence standards
Comey also under investigation, though specifics remain classified
FBI insiders describe case as potential “conspiracy”
Declassified documents reveal Clinton campaign’s role in dossier origins
White House urges accountability for Obama-era intelligence officials

In what appears to be a renewed legal reckoning tied to the Trump–Russia investigation, former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey are now reportedly subjects of active criminal investigations. According to sources from the Department of Justice (DOJ), the probes are focused on potential misconduct, including allegations that both officials may have made false statements to Congress.

These developments come after CIA Director John Ratcliffe officially referred evidence of Brennan’s potential wrongdoing to the FBI for further action. The investigation that followed, DOJ insiders say, is still in its early stages. However, they did confirm that a formal inquiry into Brennan has been opened and is ongoing.

While details remain sparse and tightly controlled, officials familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that the criminal referral specifically involves Brennan’s role in the preparation of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), particularly his push to include the now-discredited Steele Dossier. This dossier was originally funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee and has long been criticized for lacking credible verification.

The DOJ has not released additional specifics regarding the charges or scope of the investigation, but two sources familiar with internal FBI discussions suggested that the agency may view Brennan and Comey’s actions through the lens of a broader “conspiracy,” potentially opening a wide range of prosecutorial options.

Neither Brennan nor Comey has issued a public response. The FBI and CIA have also declined to comment.

The allegations against Brennan appear to stem largely from a recent declassification by the CIA of an internal “lessons learned” review. The review examined the formation of the ICA, which assessed that Russia had interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election with the goal of aiding then-candidate Donald Trump. According to that review, the process of compiling the ICA suffered from serious “procedural anomalies” and saw a departure from standard intelligence protocols.

More significantly, the review stated that senior agency officials — particularly Brennan — pushed for the inclusion of the Steele Dossier, despite objections from within the agency. The dossier, which was filled with unverified and often discredited allegations about Trump and his campaign, had long been criticized even within intelligence circles.

The internal CIA review stated:

“Despite these objections, Brennan showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness. When confronted with specific flaws in the Dossier… he appeared more swayed by its general conformity with existing theories than by legitimate tradecraft concerns.”

The dossier, compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, had been funded through law firm Perkins Coie, acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Its controversial contents served as part of the justification for multiple Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

Notably, although the main ICA delivered to President Obama did not directly feature Steele’s claims, they were mentioned in a footnote, often referred to as “Annex A.” This footnote, declassified by Ratcliffe in 2020, noted that Steele’s reporting had only “limited corroboration” and that his information was collected on behalf of private clients — not the FBI.

“We have only limited corroboration of the source’s reporting in this case and did not use it to reach the analytic conclusions,” the footnote stated.

Further complicating matters is Brennan’s own testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in May 2023. In that session, he insisted:

“The CIA was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier in the Intelligence Community Assessment.”

However, this contradicts the newly declassified internal communications and written approval attributed to Brennan himself.

According to DOJ sources, the investigation is now probing whether this contradiction amounts to knowingly making false statements before Congress.

As for James Comey, details regarding his part in the investigation remain less clear. DOJ sources only confirmed that an investigation is active but declined to elaborate. However, insiders indicate that both Comey and Brennan were present at key meetings where decisions about the Russia assessment and the Steele Dossier were made.

Comey, along with then-Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, attended a critical briefing on July 28, 2016. During that meeting, Brennan reportedly informed President Obama of intelligence suggesting Hillary Clinton’s campaign had approved a plan to link Donald Trump to Russian operatives — an effort allegedly designed to distract from her own email controversy.

Declassified handwritten notes from Brennan and a CIA Counterintelligence Operational Lead (CIOL) memo back up this timeline. The memo was then forwarded to Comey and FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok under the subject line “Crossfire Hurricane” — the codename for the FBI’s Russia probe.

The “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation officially launched days later, on July 31, 2016. It would later be taken over by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Mueller’s eventual report, released in March 2019, concluded there was no evidence of criminal conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.

Following Mueller’s findings, Special Counsel John Durham was appointed to investigate the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe. In his final report, Durham concluded that the FBI had failed to adequately examine the political origins of the Steele Dossier and Clinton-linked intelligence.

Durham wrote:

“Had the FBI opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation as an assessment… the information received would have been examined, at a minimum, with a more critical eye.”

He added:

“The FBI failed to act on what should have been — when combined with other incontrovertible facts — a clear warning sign that the bureau might then be the target of an effort to manipulate or influence the law enforcement process.”

In light of these revelations, calls for accountability have grown louder. In a statement to Fox News Digital, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasized:

“President Trump was right — again. Those who engaged in this political scandal must be held accountable for the fraud they committed against President Trump and the lies they told to the American people.”

While no formal charges have yet been filed, the investigations into Brennan and Comey suggest that the fallout from the 2016 election and the controversial Russia probe continues to reverberate across the political and legal landscape — nearly a decade later.

As criminal investigations into John Brennan and James Comey unfold, the spotlight now shifts from political narratives to legal accountability. With mounting evidence, conflicting testimonies, and questions surrounding the Steele Dossier’s role in the 2016 intelligence assessment, the case marks a turning point in the post-election aftermath. Whether the inquiries lead to formal charges or broader institutional reforms, one thing remains clear — the guardians of national intelligence are now under the same scrutiny they once imposed, and the search for truth in America’s most controversial investigation continues.