Brennan, Clapper: Trump administration seeks to ‘rewrite history' with Obama claims
'Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, and John Ratcliffe, the Central Intelligence Agency director, have over the past month claimed that senior officials of the Obama administration manufactured politicized intelligence, silenced intelligence professionals and engaged in a broad 'treasonous conspiracy' to undermine the presidency of Donald Trump. That is patently false,' the duo wrote in The New York Times.
The intelligence community concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election with the aim of aiding President Trump in the contest.
The pair then listed a suite of reports that backed that conclusion, from Trump-appointed special counsel John Durham to a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report prepared under now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
'Every serious review has substantiated the intelligence community's fundamental conclusion that the Russians conducted an influence campaign intended to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election,' the two wrote.
Amid pressure on the Trump administration to release files related to the prosecution of deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein, the Trump team has released several other tranches of documents.
Gabbard, in particular, has released a memo and documents she said shows Clapper withheld information from the American public, including that there was 'no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count.'
That was never in dispute though, and intelligence officials said at the time that Russia was unable to manipulate vote counts.
The documents released by Gabbard show intelligence officials discussing that Russia was unable to change any votes.
Gabbard later released a report from House Intelligence Republicans casting doubt on whether Russia aimed to help Trump versus sow chaos in the U.S., but most other assessments back the conclusion the adversary did so with the hopes of boosting the president.
But beyond the documents released, Gabbard and others have largely talked about the intelligence community's review of the 2016 election as part of a conspiracy to damage Trump, undermine his victory, and boost the largely-debunked Steele dossier.
'Contrary to the Trump administration's wild and baseless claims, there was no mention of 'collusion' between the Trump campaign and the Russians in the assessment,' they wrote.
'We have testified under oath, and the reviews of the assessment have confirmed, that the dossier was not used as a source or taken into account for any of its analysis or conclusions,' they added.
They also reiterated that the assessment made no judgment about the impact Russia's moves had on the outcome of the election.
'While some state and local electoral boards and voter information and registration systems were accessed by Russian intelligence, the assessment made clear that none of those types of systems were involved in counting votes,' they wrote.
'Russian influence operations might have shaped the views of Americans before they entered the voting booth, but we found no evidence that the Russians changed any actual votes.'
Clapper and Brennan go on to describe efforts to keep their intelligence work shielded, understanding the influence it would have on the election, calling it a 'remarkable irony' to have Trump figures release it now.
'The real politicization is the calculated distortion of intelligence by administration officials, notably Mr. Trump's directors of national intelligence and the C.I.A., positions that should be apolitical. We find it deeply regrettable that the administration continues to perpetuate the fictitious narrative that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election,' they wrote.
'It should instead acknowledge that a foreign nation-state — a mortal enemy of the United States — routinely meddles in our national elections and will continue to do so unless we take appropriate bipartisan action to stop it.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
6 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump admin plans first ‘Golden Dome' test of space-based missile defense system: report
Pentagon officials are aiming to test President Trump's space-based Golden Dome missile defense system to safeguard the US in the fourth quarter of 2028, according to a report. That timeframe lines up with Trump's ambitious goal to 'have it done in three years' and comes amid pitches from defense contractors to score coveted contracts to develop the cutting-edge system. 'They want a win to point to in November [2028],' a defense official told CNN. 'And DoD [Department of Defense] wants to avoid anything they perceive will slow them down.' Advertisement The test, which will be conducted by the Missile Defense Agency, is expected to be called FTI-X, which stands for 'Flight Test Integrated,' in a nod to how it will assess the Golden Dome's vast array of sensors and weapons systems, according to the report. Development of the state-of-the-art missile defense system is expected to cost about $175 billion, according to Trump, who tapped Gen. Michael Guetlein, vice chair of operations at the Space Force, to oversee the ambitious project in May. 4 President Trump wants the US to develop a state-of-the-art missile defense system to protect the homeland from advanced attacks. Getty Images Advertisement 4 The Golden Dome system is intended to safeguard the colossal continental US. AP Congress has already allocated $25 billion in funding for the Golden Dome in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law last month. Military officials have explored space-based missile defense technologies for decades, including during Ronald Reagan's Star Wars program, also known as the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Space-based missile defense technology can be advantageous because it can help thwart an enemy missile much earlier in its trajectory than other technologies that the US currently has in its arsenal. Advertisement It can also reduce geographical barriers and catch certain types of enemy missiles at a stage when they are slower and easier to intercept. However, there are many drawbacks. The US would need to make significant technological advances to develop that system, which is likely to be very costly and could entice other countries to weaponize space. 