Unsubstantiated accusations by Gabbard on a supposed anti-Trump conspiracy are refuted by declassified records
In a recent move, Tulsi Gabbard, a U.S. Congresswoman, has claimed to have uncovered overwhelming evidence of a "treasonous conspiracy" by the Obama administration, including key national security officials, to politicize and manufacture intelligence reports about Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
Gabbard asserts that the Obama White House directed the creation of a false Intelligence Community Assessment in January 2017, which falsely claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin aimed to help Trump’s election chances by discrediting Clinton. She argues this fabrication laid the groundwork for a years-long coup against Trump and has referred this evidence to the Justice Department and FBI for criminal investigation.
However, Gabbard's claims are at odds with multiple investigations and assessments from both Republican-led congressional intelligence committees and special counsels, as well as the Justice Department Inspector General (DOJ OIG). The bipartisan Senate and House intelligence committees, along with DOJ special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, have found that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election primarily through influence operations (such as disinformation campaigns), though not by altering votes or hacking election infrastructure itself.
The intelligence community's January 2017 assessment did not contradict earlier assessments that Russia did not alter votes, but rather corroborated that Russia tried to interfere to benefit Trump’s campaign. Independent investigations did not find evidence that Obama administration officials knowingly fabricated or politicized intelligence to create false conclusions about Russian interference. Instead, these investigations generally validated the core finding that Russia sought to influence the election.
The documents Gabbard released show no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count. The investigations concluded that Russia embarked on a campaign to interfere in the election through social media and hacked material. The dossier, which Gabbard's claims partly rely on, refers to a collection of opposition research files compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, whose work was funded by Democrats during the 2016 election. The Central Intelligence Agency primarily relied on a human source close to the Kremlin for its conclusion that Putin wanted to help Trump and hurt Clinton, not the Steele dossier.
In summary, Gabbard's evidence largely consists of selective or partial interpretations of intelligence assessments and internal communications but lacks corroboration from thorough bipartisan and DOJ investigations. The broader expert and investigative consensus contradicts her claim of a "treasonous conspiracy" by the Obama administration to politicize U.S. intelligence in 2016.
- Tulsi Gabbard, a U.S. Congresswoman, has accused the Obama administration of a "treasonous conspiracy" to politicize intelligence reports about Russia's involvement in the 2016 elections.
- Gabbard alleges that the Obama White House orchestrated the creation of a false Intelligence Community Assessment in January 2017, claiming Putin aimed to help Trump’s election chances by discrediting Clinton.
- Gabbard's evidence reportedly shows no direct manipulation of the vote count by Russia, but focuses on interference through social media and hacked materials.
- The documents released by Gabbard primarily rely on a dossier compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, whose work was funded by Democrats during the 2016 election.
- The Central Intelligence Agency, according to the investigations, primarily relied on a human source close to the Kremlin, not the Steele dossier, to conclude that Putin wanted to help Trump and hurt Clinton.
- Multiple investigations, including those led by bipartisan congressional intelligence committees and special counsels, as well as the Justice Department Inspector General, have found no evidence supporting Gabbard's claims.
- The Senate and House intelligence committees, alongside the investigation of DOJ special counsel Robert Mueller, have concluded that Russia did interfere in the 2016 elections, but did not alter votes or hack into election infrastructure.
- The intelligence community's January 2017 assessment did not contradict earlier assessments that Russia did not alter votes, but rather corroborated that Russia interfered to benefit Trump’s campaign.
- Incontradicting Gabbard's claim of a "treasonous conspiracy," these investigations generally validated the core finding that Russia sought to influence the election.
- Despite Gabbard's assertions, her evidence primarily consists of selective or partial interpretations of intelligence assessments and internal communications, lacking corroboration from thorough bipartisan and DOJ investigations.
- In the broader expert and investigative consensus, Gabbard's claim of a "treasonous conspiracy" by the Obama administration to politicize U.S. intelligence in 2016 is contradicted.
- It is essential to uphold the principles of justice and integrity in our political system, and thorough investigations play a vital role in ensuring fairness and accuracy in government.
- As citizens, we should stay informed on general news, evaluating each piece of evidence carefully and considering the perspectives of multiple experts to foster a well-informed opinion.
- Moving forward, it is crucial to focus on education-and-self-development, personal-growth, career-development, and policy-and-legislation to maintain a functional and prosperous society, leaving conspiracy theories behind.
