Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is alleging that newly declassified documents show former President Barack Obama played a role in promoting the now-debunked narrative that Donald Trump conspired with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election.
Gabbard’s comments revive long-standing concerns that high-ranking Obama-era officials helped shape the “Russia collusion” story despite having early indications that the allegations lacked substance.
Back in July 2016, then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed President Obama on reports that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was seeking to smear Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin. Yet Obama, despite this knowledge, reportedly withheld relevant intelligence from the incoming Trump administration and ordered an intelligence assessment of Russia’s interference.
That assessment, which was rushed together in a matter of weeks, included the now-discredited Steele dossier — an opposition research file paid for by Democrats — while leaving out dissenting views from senior CIA officials who saw no evidence that Russia’s actions were meant to aid Trump.
The hasty nature of the report and its selective sourcing have led many to question whether the process was politically manipulated. “Judicial orders are judicial orders and need to be respected,” Justice Elena Kagan recently said on another matter — but the same could be said about the obligation to present intelligence with integrity.
Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, sent herself an email on her final day in office, claiming Obama had told FBI Director James Comey to conduct the Trump-Russia investigation “by the book.” Critics say the timing and wording of that message appeared crafted to shield Obama from scrutiny, not to document a legitimate concern.
The Obama administration has also faced criticism for not disciplining officials who allegedly ignored court orders and suppressed exculpatory intelligence.
The real-world consequences were profound. The collusion narrative consumed much of Trump’s presidency and helped fuel mistrust in U.S. institutions. Prominent Democrats, including Rep. Adam Schiff, confidently accused Trump of conspiring with Russia, even as no investigation — including Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe — found any evidence of such coordination.
Attorney General Pam Bondi has now launched a “strike force” to examine the newly declassified material. Gabbard, for her part, has accused Obama of “treason” — a charge echoed by Trump — though legal experts say prosecution is unlikely.
Even if criminal intent could be proven, Obama would almost certainly be shielded by presidential immunity for official acts under the Supreme Court’s recent Trump v. United States ruling. And the statute of limitations has already expired on most of the events in question.
Many observers suspect that the release of these documents is as much about shaping the historical narrative as pursuing justice. The reality, they say, is that intelligence and law enforcement officials acted with wide latitude — possibly even abuse — but left few direct fingerprints.
While indictments remain improbable, Gabbard and others insist that a full public reckoning is still vital. As one commentator put it, “The truth matters, even if it comes too late for justice.”