4 Skeptics have raised questions about whether the Golden Dome can be completed on time and within the budget President Trump laid out. Getty Images The defense official called it a 'hard problem, and technically very risky,' CNN reported. Advertisement 'The possible number of satellites needed to achieve a probability of engagement success is going to be very high, given the time and area needed to cover the continental United States,' the defense official said. Plans for the test in 2028 are expected to be 'phase one' of the project. A deluge of defense contractors and other private companies have been jockeying for contracts to help develop the massive defense system. Precise details of how the Golden Dome system will function are not fully known. Trump has taken inspiration from Israel's feted Iron Dome system, which helps defend populated areas from short-range attacks. Trump's plans would encompass much more sophisticated missiles, such as ballistic and hypersonic missiles, that may potentially be fired off from much more distant locations than what Iron Dome defends against. 'Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world,' Trump teased in May. 4 Precise details about how the Golden Dome system will function are not clear. Getty Images Guetlein has admitted that the Pentagon faces enormous challenges in successfully completing the project. Advertisement 'I think the real technical challenge will be building of the space-based interceptor,' Guetlein said at a summit last month. 'That technology exists, I believe. I believe we have proven every element of the physics, that we can make it work.' 'What we have not proven is, first, can I do it economically, and then second, can I do it at scale? Can I build enough satellites to get after the threat? Can I expand the industrial base fast enough to build those satellites?' The initiative comes amid advancements in the American space industry, with tycoons such as Elon Musk working to bring down the costs of launching satellites. The Defense Department didn't reply to a request for comment Sunday.
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
Most education reformers have no idea what parents and kids want — and they don't care
Most education reformers — especially those interested in low-income communities — rightly focus on the needs and interests of students, whether they are discussing short-term outcomes like standardized testing results, or longer term results like rates of college acceptance and graduation. But the most important question they should be asking is: What do the parents in these communities want for their children? What do their extended family, mentors and pastors want? Unfortunately, even the best-intentioned reformers rarely entertain this question. Parents are the most important stakeholders in matters of education after the children themselves, yet reformers' ideological and emotional interests consistently take precedence over those of the parents and the local community. All too often, the education of poor or marginalized children gets lost in ideological battles between groups of elites who are completely removed from the communities they purport to defend. Elitist social justice initiatives — such as tossing out commonsense academic and behavioral standards because of supposed racial justice concerns — are a prime example of this 'soft bigotry of low expectations.' Is it acceptable to lower standards for certain children even if their parents want them to be held to a higher standard? Respect and consideration of parental priorities is one of the major reasons that indigenous, community-oriented and community-generated educational projects produce objectively excellent and even superior outcomes to top-down interventions from reformers outside the community. Take the Rosenwald schools: Booker T. Washington of the Tuskegee Institute and Julius Rosenwald, then-president of Sears Roebuck, joined to create one of the most remarkable educational successes of American history — yet remarkably few people know that they ever existed. Noting the dire lack of funding for education of Black children in the Jim Crow-era South, the Rosenwald Fund contributed $4.3 million — matched and exceeded by $4.7 million raised by Black communities themselves — to build over 5,000 schools, shops and associated homes across the segregated South. The Rosenwald schools were both very successful and indigenous projects: The seed money empowered local men, women and children to narrow the racial literacy gap in the Jim Crow-era American South by a stunning 40 percent. Within a generation, a three-year racial education gap shrank to well under a year. These highly localized, community-driven projects succeeded in the face of widespread, bitter discrimination. A modern-day example of indigenously led excellence can be seen in the Piney Woods School, a challenging preparatory school serving underprivileged children that was founded by Laurence Clifton Jones in 1909. Piney Woods serves a student body that wouldn't otherwise have access to a high-quality education, and relies largely on the generosity of donors to fund the scholarships for many of those who attend. But these kids, and their families, don't want a handout. They don't want low expectations. They want a challenge. And a challenge is what they receive. The school emphasizes self-responsibility, self-government and empowerment from within the communities and families it serves rather than from outside or 'above' them. Every student commits to working an on-campus job — in fact, the bulk of the campus buildings were built by students themselves. And their families donate or contribute to the school. They aren't looking to be accommodated or coddled. They don't want to be excused, and never have — even in the face of clear racism. There is a cautionary tale of reform, however, and it is the charter school movement. Charter schools are an increasingly common and often promising mode of educational reform, but they often flounder on the simple fact