The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, made headlines on Friday by declassifying and releasing a set of intelligence documents. Gabbard asserts that these documents provide evidence of a “treasonous conspiracy” among top officials in the Obama administration, aimed at creating the illusion of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. However, a closer examination reveals that these allegations distort and misrepresent the conclusions of the intelligence community, as outlined in a bipartisan Senate investigation conducted in 2020.
According to multiple sources familiar with the investigation, the newly released documents do not undermine the central findings of the 2017 assessment, which concluded that Russia launched an influence and hacking campaign with the intention of aiding Donald Trump in defeating Hillary Clinton. Gabbard's claims are based on pre-election assessments and statements from Obama-era intelligence officials, which indicate that while the Russians did not manipulate election results through cyber-attacks on voting systems, the broader influence campaign was indeed directed by President Vladimir Putin.
“These are two different things — cyberattacks on infrastructure and hacking the DNC — which they’re conflating in an attempt to make a political point,” explained a former senior congressional source familiar with the Senate review. “It’s just wildly misleading on its face.”
In 2020, a bipartisan review by the Senate Intelligence Committee corroborated the intelligence community’s conclusions regarding Russia’s election interference and Putin's directive role in the operation. Congressional sources emphasized that Gabbard is misinterpreting the intelligence assessments to falsely suggest that the absence of voting system breaches indicates no Russian influence or cyber campaign occurred. The Senate review included interviews with the intelligence analysts who prepared the report, none of whom indicated any political interference in their analysis.
Gabbard's office has yet to respond to inquiries regarding these claims.
This release of declassified documents is part of a broader pattern of efforts by former Trump administration officials to reframe the narrative surrounding the Russia investigation. Notably, last month, CIA Director John Ratcliffe also criticized the intelligence community's conclusions, alleging that they were reached through an “atypical & corrupt process.” Ratcliffe has referred former intelligence leaders to the Department of Justice for further investigation.
Gabbard has threatened to take similar action against Obama administration officials for potential prosecution, echoing the sentiments of Trump and his allies, who have long sought to delegitimize the entire Russia investigation, which played a significant role in Trump's first years in office.
Following Gabbard's revelations, Trump took to social media to endorse her findings, sharing videos of her appearances on Fox Business and memes depicting former President Barack Obama and his administration in prison attire. Earlier in the year, Trump had declassified documents that criticized the FBI’s investigation, including its reliance on the Steele dossier to obtain surveillance warrants on a Trump adviser.
Trump’s assertion on Truth Social claimed, “Obama himself manufactured the Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. Crooked Hillary, Sleepy Joe, and numerous others participated in this, THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY! Irrefutable EVIDENCE. A major threat to our Country!!!”
Gabbard's allegations extend to the claim that the intelligence assessment on Russian interference relied heavily on the Steele dossier. In her accompanying memo, she cites prior intelligence assessments indicating that foreign adversaries lack the capability to “covertly overturn the vote outcome.” Gabbard contends that the January 2017 assessment falsely claimed that Putin directed efforts to aid Trump's campaign.
However, congressional sources counter that the intelligence community's assessment regarding a Putin-directed campaign does not imply that the election outcome was altered. Interviews conducted with the analysts involved revealed that the Steele dossier did not inform the intelligence assessment. Although there was debate about whether to include the dossier as part of the report or as a separate annex, the CIA ultimately insisted it be excluded from the main analysis.
Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, criticized Gabbard's claims, stating that the panel’s investigation resulted in a “unanimous, bipartisan conclusion” confirming that Putin interfered in the 2016 election to benefit Trump. Warner added, “This is just another example of the DNI trying to cook the books, rewrite history, and erode trust in the intelligence agencies she’s supposed to be leading.”
As the debate continues over the implications of Gabbard's declassified documents, it remains clear that the interpretation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is still a deeply contentious issue, with significant ramifications for U.S. politics and the integrity of intelligence assessments.
