Gabbard releases more Russia documents, prompting concerns over intelligence sources
Her statement on X said the documents show Obama officials "manufactured the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false, promoting the LIE that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win the 2016 election."
Democrats disputed her claims and accused Gabbard of misrepresenting the intelligence findings. Wednesday's report follows a separate set of declassified documents on the matter released by Gabbard Friday. In a memo accompanying those documents, she similarly accused Obama administration officials of plotting a "years-long coup" against Mr. Trump.
Obama's spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement regarding the first set of materials, "These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," and he said nothing in last week's documents "undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes." Rodenbush has not responded to the most recent release of material.
The Wednesday release was a declassified report that was compiled in 2017 by the House Intelligence Committee's Republican majority — where FBI Director Kash Patel was a lead staffer at the time, according to two sources familiar with the matter. It focuses at length on the intelligence community's judgment that Russian president Vladimir Putin aspired to help President Trump to win the 2016 election.
It includes discussions of raw intelligence provided by a human source to the CIA, as well as Signal intercepts gathered by the National Security Agency, prompting concerns from current and former intelligence officials and condemnation from Democrats about the risks it could pose to sensitive intelligence sources and methods.
But the report does not fundamentally change previous assessments by the U.S. intelligence community — or the multiple reviews that followed.
"The desperate and irresponsible release of the partisan House intelligence report puts at risk some of the most sensitive sources and methods our Intelligence Community uses to spy on Russia and keep Americans safe," Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner said in a statement. "And in doing so, Director Gabbard is sending a chilling message to our allies and assets around the world: the United States can no longer be trusted to protect the intelligence you share with us."
At the White House briefing Monday, Gabbard accused President Obama of "leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment." She told reporters that the documents would be sent to the Justice Department and FBI for investigation of "criminal implications."
Asked by CBS News correspondent Ed O'Keefe whether she thinks Obama is guilty of treason, Gabbard responded that she would leave criminal charges to the Justice Department, but said what occurred "can only be described as a years-long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people."
She declined to directly answer another question from O'Keefe about how the latest declassified documents change previous assessments, given that the Senate Intelligence Committee — which included then-Sen. Marco Rubio — dedicated an entire volume of its five-volume investigation to the intelligence community's analysis..
"[W]e are ensuring that the intelligence community is not being politicized, Gabbard said. "Look at the evidence and you will know the truth."
The House committee's Republican-authored report criticizes the review of the analysis underlying the assessment that went into the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, or ICA, for several reasons, including that its production was rushed to be released before Mr. Trump took office. It also claimed analysts failed to consider plausible alternative explanations for Putin's intentions and questioned whether they sufficiently took into account the human source's motivations, proximity to Putin or bias towards Trump.
The GOP House committee report zeroes in on a piece of intelligence contained in a report from a human source that it contends was subjected to "questionable interpretation" by analysts.
"The unclear fragment (shown in bold) is part of a sentence in a [redacted] that reads, 'Putin had made this decision [to leak DNC emails] after he had come to believe that the Democratic nominee had better odds of winning the U.S. presidential election, and that [candidate Trump] whose victory Putin was counting on, most likely would not be able to pull off a convincing victory,'" a bullet says on page 4 of the report.
It adds that a senior CIA operations officer said at the time, "We don't know what was meant by that" and "five people read it five ways."
The findings align in many areas with a separate tradecraft review released earlier this month by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, which determined that the confidence level in the assessment that Putin aspired to help Trump win should have been "moderate" instead of "high," chiefly because it was derived from one source instead of multiple. The CIA's report, however, did not include any detailed discussion of the sensitive sources or methods involved.
The CIA's own review of the intelligence that informed the finding on Putin's preference "confirmed that the clause was accurately represented…and that the ICA authors' interpretation of its meaning was most consistent with the raw intelligence." It more broadly found that much of the tradecraft underlying the 2017 assessment was "robust and consistent" with analytic standards.
The CIA declined to comment on the report released by Gabbard.
Democrats seized on the timing of the disclosures — which they pointed out could have been made at any time during the first Trump administration or since he took office for a second time.
"It's appropriate that this shoddy and partisan report was released by Director Gabbard on the day that House Republicans are quite literally fleeing Washington, D.C., for six weeks rather than releasing the Epstein files that Trump is so desperate to cover up," said House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes.
