The Russia investigation that haunted President Trump’s first term is back in the headlines.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released declassified documents suggesting that key intelligence leaders under President Obama may have deliberately changed assessments about Russian interference in the 2016 election – after Donald Trump won.
She says the Obama administration quietly pulled back an intelligence report in December 2016 that originally found no real Russian impact on the election.
Then, she says, top officials quickly rewrote the story blaming Russia and tying it to Trump.
That shift, she claims, helped launch what many on the right have long called a “witch hunt.”
Americans will finally learn the truth about how in 2016, intelligence was politicized and weaponized by the most powerful people in the Obama Administration to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President @realDonaldTrump, subverting the… pic.twitter.com/UQKKZ5c4Op
— DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) July 18, 2025
The Pulled Report
According to Gabbard, a top-secret Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) dated December 8, 2016, concluded that Russia had not meaningfully influenced the 2016 election. But Gabbard says that document was pulled back.
By January 6, 2017, a new Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) came out. This one claimed Russia did interfere to help Trump win.
That report shaped years of investigations, headlines, and hearings. It led to Robert Mueller’s appointment as special counsel, a $32 million probe, and years of claims that Trump was a Russian puppet.
But what if the real story was never about Russia?
A Narrative Shift – On Purpose?
Gabbard’s thread points to a White House meeting on December 9, 2016 – right after Trump’s surprise win – where Obama officials allegedly directed intel agencies to change course. Former CIA Director John Brennan and DNI James Clapper were key players.
Gabbard says they used the discredited Steele Dossier to justify the new narrative. That file, filled with salacious and unverified claims, was partly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and was later criticized by both internal watchdogs and independent reports.
Still, it made its way into intelligence briefings and was used to support FISA warrants, including surveillance of Trump adviser Carter Page.
Durham’s 2021 report into the origins of the Russia probe raised similar concerns. He found the FBI relied on shaky evidence and ignored signs the dossier wasn’t reliable.
In short, investigators may have chased a ghost story while knowing it was fiction.
Conservative Critics Speak Out
Conservative voices like Charlie Kirk, Nick Sortor, and War Clandestine have taken to X to back Gabbard’s claims. They say it’s proof of a “deep state” effort to block Trump from governing.
Gabbard says she’s referring the pulled documents to the Department of Justice. Some online are calling for prosecutions under treason laws. Others say it’s time for full transparency – and accountability.
Mainstream Pushback
Critics point out that Russia did hack Democratic emails and push disinformation on social media, facts confirmed by the Mueller investigation and the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report.
Obama’s team also expelled 35 Russian diplomats and imposed sanctions after the election, showing they took the threat seriously.
But some are arguing those actions only happened after Trump won, not before. And Gabbard’s timeline supports that.
A 2019 study in the Journal of Intelligence Analysis warned that intelligence agencies under political pressure can fall into “confirmation bias” – seeing what they want to see. That’s what Gabbard says happened here.
Why It Matters Now
Gabbard’s move comes as President Trump serves his second term in office, and calls grow louder to clean house at the FBI and CIA.
Her past as a Democrat and her current role as a Republican-appointed official give her claims added weight, especially among those who believe the 2016 narrative was shaped not by facts, but by politics.
And if she’s right, the real threat to our democracy didn’t come from Moscow.
It came from inside the house.
This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
