• Declassified intelligence records reveal a sweeping attempt to politicize election-related assessments in 2016. Tulsi Gabbard, as Director of National Intelligence, has unveiled what she terms a “treasonous conspiracy,” implicating Obama-era officials in allegedly manipulating intelligence to undermine President Trump before and after his electoral victory.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (TDR) — In a disclosure both sobering and incendiary, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Friday released a trove of declassified materials alleging an orchestrated effort by senior Obama administration officials to manipulate intelligence assessments in late 2016 — not to inform policymakers, but to politically damage President Trump.

Calling the effort a “treasonous conspiracy,” Gabbard stated that her office has forwarded all related documents to the Department of Justice for review. In her words, the evidence reveals “an attempt to subvert the will of the American people” and impose “what was essentially a years-long coup” upon the duly elected president.

Tulsi explains Obamagate. pic.twitter.com/Ud6HJ88TWH

— Praying Medic (@prayingmedic) July 19, 2025

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

A Matter of Grave Constitutional Consequence

“No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Gabbard declared in a press statement.

The documents released by ODNI include 114 pages of declassified emails, reports, and a memorandum now widely referred to as the “Russia Hoax memo.” The memo outlines a deliberate effort to suppress intelligence indicating that “Russian and criminal actors did not impact” the 2016 election through cyberattacks — a finding omitted from the more publicized Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) released in early 2017.

“The facts reveal this new assessment was based on information that was known by those involved to be manufactured,” Gabbard’s office concluded, referencing the now-discredited Steele dossier.

The Steele Dossier: From Campaign Smear to State Instrument

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

The ICA of January 2017, prepared under the auspices of outgoing intelligence leadership, included claims from British ex-spy Christopher Steele. His report was commissioned by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS on behalf of Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias.

As Just the News has reported, internal emails reveal that the inclusion of the Steele dossier stunned cybersecurity officers at the National Intelligence Council. One senior official, now revealed to be a whistleblower, expressed disbelief that such unverified materials were considered analytically credible.

The ODNI’s newly released memo frames the final December 2016 ICA as a marked departure from an earlier, September 2016 assessment — also now declassified — which made no reference to Russian favoring of any particular candidate and provided a more generalized warning about foreign influence operations.

Brennan, Comey, and a Culture of Analytic Erosion

According to the CIA’s “lessons learned” review, the inclusion of the Steele material was a break from established analytic tradecraft. “Agency heads chose to marginalize the National Intelligence Council,” the report found, while “Brennan showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness.”

CIA analysts — including senior figures within the agency’s Russia mission center — strongly opposed the use of Steele’s claims, citing poor sourcing and lack of corroboration. Their objections were reportedly overruled.

NSA Director Adm. Mike Rogers dissented from the consensus judgment that Russian President Vladimir Putin “aspired to help” President Trump, assigning only “moderate confidence” to that claim — a distinction omitted from many subsequent media portrayals of the ICA.

“To impose large-scale change that gets at redefining the underlying culture, the IC has to be honest about the issues plaguing its analytic integrity,” House Intelligence Chairman Rick Crawford wrote on Friday.

Transparency Versus Entrenchment

Predictably, partisan reactions have fallen along familiar lines. Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, dismissed the revelations as “decade-old false claims” rehashed to serve political ends. Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) decried what he called Gabbard’s “weaponization” of the DNI post.

Yet it was Warner’s own Senate Intelligence Committee that in 2020 acknowledged that “differing confidence levels” within the ICA were legitimate and “justified.”

In contrast, the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee under then-Chairman Devin Nunes found that while some tradecraft was followed, “the judgments on Putin’s strategic intentions did not” meet acceptable standards — a view supported by the internal dissent of NSA and NIC officials at the time.

A Legacy of Institutional Damage

The declassified documents confirm what many constitutional conservatives have long feared: that the intelligence services, whose credibility rests on nonpartisan integrity, were harnessed to partisan ends. That such manipulation occurred on the cusp of a presidential transition renders the actions not merely improper, but dangerously precedent-setting.

“The American people are not to be manipulated using manufactured or misrepresented intelligence that pushes one political or personal agenda,” Chairman Crawford asserted.

As John Adams once wrote, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes… they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” The facts now coming to light warrant serious inquiry — and, if proven, legal redress.

Will these revelations be the beginning of a long-overdue reckoning in our intelligence agencies, or another chapter lost to political inertia?

Follow The Dupree Report on YouTube

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10