DNI Gabbard Sends Declassified Evidence to DOJ for Potential ‘Treasonous Conspiracy’ Prosecution

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has made headlines by sending declassified evidence to the Justice Department, alleging a “treasonous conspiracy” involving top U.S. intelligence officials. According to Gabbard, these officials politicized intelligence related to Russia and the 2016 election, aiming to undermine President Trump after his victory over Hillary Clinton. The declassified documents, she claims, reveal a deliberate attempt to overturn the will of the American people.

Gabbard’s office released a statement accusing President Obama and his national security team of manufacturing intelligence to stage what she called a coup against Trump. The documents sent to the DOJ are intended to hold accountable those involved in this alleged conspiracy. “Every person involved must be investigated and prosecuted,” Gabbard said, emphasizing that the American people deserve accountability.

In addition to Gabbard’s revelations, CIA Director John Ratcliffe had earlier sent a criminal referral to the FBI concerning possible criminal actions by former CIA Director John Brennan. This move is part of a broader effort to scrutinize the actions of top officials during the Obama administration. According to Just the News, the referral points to potential misconduct aimed at destabilizing Trump’s presidency.

The focus of Gabbard’s declassifications centers on the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) completed in December 2016. This assessment had concluded with “high confidence” that Russia aimed to help Trump win the 2016 election. However, a recent CIA review criticized the inclusion of the Steele Dossier in the ICA, calling it a violation of fundamental tradecraft principles.

The Steele Dossier, compiled by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, was initially funded by Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias. Despite being discredited, the dossier played a role in obtaining FISA warrants against a Trump campaign official. The dossier’s inclusion in the ICA has been a contentious point, as it was used to question the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency.

The declassification by Gabbard also brought to light a new assessment from September 2016, which did not express the same level of concern about Russian interference as the later ICA. This earlier assessment made no mention of Russia favoring Trump or opposing Clinton. It suggested that Russia’s actions were more about undermining the U.S. election process than picking a winner.

Emails from September 2019, obtained by Just the News, revealed that the Steele dossier’s role in the ICA was a shock to some intelligence officials. One official, who later became a whistleblower, expressed surprise that the dossier’s influence had been hidden from him. Gabbard’s office highlighted this as an example of the politicization of intelligence.

The recent CIA review criticized Brennan for allegedly supporting the inclusion of Steele’s dossier in the ICA, aligning with FBI officials who were seen as anti-Trump. Brennan, however, dismissed the investigation into his actions as politically motivated, telling MSNBC that it was a sad example of political bias in the intelligence community.

The December 2016 assessment, made public in January 2017, claimed with “high confidence” that Putin ordered a campaign to undermine faith in the U.S. democratic process and harm Clinton’s electability. It also stated that Russia preferred Trump. However, NSA head Admiral Mike Rogers expressed only “moderate confidence” in some of these conclusions, diverging from Brennan and Comey’s views.

Recent revelations have added fuel to ongoing debates about the integrity and objectivity of the intelligence community. These declassifications have further polarized opinions on the 2016 election interference narrative. Gabbard’s actions have sparked renewed calls for transparency and accountability in how intelligence is handled.

The release of these documents is likely to have significant implications for public trust in the intelligence community. As more details emerge, the question of how intelligence was manipulated or used politically remains a critical issue. The public is watching closely as these allegations unfold.

The broader context of these revelations ties back to long-standing concerns about the deep state’s influence on American politics. Many conservatives see this as confirmation of their suspicions about efforts to undermine Trump. The narrative of a “Russia hoax” continues to resonate with those who believe the 2016 election was unfairly challenged.

While Gabbard’s declassifications have been met with skepticism from some quarters, they underscore the need for vigilance in safeguarding democratic processes. The integrity of elections and the impartiality of intelligence agencies are crucial for public confidence. The ongoing fallout from these revelations will likely shape political discourse for the foreseeable future.

The events surrounding the 2016 election have left a lasting impact on American politics. The allegations of a conspiracy against Trump have fueled debates about transparency and accountability. As the investigation continues, the role of intelligence in political affairs remains under scrutiny.

The revelations are a reminder of the complex interplay between politics and intelligence. They highlight the challenges of maintaining objectivity in a highly polarized environment. The consequences of these actions will be felt for years to come as the nation grapples with issues of trust and governance.