DOJ Launches Strike Force to Investigate Declassified Russiagate Evidence Linking Obama-Era Officials to Conspiracy

In a dramatic escalation of efforts to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, the U.S. Department of Justice has announced the formation of a specialized “strike force” aimed at probing recently declassified intelligence documents that allegedly implicate former President Barack Obama and top members of his national security team.

The move follows weeks of growing pressure from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who released a trove of internal memos and assessments suggesting that senior officials under the Obama administration manipulated intelligence to create the illusion that then-candidate Donald Trump had coordinated with Russian operatives to influence the outcome of the 2016 election.

Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed the formation of the DOJ strike force Wednesday evening, describing it as a comprehensive initiative to pursue justice in light of what she called “deeply troubling disclosures.”

According to Bondi, the DOJ is now working closely with Gabbard’s office and will be launching a full-spectrum investigation to uncover the truth about the origins of what many now consider a discredited and politically driven investigation into Trump’s presidential campaign.

“The Department of Justice is proud to work with my friend Director Gabbard,” Bondi stated during a press briefing. “We are grateful for her partnership in delivering accountability for the American people. We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice.”

The newly formed strike force, according to DOJ insiders, will include prosecutors and investigators from the DOJ’s National Security Division as well as the Public Integrity Section.

The unit’s mandate is to examine all available evidence tied to the production and dissemination of the now infamous 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), which concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin “aspired” to help Trump win the presidency.

That assessment became the foundation for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and dominated the news cycle for years, casting a shadow over Trump’s first term.

However, declassified materials released in recent weeks have cast serious doubt on the objectivity and accuracy of that assessment. Chief among the concerns are revelations that the ICA’s production process was rushed, directed by political appointees rather than career intelligence officials, and driven by pressure from Obama-era leadership—most notably then-CIA Director John Brennan.

Gabbard’s office declassified and released a 2020 report prepared by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. That report detailed how Brennan pushed for the inclusion of the now-debunked Steele dossier—a document filled with unverified and widely discredited allegations about Trump—despite concerns raised by career CIA officers about its reliability.

According to the report, the ICA was constructed by just five CIA analysts working under immense pressure, and its conclusions were not properly coordinated across the intelligence community, violating fundamental tradecraft standards.

“The ICA misrepresented these reports as reliable, without mentioning their significant underlying flaws,” the report stated. One portion of the document reveals that a single vague sentence from one of the substandard intelligence reports formed the backbone of the assessment’s claim that Putin favored Trump over Clinton.

In response to this, Gabbard has initiated a criminal referral to the DOJ and the FBI, citing the clear evidence of intelligence politicization and misuse.

“The American people were subjected to a years-long narrative built on lies and manufactured intelligence,” Gabbard said. “Those who abused their power must be held to account—no matter how high their rank or how powerful their office.”

Earlier this month, CIA Director John Ratcliffe also submitted a criminal referral to the FBI targeting Brennan, citing procedural anomalies and breaches of intelligence protocols in the ICA’s production.

Ratcliffe’s “lessons learned” review of the assessment pointed to serious deviations from standard practice, including a rushed timeline and politically influenced content.

FBI Director Kash Patel, a longtime Trump ally and former senior intelligence advisor, has reportedly accepted the referral and launched parallel criminal investigations into both Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey.

Patel’s involvement marks a significant moment in the case, as he brings intimate knowledge of the previous administration’s efforts to investigate the Trump campaign.

Sources familiar with the DOJ’s efforts say the investigations are wide-ranging and consider Brennan and Comey’s actions part of a broader conspiracy.

“The meetings, the memos, the pressure to include discredited information—it all paints a picture of intentional deception,” one official told Fox News Digital. “This was not just poor judgment. This looks like a conspiracy to weaponize the intelligence community for political gain.”

The formation of the DOJ strike force is the most aggressive federal move yet to pursue criminal accountability related to the Trump-Russia probe’s origins.

Its task, according to DOJ insiders, will be to examine every aspect of how intelligence was collected, interpreted, and disseminated during the late stages of the Obama administration and the transition to President Trump’s first term.

The team is expected to look at several key figures, including John Brennan, James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and potentially even President Obama himself.

Legal experts say the recent Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States, which granted broad immunity to presidents for their “official acts,” may complicate efforts to prosecute Obama, but not necessarily his subordinates.

In fact, Attorney General Bondi hinted that the strike force’s efforts would not be limited by rank or reputation. “This is not about politics. It’s about the law,” Bondi stated.

“If evidence emerges that individuals—regardless of office—violated their oaths and used federal power to undermine an election and target a political opponent, they will be held accountable.”

Gabbard echoed that sentiment, stating, “Our institutions only survive when the people believe in their fairness. We cannot allow political appointees to rewrite the rules of national security in service of a partisan agenda.”

The political stakes are enormous. Trump supporters have long argued that the Russia collusion narrative was a smokescreen designed to delegitimize a populist outsider presidency.

Critics of Gabbard and Bondi, however, see the investigation as an attempt to relitigate past grievances and distract from current controversies. Progressive lawmakers like Rep. Adam Schiff have condemned the declassifications as “reckless” and accused the Trump administration of using the DOJ as a political weapon.

But the DOJ insists that the evidence now made public demands an official review, especially in light of the fact that many of the narratives promoted in the media and supported by the intelligence community have since collapsed under scrutiny.

Among the strike force’s priorities will be determining whether Brennan and others knowingly misled both Congress and the public by supporting judgments that lacked evidentiary support. The team is expected to review internal CIA emails, briefing notes, and inter-agency communications during the 2016–2017 transition period.

Another avenue of investigation involves the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which funded the Steele dossier through Fusion GPS. The DOJ will examine whether the dossier was knowingly promoted by intelligence officials despite its political origins and factual flaws.

This is not the first time the Justice Department has examined these issues. Special Counsel John Durham’s lengthy investigation into the Russia probe’s origins concluded in 2023 with limited criminal results, though it uncovered serious irregularities in how the investigation into Trump was launched and conducted.

The new strike force, however, has access to newly declassified documents that Durham did not, and is reportedly operating with greater prosecutorial authority.

Whether this new chapter in the ongoing saga of Russiagate results in indictments remains to be seen. But what is clear is that the Justice Department, now led by Trump-aligned figures, is signaling that it views the alleged misconduct surrounding the ICA not just as a historical curiosity—but as an unresolved breach of public trust requiring legal consequences.

As Gabbard said in closing, “This is not about vengeance. It’s about justice. And the American people deserve nothing less.”