"Given the rushed and unusual 'declassification' process the DNI has implemented, I fear that the public release of this report could compromise sensitive sources and methods and endanger our national security," Himes said. Ed O'Keefe
contributed to this report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The winners and losers in US-EU trade deal
The US and EU have struck what is being billed as the largest trade deal in history, after talks in Scotland. It actually resembles the framework for an agreement rather than a full trade deal, with details still unclear. But the headline figures announced by President Donald Trump and EU chief Ursula von der Leyen do offer clues about which sectors and groups could be hit hardest or have most to gain. Follow reaction live Trump - winner After promising new trade deals with dozens of countries, Trump has just landed the biggest of them all. It looks to most commentators that the EU has given up more, with instant analysis by Capital Economics suggesting a 0.5% knock to GDP. There will also be tens of billions of dollars pouring into US coffers in import taxes. But the glowing headlines for Trump may not last long if a slew of economic data due later this week show that his radical reshaping of the US economy is backfiring. Figures on inflation, jobs, growth and consumer confidence will give a clearer picture on whether Trump's tariffs are delivering pain or gain. US consumers - loser Ordinary Americans are already aggrieved at the increased cost of living and this deal could add to the burden by hiking prices on EU goods. While not as steep as it could have been, the hurdle represented by a 15% tariff rate is still significant, and it is far more pronounced than the obstacles that existed before Trump returned to office. Tariffs are taxes charged on goods bought from other countries. Typically, they are a percentage of a product's value. So, a 15% tariff means that a $100 product imported to the US from the EU will have a $15 dollar tax added on top - taking the total cost to the importer to $115. Companies who bring foreign goods into the US have to pay the tax to the government, and they often pass some or all of the extra cost on to customers. Markets - winner Stock markets in Asia and Europe rose on Monday after news emerged of the deal framework. Under the framework, the US will levy a 15% tariff on goods imported from the EU. While this rate is significant, it is less than what it could have been and at least offers certainty for investors. The agreement is "clearly market-friendly, and should put further upside potential into the euro", Chris Weston at Pepperstone, an Australian broker, told AFP. European solidarity - loser The deal will need to be signed off by all 27 members of the EU, each of which have differing interests and levels of reliance on the export of goods to the US. While some members have given the agreement a cautious welcome, others have been critical - hinting at divisions within the bloc, which is also trying to respond to other crises such as the ongoing war in Ukraine. A big Trump win but not total defeat for Brussels French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou commented: "It is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, brought together to affirm their common values and to defend their common interests, resigns itself to submission." He was joined by at least two other French government ministers as well as Viktor Orban, the Hungarian leader, who said that Trump "ate von der Leyen for breakfast". Carmakers in Germany - loser The tariff faced by importers bringing EU cars to the US has been nearly halved, from the rate of 27.5% that was imposed by Trump in April to a new rate of 15%. Cars are one of the EU's top exports to the US. And as the largest manufacturer of cars in the EU - thanks to VW, Mercedes and BMW - Germany will have been watching closely. Its leader, Friedrich Merz, has welcomed the new pact, while admitting that he would have welcomed a "further easing of transatlantic trade". That downbeat sentiment was echoed by the German carmaking trade body, the VDA, which warned that even a rate of 15% would "cost the German automotive industry billions annually". Carmakers in the US - winner Trump is trying to boost US vehicle production. American carmakers received a boost when they learned that the EU was dropping its own tariff on US-made cars from 10% to 2.5%. Theoretically that could result in more American cars being bought in Europe. That could be good for US sales overseas, but the pact is not all good news when it comes to domestic sales. That is down to the complex way that American cars are put together. Many of them are actually assembled abroad - in Canada and Mexico - and Trump subjects them to a tariff of 25% when they are brought into the US. That compares with a lower tariff rate of 15% on EU vehicles. So US car makers may now fear being undercut by European manufacturers. EU pharmaceuticals - loser There is confusion around the tariff rate that will be levied on European-made drugs being bought in the US. The EU wants drugs to be subject to the lowest rate possible, to benefit sales. Trump said pharmaceuticals were not covered by the deal announced on Sunday, under which the rate on a number of products was lowered to 15%. But von der Leyen said they were included, and a White House source confirmed the same to the BBC. Either scenario will represent disappointment for European pharma, which initially hoped for a total tariffs exemption. The industry currently enjoys high exposure to the US marketplace thanks to products like Ozempic, a star type-2 diabetes drug made in Denmark. This has been highlighted in Ireland, where opposition parties have pointed out the importance of the industry and criticised the damaging effect of uncertainty. Ireland 'not celebrating' Trump's EU deal US energy - winner Trump said the EU will purchase $750bn (£558bn, €638bn) in US energy, in addition to increasing overall investment in the US by $600bn. "We will replace Russian gas and oil with significant purchases of US LNG [liquified natural gas], oil and nuclear fuels," said Von der Leyen. This will deepen links between European energy security and the US at a time when it has been pivoting away from importing Russian gas since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Aviation industry in EU and US - winner Von der Leyen said that some "strategic products" will not attract any tariffs, including aircraft and plane parts, certain chemicals and some agricultural products. That means firms making components for aeroplanes will have friction-free trade between the huge trading blocs. She added that the EU still hoped to get more "zero-for-zero" agreements, notably for wines and spirits, in the coming days. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Miami Herald
