According to recently declassified papers, former President Barack Obama helped spread the now-disproved theory that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election, according to Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence.
Gabbard’s remarks rekindle long-standing worries that senior Obama administration officials influenced the Russia connection narrative even though they had early warning signs that the accusations were unfounded.
President Obama was informed by then-CIA Director John Brennan in July 2016 on rumors that Hillary Clinton’s team was attempting to discredit Trump by linking him to Vladimir Putin. Obama allegedly ordered an intelligence assessment of Russia’s meddling and kept pertinent intelligence from the incoming Trump administration in spite of this knowledge.
The now-discredited Steele dossier, an opposition research file funded by Democrats, was included in that assessment, which was hastily put together in a couple of weeks. However, top CIA officials who saw no proof that Russia’s efforts were intended to help Trump were left out.
Many have questioned whether the process was politically controlled due to the report’s hurried pace and its selected sourcing. Justice Elena Kagan recently stated on another issue that judicial instructions are judicial orders and must be obeyed, but the same might be said for the duty to convey intelligence in an honest manner.
On her last day in office, Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, wrote an email to herself asserting that Obama had instructed FBI Director James Comey to carry out the Trump-Russia investigation according to the book. The timing and content of that communication, according to critics, seemed designed to avoid criticism of Obama rather than to address a valid worry.
The Obama administration has also been criticized for failing to discipline personnel who allegedly suppressed exculpatory intelligence and disregarded court orders.
There were serious repercussions in the real world. Trump’s presidency was dominated by the collusion narrative, which also contributed to the growing distrust of American institutions. Even while no investigation, including Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, revealed any evidence of such collaboration, prominent Democrats, like Rep. Adam Schiff, boldly accused Trump of plotting with Russia.
A strike squad has now been established by Attorney General Pam Bondi to review the recently disclosed documents. While legal experts say prosecution is unlikely, Gabbard has accused Obama of treason, an allegation that Trump has often echoed.
Obama would most likely be protected by presidential immunity for official activities under the recent Trump v. United States ruling by the Supreme Court, even if criminal intent could be demonstrated. Additionally, for the majority of the events in question, the statute of limitations has already passed.
The publishing of these records is suspected by many observers to be as much about influencing history as it is about seeking justice. They claim that the truth is that law enforcement and intelligence personnel behaved with little direct trace and with considerable discretion, possibly even abusing their position.
Even though prosecutions are unlikely, Gabbard and others maintain that a thorough public reckoning is still essential. Even if the truth is revealed too late for justice, it still matters, as one critic stated.
