WASHINGTON (July 18, 2025) – Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Friday accused former President Barack Obama and top Obama‑era national security officials of orchestrating a “treasonous conspiracy” to discredit President Trump in the aftermath of the 2016 election.
In a newly declassified report, Gabbard alleges that key intelligence figures—including then‑DNI James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan and FBI Director James Comey—suppressed evidence showing that “foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the U.S. presidential election outcome.”
The mainstream legacy media isn’t showing you all of this. Support my independent journalism by becoming a paid subscriber to help me keep my real journalism going. It’s less than $1 per week and you can leave at anytime.
Gabbard asserted that the Obama White House convened multiple senior national security officials on Dec. 9, 2016, and directed a shift in intelligence narratives. This led to the inclusion of the Steele dossier in the Jan. 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, contradicting earlier findings that Russia posed no credible threat to vote infrastructure. ‑long coup,” Gabbard said, announcing she had forwarded more than 100 pages of emails, memos and related intelligence to the Department of Justice and called for criminal investigations.
Critics refute the allegations
Several Democrats dismissed Gabbard’s charges as unfounded and politically motivated.
Rep. Jim Himes, D‑Conn., described the accusations as “baseless” and noted that a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee concluded Russia had interfered in the 2016 election and represented a serious counterintelligence threat—though it did not establish intentional collusion.
Legal and political implications
While the Department of Justice has declined to comment, the release adds to broader Trump‑era investigations into intelligence officials. Attorney General directives earlier this year targeted former CIA Director Brennan and former FBI Director Comey over their roles in crafting the original Russia assessment.
The revelations surface amid ongoing scrutiny of Gabbard’s own nomination as DNI. Critics have pointed to her lack of traditional intelligence background and past critiques of U.S. policy—including ties to the faith‑based Science of Identity Foundation—as possible concerns about her judgment.
Background
Declassified materials include a Sept. 12, 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment and a Dec. 7, 2016 Clapper memo asserting that Russia had not tampered with vote counts—assessments Gabbard claims were later downplayed.
Following the December 2016 White House meeting, a new Jan. 2017 assessment was issued, one that acknowledged Kremlin preference for Trump—a shift Gabbard says was orchestrated to undermine him.
What’s next
Gabbard has urged the Justice Department to initiate criminal probes. Meanwhile, lawmakers and intelligence officials may weigh whether her actions bind U.S. intelligence posture to partisan strategy or represent legitimate oversight of the national security apparatus.
