Latest news with #NationalIntelligence
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Epstein files: Can Obama help Trump win MAGA civil war?
AI image for representation. It began, as it so often does, with a rant. This time, the setting was the Oval Office, where US President Donald Trump, facing renewed questions about his ties to the late Jeffrey Epstein, turned the spotlight - and the blame - onto his favorite old foe: Barack Obama . 'Obama was trying to lead a coup,' Trump declared, in reference to a recently declassified report from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. 'And it was with Hillary Clinton. This was treason.' That assertion, devoid of supporting evidence and instantly refuted by Obama's office as 'a weak attempt at distraction,' wasn't just a deflection from the Epstein firestorm now singeing Trump's own base. It was a high-octane play to shift the narrative, ignite familiar conspiracy theories, and, above all, remind MAGA loyalists who their true enemy is - or was. But the question now dogging the West Wing is whether the old playbook still works. For years, Trump surfed the waves of right-wing outrage he helped create. Now, those waves are threatening to pull him under. TL;DR: The Epstein saga so far Trump, under fire from MAGA over Epstein files, accused Obama of 'treason' and a coup. However, Trump's deflection tactics are losing effectiveness with his skeptical base. The Epstein scandal is dividing MAGA, with supporters demanding more disclosures. Democrats and some Republicans are using the Epstein fallout against Trump. MAGA is showing signs of revolt as Trump's grip on his base weakens. The situation underscores a new reality: Trump's old playbook of distraction may not be enough to contain the political firestorm he helped ignite. Why it matters Trump's broadsides against Obama - absent any evidence - are part of a familiar playbook: escalate, deflect, and inflame. But this time, the context is different. MAGA isn't just battling Democrats or the media. It's fracturing internally over Trump's reluctance to release more about Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death continues to fuel conspiracies across the political spectrum. Even as Trump tries to redirect attention, a growing segment of his supporters feel betrayed. 'You cannot allege a treasonous conspiracy and then do nothing about it,' conservative commentator Matt Walsh fumed this week. 'Funny memes and sound bites aren't going to cut it anymore.' Catch up quick Trump and Epstein were longtime social acquaintances in the 1990s and early 2000s, appearing together at Mar-a-Lago and other events. While Trump has denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes and claims to have severed ties, photos and newly unearthed documents - including from his wedding to Marla Maples - continue to surface. The Wall Street Journal bombshell: The crisis deepened exponentially when The Wall Street Journal published revelations about a sexually suggestive 2003 birthday card allegedly sent by Trump to Epstein. The story described a hand-drawn naked woman with Trump's signature forming her pubic hair, accompanied by the message "may every day be another wonderful secret". Trump's immediate denial and subsequent $10 billion lawsuit against the Journal, Rupert Murdoch, and the reporting team represented an unprecedented escalation in presidential attacks on the press Now, as Democrats amplify these connections and MAGA demands answers, Trump's deflection campaign has grown more erratic. He reposted a deepfake video of Obama being arrested in the Oval Office and, according to Bloomberg Opinion's Nia-Malika Henderson, revived his "Obama complex" in a bid to fire up the base. 'Donald Trump's fantasy is to be the guy who takes the key to the Oval Office from Barack Obama's hand,' author Michael D'Antonio told PBS show Frontline. The big picture Trump's attempt to change the subject comes at a politically precarious moment. The department of justice recently concluded that Epstein died by suicide and that no 'client list' exists - a finding that has triggered outrage among Trump's own base, who long believed he would be the one to expose the truth. Even moves like directing attorney general Pam Bondi to unseal grand jury transcripts and announcing a justice department interview with Ghislaine Maxwell have failed to quiet MAGA fury. Trump is now facing demands for transparency from the very conspiracy-minded corners of his movement he once encouraged. 'If the executive branch won't release phase two of the Epstein files, we will,' vowed Rep Thomas Massie (R-Ky), promising a congressional push if Trump stalls any longer. Summer weekends in America are good for lots of things: baseball games, cookouts, farmers' markets, sipping a bev next to a lake. Or, if you're President Donald Trump: crashing out on social media in hopes of distracting the nation from nonstop coverage of his long friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. An article in Atlantic Zoom in: 'Allegations are ridiculous' The latest escalation came after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a controversial report alleging that Obama-era officials engaged in a 'treasonous conspiracy' by manipulating the 2016 intelligence assessment on Russian election interference. The report was panned by both Democrats and intelligence veterans for conflating unrelated findings and rehashing debunked theories. 