Obama, Russia, and a coup? DNI Tulsi Gabbard claims plot to derail Donald Trump's 2016 win

Time of India

20-07-2025

Tulsi Gabbard
, the current
US Director of National Intelligence
, has ignited a political firestorm by accusing former President Barack Obama and senior members of his administration of orchestrating a "treasonous conspiracy" during the 2016 election aftermath.
Speaking on Friday, Gabbard said her office had uncovered "overwhelming evidence" that high-ranking officials manipulated intelligence to justify the Trump–Russia investigation. These claims were laid out in newly declassified documents, which she says will be handed to the Department of Justice for criminal referral.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Select a Course Category
Cybersecurity
Technology
Artificial Intelligence
Data Science
CXO
MCA
Healthcare
Degree
others
Design Thinking
Product Management
PGDM
Management
Others
healthcare
Digital Marketing
Leadership
Data Analytics
Project Management
Public Policy
Finance
Data Science
Operations Management
MBA
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
10 Months
MIT xPRO
CERT-MIT xPRO PGC in Cybersecurity
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
'No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again,' Gabbard said in an official statement.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
20 Most Expensive Cars In The World
LuxYouDesire.com
Undo
A high-level meeting and a shift in narrative
According to the documents released by Gabbard, the turning point came during a
National Security Council
meeting at the White House on 9 December 2016. Present at that meeting were former CIA Director John Brennan, DNI James Clapper, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Secretary of State John Kerry, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
She contends that the meeting led to a new intelligence directive—ordered by Obama—to reassess Russia's role in the 2016 election. Following the meeting, Clapper's assistant reportedly instructed the CIA, FBI, NSA and DHS to prepare a revised Intelligence Community (IC) assessment "per the President's request".
Live Events
This assessment, released on 6 January 2017, suggested Russia interfered in the election to aid Donald Trump. But Gabbard says earlier internal findings did not support that conclusion.
'Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome,' reads a 7 December 2016 internal memo cited in the report.
She claims the revised report ignored previous intelligence and relied instead on 'manufactured' sources, including the now-discredited Steele Dossier.
'Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,' Gabbard said on social media.
False leaks and media influence
Gabbard further alleged that Obama-era officials leaked misleading claims to major news outlets to shape public opinion. She cited examples where statements were fed to publications such as The Washington Post, claiming Russia had attempted to interfere with or even influence the election outcome.
'Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election,' she said, quoting one such claim.
Trump applauds, Democrats push back
Donald Trump quickly responded to Gabbard's claims, voicing his support through a post on Truth Social.
"Great job by young and talented Harrison Fields on FoxNews. The Panel was fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the 'thugs' who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud. Congratulations to Tulsi Gabbard. Keep it coming!!!"
Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers issued swift and sharp rebuttals.
Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, 'The Senate Intelligence Committee conducted a bipartisan investigation reviewing hundreds of thousands of documents and interviewing witnesses over several years. The unanimous, bipartisan conclusion was that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump. This is just another example of the DNI trying to cook the books, rewrite history, and erode trust in the intelligence agencies she's supposed to be leading.'
Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut also weighed in, 'Baseless accusations of treason are unfortunately par for the course for this Director of National Intelligence, but that doesn't make them any less damaging and unacceptable. The IC leaders in 2016 understood that they took an oath to the Constitution, not President Trump. I wish Director Gabbard could say the same.'
Layers of investigation and conflicting reports
Gabbard's claims arrive years after a slew of investigations into the Trump–Russia saga.
The Senate Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans during Trump's presidency, conducted a three-year investigation concluding that Russia did mount an aggressive effort to sway the 2016 election. It found numerous contacts between Trump campaign aides and Russian officials but stopped short of confirming coordination.
Former CIA Director John Ratcliffe also ordered a separate review. While that review criticised how the 2016 IC assessment was put together, it did not overturn its conclusions.
Additionally, the Department of Justice's internal watchdog and Special Counsel John Durham investigated the origins of the FBI's Russia probe. Durham's inquiry led to three indictments, including one FBI lawyer who admitted to falsifying details in a surveillance warrant. But overall, the probe found no systemic wrongdoing.
A deepening divide
Gabbard insists this issue cuts across party lines.
'The issue I am raising is not a partisan issue. It is one that concerns every American,' she said. 'The American people's faith and trust in our democratic republic and therefore the future of our nation depends on it.'
The Justice Department has not yet confirmed whether it will pursue the referrals. Clapper and Brennan did not respond to comment requests. James Comey declined to comment.
With both political camps entrenched, the release of these documents may reopen old wounds—but whether it leads to prosecutions remains uncertain.