that reformers eventually rely on politics, rather than community interests, to guide their decisions. Former inner-city public school teacher Robert Pondiscio, in his recent review of Steve Wilson's book 'The Lost Decade,' briefly recounts the rise and fall of the 'no excuses' charter school model. In its ascendant years, the model allowed urban and underprivileged students to excel beyond anyone's expectations. But then it failed, catastrophically, under the growing weight of social justice culture. The schools that offered an irreplaceable chance at academic excellence — and long-term professional success — to Black students all over the country were sabotaged by the anxieties of political elites locked in pointless ideological battles over 'whiteness.' White guilt became more important than Black excellence. These charter schools abandoned the 'no excuses' standards that had helped lift students up from disadvantaged backgrounds as outdated or racist, replacing them with 'equity' initiatives that are leading today to low scores and low achievement. But no one asked the community leaders, who stand to gain or lose the most, if they were on board with these changes. Parents are stakeholders. Children are stakeholders. Siblings, aunts and uncles, mentors, pastors — anyone invested in these kids' lives are stakeholders. And that is the only real safeguard that communities have here: direct participation in and influence over the well-being of the children. If we want to build a more just society, we can and should begin by abandoning the top-down, ideologically-motivated model of educational reform. We must stop letting the elites destroy the strongest chance our most vulnerable children have at improving their station in life. Indigenous projects are the very best of our past — and they will be the very best of our future. Bob Woodson is the founder and president of the Woodson Center, and editor of the book ' A Pathway to American Renewal: Red, White, and Black Vol II. ' Will Crossley is the executive vice president of the Woodson Center and president of the Piney Woods School.
Miami Herald
6 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Miami judge becomes first confirmed U.S. attorney during Trump's second term
President Donald Trump's first confirmed nominee for U.S. Attorney is a Miami-Dade judge whose professional background includes poor job evaluations in the office he will now lead. On Saturday, Judge Jason A. Reding Quiñones secured a 49-44 cloture vote in the U.S. Senate. He will now head the U.S. Attorney's Office in South Florida, replacing interim U.S. Attorney Hayden O'Byrne. READ MORE: Trump picks U.S. attorney in Miami. As criminal prosecutor, he received poor evaluations Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, 'Very proud of our great Republican Senators for fighting, over the Weekend and far beyond, if necessary, in order to get my great Appointments approved, and on their way to helping us MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!' The Miami Herald could not reach Reding Quiñones for comment. Reding Quiñones, formerly a federal prosecutor in the Miami office, was appointed as a Miami-Dade County judge a year ago by Gov. Ron DeSantis and is a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force Reserve. After graduating from Florida International University's law school in 2008, he began his career practicing corporate law before transitioning to a military lawyer for the U.S. Air Force and then joining the Justice Department. Soon after, he joined the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami as a prosecutor in the major crimes section, where he would receive poor evaluations from supervisors relating to incompetence; however, Reding Quiñones filed a discrimination complaint claiming he was being targeted because of his race. He would later drop that complaint and continue on in the Miami office's civil division, where he recieved satisfactory job evaluations. Despite this history, University of Richmond Law Professor Carl Tobias said it likely wouldn't have a big impact on his confirmation by the Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committe process for evaluating U.S Attorney nominees is 'not very rigorous,' Tobias said. That's because, he said, the panel doesn't have the resources to conduct hearings and instead relies on staff analysis and recommendations. 'Practically all nominees receive no discussion and voice votes, unless staff detects red flags,' he said. Tobias believes confirmations have grown increasingly politicized, but in a rare occurrence, Reding Quiñones received a 12-9 committee party line vote before the process continued to the Senate where he would be confirmed. The confirmation is not only a victory for the president, but also a much-needed move for the Miami office, which has remained one of the busiest in the country despite growing struggles. Since the resignation of former U.S. Attorney Markenzy Lapointe, the first Black lawyer to hold the position in South Florida, earlier this year, the office has lost a half a dozen senior career prosecutors. READ MORE: Miami U.S. Attorney, first Haitian-American in post, to resign before Trump takes office 'The [South Florida office] does critical law enforcement work and its several hundred attorneys function more smoothly when the office has a permanent, Senate-confirmed leader, who cooperates effectively with the Justice Department and other US Attorneys,' Tobias said. While the U.S. Attorney position may now be filled, other seats in South Florida and the rest of the state have not made it through Senate confirmation hearings yet. The Senate failed to confirm one Trump federal judge nominee who would preside in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and three nominees for the Middle District. Tobias noted that these are emergency vacancies, as both districts have substantial caseloads that are reaching or already surpassing protracted lengths without resolution. The Senate is now in recess, which means any appointments will have to wait until September when it resumes session. 'The diligent, overloaded Southern and Middle District judges and the people of Florida must wait for relief,' Tobias said.