'It is sadly not surprising that DNI Gabbard... is once again weaponizing her position to amplify the president's election conspiracy theories,' said Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.), ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Obama's office, typically restrained in responding to Trump, broke precedent with a rare and forceful public statement. 'These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,' Obama spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush said. 'Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.' Between the lines Trump's move to revive the Russia probe and cast Obama as the 'ringleader' behind it may be more than just deflection - it's a calculated effort to reframe the Epstein controversy within the broader 'Deep State' narrative. But the Epstein conspiracy, unlike some of Trump's other hobbyhorses, cuts both ways. MAGA is not united here. Many of Trump's most devoted followers - from Liz Wheeler to Theo Von - are openly pressuring him to follow through on his 2024 promise to expose Epstein's network. For once, Trump's usual mix of blame-shifting, lawsuits, and social media bluster isn't sticking. 'Today's statement by Pam Bondi seems like a massive cope,' Laura Loomer posted. 'Why wasn't this 'interview' with Ghislaine Maxwell done on day one?' What's next Speaker Mike Johnson abruptly adjourned the House this week to avoid a floor vote on releasing more Epstein-related files, a move designed to limit political damage. But the delay only inflamed tensions. Even Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyer confirmed she is in talks with the DOJ. 'We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case,' said David Oscar Markus - a line that raised eyebrows, even among conservatives skeptical of the DOJ's credibility. Trump insists the demands are politically motivated. 'Nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request,' he wrote on Truth Social. 'It will always be more, more, more.' But that message is wearing thin - not just with Democrats, but with a restive base that may no longer be fully under Trump's control. The bottom line For now, Trump continues to play the greatest hits: Obama. Treason. Coup. Russia. Witch hunt. It's a playlist that carried him through impeachment, indictments, and election losses. But even reruns lose their punch when the plot doesn't advance. As Ross Douthat of the New York Times wrote, 'No one controls MAGA - not even Trump.' The Epstein genie is out of the bottle, and the usual distractions may not be enough this time. Trump once told his supporters he alone could fix things. They're starting to ask why he hasn't.
New York Post
35 minutes ago
- Politics
- New York Post
John Brennan ignored ‘veteran' CIA officers to push claim Putin wanted Trump to win in 2016: bombshell House intel report
WASHINGTON — Former CIA Director John Brennan ignored warnings from 'veteran' officers and ordered the publication of a 'substandard' intelligence report that claimed Russian President Vladimir Putin 'aspired' to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election, according to a bombshell congressional report released Wednesday. The House Intelligence Committee had compiled the 'egregious' errors by the CIA back in 2020 — errors that included burying intelligence that the Kremlin was preparing for a possible victory by Democrat Hillary Clinton, according to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. The committee's findings also show that 'fabricated' information from the since-debunked Steele Dossier — funded by Clinton's campaign and put together by an ex-MI6 spy — was crammed into the CIA product over the objections of senior officials. Advertisement 3 President Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin are seen during the G20 leaders summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina November 30, 2018. REUTERS 'Not only did CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director [James] Comey, DNI [James] Clapper and others include the Steele Dossier in the 2017 ICA, they overruled senior Intel officials who warned them it was fabricated and should not be used,' Gabbard said, calling the move 'the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history.' 'In doing so, they conspired to subvert the will of the American people, working with their partners in the media to promote the lie, in order to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump, essentially enacting a years-long coup against him,' she added. 'The Russia Hoax was a lie that was knowingly created by the Obama Administration to undermine the legitimacy and power of the duly elected President of the United States, Donald Trump.' Advertisement 3 Former CIA Director John Brennan arrives for a meeting at the Capitol in Washington, May 21, 2019. AP 3 Trump shakes hands with Hillary Clinton during a OCt. 9, 2016 presidential debate. Getty Images According to the House report, only a 'scant, unclear, and unverifiable fragment of a sentence from one of the substandard reports constitutes the only classified information cited to suggest Putin 'aspired' to help Trump win.' 'CIA officers said that some of this information had been held on the orders of [Brennan], while other reporting had been judged by experienced CIA officers to have not met longstanding publication standards,' the report noted. Advertisement Other information was 'unclear, of uncertain origin, potentially biased, implausible, or in the words of senior operations officers 'odd,'' the report also stated, and was 'published after the election–over the objections of veteran officers–on orders of DCIA [Brennan] and cited in the [January 2017] ICA to support claims that Putin aspired to help Trump win.'
