President Donald Trump’s best intelligence officer appeared Wednesday in the Information Room of the White House to level the accusations of leveling that no US spies chief. UU. He has made a former president or administration against a former president or administration.
The National Intelligence Director, Tulsi Gabbard, accused former President Barack Obama and his deputies of manufacturing a “false” intelligence analysis to show that Russia tried to help Donald Trump win the 2016 elections.
Obama and former administration officials have dismissed accusations as unfounded. “These strange accusations are ridiculous and a weak attempt of distraction,” Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said.
Democrats have accused the administration of trying to change the issue, since many of Trump’s supporters have demanded that the government publish more documents and information related to the case of the deceased financial Jeffrey Epstein.
The leaders of the country’s intelligence agencies have tended to maintain a low public profile and prevent explicitly partisan sides, much less suggest that a former president may have participated in a criminal conspiracy.
But Gabbard, serving a commander in chief who has enjoyed conspiracy theories and insisted that he was the victim of a partisan plot, ventured into unknown territory in his appearance of the White House.
“There is irrefutable evidence detailing how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an evaluation of the intelligence community that knew it was false,” said Gabbard, a former Democratic congressman.
Gabbard announced that he had declassified a five -year Republican report in the Chamber’s Intelligence Committee on the 2016 elections. The Republican report was emphatically rejected at that time by Democratic legislators in the panel that did not play any role in its creation.
The Republican report sought in doubt an evaluation of American intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections in an attempt to boost Trump’s candidacy. The Republican report found that most of the 2017 intelligence evaluation, which evaluated that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections to damage Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, was “sound.”
But he found in trouble with the discovery of the evaluation that Russian President Vladimir Putin “aspired” to help Trump win the 2016 elections. The Chamber report argued that the trial of intelligence agencies was based on a piece of human intelligence that was open to different interpretations. The report added that some CIA officers opposed to include the judgment on Putin’s intentions, arguing that the intelligence behind this was insufficient.
The Chamber Committee’s report also accused the CIA director at that time, John Brennan, to press to maintain the discovery about Putin in the evaluation.
Senate Bipartisan Report
Gabbard focused on the Republican Chamber report, but a bipartisan investigation of the Senate published the same year reached a different conclusion.
The 2020 Senate investigation, which covered three years, involved more than 200 witnesses and reviewed more than one million documents, supported the evaluation of the intelligence agencies that Russia had disseminated the online misinformation and leaked stolen electronic emails from the National Democratic Committee to undermine the perspectives of the candidacy and the Athenter of Clinton.
The current Secretary of State for Trump, Marco Rubio, was the interim president of the Intelligence Committee at that time. He and all the other members of the committee, both Republicans and Democrats, supported the reports of the report.
Gabbard’s decision to declassify an old Republican report of Congress is the last of a series of administration actions designed to reopen a politically polarized debate about what happened in the 2016 elections and if Trump benefited from the Moscow information war.
Satisfying any of the sides
The analysis of the intelligence community of the 2016 elections and the subsequent government investigations have never satisfied both sides of the US political division.
Intelligence agencies never issued a verdict on the possible impact of Russia’s influence operations on the electoral result, and an investigation by special lawyer Robert Mueller discovered that Russia intervened in 2016 to undermine Clinton. But he found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump team and the Kremlin, as some voices had suggested to the left.
At the same time, a special lawyer that Trump appointed in his first term, John Durham, disappointed activists on political law with his three -year investigation. Durham reported that he did not find a criminal conspiracy among the officials of the Obama Administration to manufacture intelligence on Russia’s operations and did not present charges against the CIA officers who supervised the 2017 evaluation.
The Democrats said that Gabbard’s decision to declassify the report of the Republican Chamber could put sensitive sources at Russia at risk.
“It seems that the Trump administration is willing to declassify anything and everything, except Epstein’s archives,” Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, Democratic Vice President of the Intelligence Committee, said in a statement. “The desperate and irresponsible liberation of the intelligence report of the partisan house puts at risk some of the most sensitive sources and methods that our intelligence community uses to spy on Russia.”
In his presentation at the White House, Gabbard publicly described the detailed Russian intelligence reports on Clinton, including accusations about their behavior and health that had not been verified.
Gabbard then criticized Obama administration officials for including an un verified file on Trump by a former British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele, in the 2017 intelligence evaluation. The file was included in the annex of the evaluation with a discharge of responsibility that said that his claims had not been verified.
The representative Jim Himes, D-Conn., Member of Classification of the Chamber Intelligence Committee, described the statements of Gabbard “a transparent effort to distract from bipartisan criticism about the refusal of the Trump administration to free Jeffrey Epstein’s archives.”
However, Himes added that Gabbard had crossed a new and dangerous rhetorical line. “As part of his effort to rewrite history,” he said in a statement, “he accused President Obama and other former officials to participate in a conspiracy to commit a betrayal, a claim as dangerous as unfounded.”
