Two Questions !
- Bob O'Brien
- Aug 13, 2025
- 5 min read
Last month, the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, declassified a series of documents, claiming that "There is irrefutable evidence that detail how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false. They knew it would promote this contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, selling it to the American people as though it were true.”
Tulsi was referring to the released intelligence community assessment commissioned by President Barack Obama in December 2016 (after Trump had won), which alleged that Russia had interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump. There was also released material that showed evidence of a secret plan by the Clinton campaign to use the FBI and media to spread a false claim that Donald Trump was a Russian asset. The purpose was to distract attention from her reckless handling of classified materials when she was Secretary of State.
The Democratic politicians in Washington have reacted angrily, claiming that that there was nothing to see here, and that she was being “reckless” - willing to risk classified sources, betray our allies, and politicize the very intelligence she has been entrusted to protect.” We could not disagree more. The CIA and FBI need more transparency, for they have many times in the past abused their power and spied upon ordinary American citizens. As one of many pieces of evidence, we cite the fact that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court found in May 2023, that the FBI improperly searched for information in a U.S. database of foreign intelligence 278,000 times over several years. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act allows the FBI to search communications of foreigners abroad including their conversations with Americans without warrants.
But more to the point, we have two questions to those, like Former CIA Director John Brennan, who continually claimed that, after Trump won in 2016, that Trump was "a Russian asset, and in the pocket of Putin.”
Question #1: Why in the world would Putin prefer Trump over to the Democrats on the Obama/Biden team? It just does not make any sense. Remember that the Russians invaded Crimea in 2014 when Obama was President and also began arming separatists in eastern Ukraine with tanks, armored vehicles and rocket launchers. How did the Obama Administration respond? They refused to provide Ukraine with lethal weapons in 2014 to fight Russian-backed separatists. As for the Crimea, Obama offered nothing more than words of protest and mild sanctions. Why? In his own words, because “Crimea was full of Russian speakers, and there was some sympathy to the view that Russia was representing its interest.”
Contrast that to the view of Republican nominee in 2016, Donald Trump, who was urging European nations to sharply increase their military spending to defend against any attack from Russia. Back then, it seems obvious to us that Putin should have preferred Democrats who reacted mildly to his military aggression instead of someone like Trump who vociferously argued for more defense spending from the Europeans.
Our second question is: Why didn’t they? The declassified documents reveal that in 2016, Putin had information from hacked DNC sources that detailed how Clinton was allegedly suffering from “intensified psycho-emotional problems, including uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression and cheerfulness;” that she was "allegedly" on a daily regimen of "heavy tranquilizers,” that Clinton was placed on the drugs out of her deep fear of losing the election to Trump, as she was “obsessed with a thirst for power.” The documents also alleged that there was evidence that Clinton suffered from dangerous health issues, including type 2 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ischemic heart disease, and deep vein thrombosis. The report stated that “then-President Barack Obama and other Democratic party leaders found the state of Clinton’s health “extraordinarily alarming” and felt it could have a “serious negative impact” on the likelihood of her winning the election.
(As an aside, we find this absurdly funny. The Presidential nominations of both Clinton and Biden show that the Democratic Party nominated politicians that it knew were both physically and/or mentally unfit for office. It also shows that while knowing of the physical and mental decline of Clinton and Biden, powerful Democrats refused to come clean with the American people and continued to support people who, health-wise, never ever should have come close to the power of the Presidency.)
However, the bigger point Is that if Putin really wanted Trump to win, all he had to do was release the hacked material showing Hillary’s physical and mental decline. Look at what happened to Biden in 2024, when the American people saw how mentally feeble he was in the famous debate with Trump. His popularity fell off the cliff, and he was abandoned by the Democrats. The same thing would have happened to Hillary if the hacked information about her health was known. Releasing that information would have been the easiest way for Putin to help Trump win; yet he didn’t. If he really wanted Trump to win, he would have. Why didn’t he?
Some long-time, non-political, traditional liberal Democrats who have studied the released material have come to conclusions that should concern all Americans, regardless of political affiliation. Professor Jonathan Turley says: “with this material, the public is finally seeing how officials and reporters set into motion what may be the greatest hoax ever perpetrated in American politics. There never was a Russian collusion conspiracy.” Independent journalists Matt Taibbi says: "There’s no doubt. Hillary Clinton got in a jam, and the FBI, CIA, and the Obama White House got her out of it by setting Trump up. That’s it. It was a cover-up, plain and simple.”
Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard certainly agrees. She has made a criminal referral to the Justice Department, and Attorney General Pam Bondi has reacted by directing an unnamed U.S. Federal prosecutor to take evidence to a grand jury. It’s much too early to know what will happen next, but we will make a guess anyway. I suspect that at a minimum, former FBI Director James Comey, former Director of Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan will all be criminally indicted. The cruel irony (for them anyway) is that they will all be indicted in a state that overwhelmingly voted for President Trump, much in the same way former President Trump was indicted in states that overwhelmingly voted Democratic. I believe they will be found guilty too, just like Trump was found guilty.
For those of us who believe that the FBI and CIA have become too corrupt and powerful, this will be great fun to watch!
Check out the links below!
Comments