News18
an hour ago
- Politics
- News18
‘Hottest In The Room': Trump Praises Tulsi Gabbard, Revives Debunked Obama Claims
Donald Trump praised Tulsi Gabbard, claiming her report proves Barack Obama conspired to rig the 2016 election. US President Donald Trump lavished praise on Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard during a White House event, calling her 'the hottest one in the room" as he credited her with releasing a controversial report that he claims proves former US President Barack Obama conspired to rig the 2016 election. Gesturing towards Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump said, 'Oh, where's Tulsi? She's, like, hotter than everybody. She has all the documents. She found out that Barack Hussein Obama led a group of people and they cheated in the elections. They cheated without question. It's not even a quote." The US President went on to claim that the 2016 election 'was a big victory" and that 'it shouldn't have been a loss"- appearing to reference his popular vote defeat to Hillary Clinton despite winning the Electoral College. According to Donald Trump, Tulsi Gabbard's newly released intelligence report contains 'proof" that Barack Obama directed a plot involving several senior officials- including Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, and ex-intelligence chief James Clapper- to undermine his campaign. None of the named individuals have been charged with any crime related to the Russia probe and multiple bipartisan investigations, including one by the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee, have long upheld the finding that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump. Donald Trump insisted, 'She told me, 'You've seen nothing yet.' We're very proud of you, Tulsi." Tulsi Gabbard's report hinges on previously released Barack Obama-era communications and asserts that while no votes were altered in 2016, that absence somehow discredits broader claims of interference. The argument, widely rejected by intelligence analysts, attempts to redefine the scope of Russian meddling as purely a fabrication to delegitimize Donald Trump's victory. Barack Obama's spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush issued a swift rebuttal to the comments made by the US President, saying, 'These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction." view comments First Published: July 23, 2025, 19:20 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Trump has his biggest target in crosshairs. What can happen
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The political temperature in Washington has surged again, this time over a storm of accusations from President Donald Trump , targeting former President Barack Obama . During a press appearance alongside Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Trump accused Obama of orchestrating a 'coup' in 2016 by politicising intelligence regarding Russian election interference . The spark for this latest escalation: a set of newly declassified documents released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard last week, which Trump claims are proof of treason. He is now demanding that the Department of Justice (DOJ) open a criminal unprecedented moment raises a pressing question: can a former US president actually face prosecution for actions taken while in office? And what are the legal and political implications of such a move?At the heart of the controversy are intelligence documents recently declassified by Tulsi Gabbard, who now heads the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Gabbard's disclosures allege that Obama-era officials -- specifically James Clapper, John Brennan, James Comey, Susan Rice, and Andrew McCabe --deliberately distorted or suppressed intelligence to frame a narrative of Russian election interference that would damage argued that this manipulation of intelligence was not only unethical but possibly criminal, referring to it as a 'treasonous conspiracy". According to her statements, certain intelligence reports that cleared the Trump campaign of collusion were deliberately downplayed or ignored, while narratives emphasising Russian interference were selectively elevated. Importantly, the materials do not show that votes were altered or that Obama directly interfered in vote counts. Rather, they appear to suggest a pattern of politically motivated intelligence shaping which is serious, but far from the clear-cut criminal behaviour that would normally prompt a DOJ on the released documents, Trump quickly amplified the narrative. He accused Obama of treason and insisted that the DOJ open an investigation. Trump even went so far as to post an AI-generated video showing the FBI arresting Obama in the Oval Office, a move that was widely condemned as inflammatory and reckless. While Obama's office rarely responds to Trump's ongoing attacks, the former president issued a statement calling the accusations 'bizarre,' 'ridiculous,' and 'a weak attempt at distraction". The statement emphasised the unprecedented nature of the accusation and suggested it was designed to distract from Trump's own mounting legal and political Trump's message resonated with his base. Conservative media and MAGA-aligned lawmakers echoed his call for accountability, with several suggesting that the disclosures represent the biggest scandal in American the political firestorm, the likelihood that Obama will face criminal prosecution remains extremely slim. The evidence currently available may not establish that Obama committed a prosecutable offence. The documents suggest internal disagreements and potentially politicised decision-making, but not necessarily criminal behaviour. Under US law, proving treason or criminal conspiracy requires evidence of intent, coordination and direct action to break the there is the matter of precedent and prosecutorial norms. No former US president has ever been prosecuted for actions taken while in office unless there was incontrovertible proof of criminal conduct. Even in high-profile cases like Watergate, those involved were either pardoned or avoided criminal charges through plea deals and immunity arrangements. While it is possible that the DOJ may quietly review the Gabbard disclosures, the standard for launching a formal criminal case against a former president is extraordinarily high. Without compelling evidence, it's unlikely that Attorney General Merrick Garland would take the risk of igniting a constitutional has promised more disclosures in the coming weeks. If new documents emerge that contain stronger evidence of deliberate falsification or political manipulation, especially if Obama is directly implicated, then the DOJ could face renewed pressure to the allegations have already become a powerful tool for Trump and his allies, who are using the narrative to galvanise support and frame the 2016 Russia investigation as a calculated attack. For Democrats, however, the accusations are viewed largely as a diversion tactic, aimed at deflecting attention from Trump's own troubles. Within the intelligence community, Gabbard's unilateral declassification has raised alarm, with critics arguing that it undermines institutional credibility and could damage relationships with allied intelligence services. These concerns have been echoed by figures such as Senator Mark Warner, who warned that such politicisation erodes the foundational trust that intelligence-sharing depends the legal pathway seems narrow, the political implications are far-reaching. Trump and his allies have seized on the moment to reframe the Russia investigation as a political weapon wielded by Obama to undermine the peaceful transfer of power. In their view, the disclosures prove that the 2016 Russia investigation was a 'hoax' built on fabricated intelligence and partisan motives. This can help Trump regain support of many of those among MAGA who have been disppointed by the Trump adminsitration's handling of Epstein role in all of this cannot be overstated. Once a Democratic congresswoman known for her anti-establishment stance, she has become a central figure in reshaping how intelligence is handled in the executive branch. Critics say she is politicising national security, while supporters argue she is exposing long-standing corruption.