28 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Social Security quietly backtracks on unpopular benefit change
The Social Security Administration made a big announcement recently, but it was not popular. The announcement was intended to save the government money and improve efficiency - a big focus for the Trump administration, which came into office and made creating the Department of Government Efficiency its top priority. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Over half a million Social Security benefit recipients were slated to be impacted by the shift, but it has drawn many objections, including from lawmakers who have expressed serious concern about its impact. In light of all this pushback, Social Security has now quietly backtracked. The change isn't going to happen starting September 30, 2025, after all. Here's more about the proposed benefit change, along with insight into why it was scrapped. Social Security had planned to revolutionize the benefits delivery process as part of its efforts to enhance efficiency. Specifically, the intent was for paper checks to be stopped permanently beginning September 30, 2025. Lawmakers have long desired to make this change, and there has officially been a rule requiring electronic delivery of benefits for well over a decade since 2011. However, no one in the past took decisive action to stop sending paper checks. Related: Social Security's 2026 COLA will be good news for older Americans The White House wanted to be the administration that put an end to physical checks. A July 2025 notice posted on the Social Security Administration's website stated: "Starting September 30, 2025, the Social Security Administration (SSA) will no longer issue paper checks for benefit payments. This change is part of a broader government-wide initiative to modernize payment systems and enhance service delivery." The announcement about shifting to paper checks outlined some of the reasons why the Social Security Administration made this plan, including: Improving speed and efficiency, as direct deposits are quickerCost savings, because sending out a paper check costs the government $0.50, while it's possible for the government to make a direct deposit of a Social Security check for just $0.15Better security, since paper checks are 16 times more likely to be stolen Because of these benefits, the government said that Social Security recipients would have two options for receiving payments after September - direct deposit or a Direct Express card. Related: AARP CEO shares blunt 9-word warning about Social Security While there were clearly some good reasons for shifting away from paper checks, the decision was also a very unpopular one. The reason: There was serious concern that people who most need their benefits would lose access because they are unbanked or underbanked. Some Social Security recipients face barriers to opening bank accounts. These include being unable to afford account fees, being ineligible due to previously overdrafting or other problems, or lacking a government-issued ID needed to open an account. Senator Elizabeth Warren was a vocal critic of the plan to switch, commenting on a press call, "There are about 600,000 Americans who still receive their paper checks - it's a small fraction of people who receive Social Security payments, but it's a population that often needs checks through paper." More on retirement: Dave Ramsey offers urgent thoughts about MedicareJean Chatzky shares major statement on Social SecurityTony Robbins has blunt words on IRAs,401(k)s Warren met with Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano, and after that meeting, the Administration backtracked on the change. Warren announced on July 23 that Commissioner Bisignano had agreed to keep sending out physical checks to those who need them, and an SSA spokesperson confirmed this to both CBS MoneyWatch and Kiplinger. While the Administration has agreed to cancel the unpopular change, it will still be pushing people to switch to electronic means of receiving payments by communicating about the benefits of making the change and explaining how to do it. The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Live updates: Trump, UK prime minister to meet at start of big week for economy
President Trump will meet with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for 'wide-ranging talks' on Monday in Scotland. Fresh off Trump's trade deal with the European Union, announced Sunday, Trump and Starmer are expected to discuss implementation of the U.S.-U.K. trade deal, agreed to in May, the prime minister's office said Sunday. The struggle to reach a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, along with the hunger crisis in Gaza, as well as the war in Ukraine, are also on the table. Trump's five-day visit to Scotland is a mix of business — trade talk ahead of Thursday's White House deadline for tariff deals — and pleasure, with the president taking in his golf courses. In Stockholm on Monday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent starts the next round of trade meetings with China. Looking even beyond tariffs, a flurry of economic activity this week makes it a significant one. The Federal Reserve announces its next interest rate decision on Wednesday. Between Tuesday and Thursday, the government will release consumer confidence insights, second-quarter GDP data, details on job openings, and the Fed's preferred inflation measure, the PCE index.