IOL News
3 hours ago
- Politics
- IOL News
The Rotten Core of a Manufactured Scandal
Did President Obama play a role in fabricating the Russia collusion narrative? Former Representative Tulsi Gabbard claims he did, suggesting a treasonous conspiracy that weaponised the intelligence community. Image: IOL / Ron AI Did President Barack Obama play a role in the fabrication of the Russia collusion narrative? According to former Representative Tulsi Gabbard—once a rising star within the Democratic Party and now a gadfly for political truth—the answer is unequivocally yes. More than that, Gabbard suggests the Obama administration orchestrated a 'treasonous conspiracy' in 2016, one that weaponised the intelligence community and buried exculpatory findings that contradicted their desired political outcome. Let us not pretend this charge is light. A 'treasonous conspiracy' suggests not merely malfeasance but a betrayal of the public trust at the highest levels of government. If these allegations are true—and the declassified documents and testimonies increasingly suggest they are—then we are dealing with one of the most corrosive abuses of power in American history. And yet, predictably, the usual suspects in the Democratic Party and their allies in corporate media have denounced these revelations not with evidence, but with noise. Men like Adam Schiff, the architect and chief propagandist of the Russia hoax, have long enjoyed the luxury of consequence-free deception. Schiff assured the nation, repeatedly and confidently, that he had 'direct evidence' of collusion between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin's government. No such evidence ever materialised. None. Instead, what we received was a years-long investigation—one that disrupted a presidency, undermined international credibility, and cost the American taxpayers tens of millions—only to conclude there was no collusion. The Mueller Report confirmed it. The Durham investigation exposed the rot. And yet, the architects of the lie remain untouched, their reputations defended by a press that long ago abandoned its role as watchdog in favour of partisan priesthood. What Gabbard alleges, however, takes this abuse of power a step further. According to her review of intelligence findings—now echoed by former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe—the original assessments from our intelligence community clearly stated that Russia's efforts had no material effect on the outcome of the 2016 election. In other words, while Russia may have engaged in cyber-meddling and online influence operations (as every major power does), it had no decisive impact on voting outcomes. That should have been the headline. Instead, it was buried. Why? Because truth was inconvenient to power. Because the narrative of Russian interference served a political end: to delegitimise Trump's presidency before it even began. What followed was not a sober investigation into foreign threats, but a coordinated disinformation campaign by our own intelligence apparatus at the urging of political elites. It was, as Former US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia might argue, an affront not merely to the legal process but to the very idea of republican government. In Morrison v. Olson, Justice Scalia famously dissented alone, warning against the creation of a fourth branch of government—unaccountable bureaucracies with the power to influence political outcomes. 'A government of laws, and not of men,' he wrote, 'means that our rulers are bound by the law, just as the governed are.' Yet here we are, in 2024, looking back at a moment when our rulers were the law—when intelligence agencies were pressured into revising their own conclusions to align with political imperatives. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is the documented history of the modern American state. It is what happens when ideology becomes the lens through which evidence is interpreted, and when political expediency outweighs constitutional restraint. And now, with Trump poised for a potential return to the White House, the fear among Democrats is palpable. Not because of what Trump might do in the future, but because of what he might uncover from the past. This is the nightmare scenario for the left—not a second Trump term, but a reckoning with the truth. The emails, the memos, the redacted reports—they may not remain buried for much longer. Gabbard is right to call it treasonous. Whether that charge meets the legal standard or not is almost beside the point. What matters is that Americans were lied to by their own government—systematically, persistently, and with great sophistication. As Thomas Sowell has often warned: 'It is hard to imagine a more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.' The question now is whether anyone will be held accountable. Or whether, once again, we will look the other way while the powerful write a different version of history—one where the truth is not merely inconvenient, but disposable. Did President Obama play a role in fabricating the Russia collusion narrative? Former Representative Tulsi Gabbard claims he did, suggesting a treasonous conspiracy that weaponised the intelligence community. Image: IOL * Armstrong Williams ( @arightside) is a political analyst, syndicated columnist and owner of the broadcasting company, Howard Stirk Holdings. He is also part owner of The Baltimore Sun. ** The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Independent Media or IOL.
