A new trove of emails, text messages, and official government documents has emerged, painting a damning picture of coordination between former President Barack Obama’s administration and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign team in the infamous Russia collusion narrative targeting Donald Trump.
These newly declassified materials, released under the authority of Director of Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, confirm long-standing suspicions that the Russia collusion allegations were not the product of objective intelligence gathering but rather a politically motivated operation orchestrated at the highest levels of government and campaign strategy.
The implications of these revelations are nothing short of historic, shaking the foundations of trust in American institutions and reinforcing claims that Trump was deliberately undermined before he even set foot in the White House.
For years, Trump and his allies have insisted that the Russia collusion story was a deliberate hoax created to delegitimize his presidency and cripple his political future.
Now, with these disclosures, their assertions find the clearest substantiation yet. The declassified memo from 2016, which Gabbard authorized for release on Friday, directly contradicts the narrative that Russia played any significant role in swaying the 2016 election in Trump’s favor.
Addressed to then-President Obama, the memo explicitly states that “Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.”
While the memo does acknowledge attempts to target voter databases, such as the breach in Illinois and unsuccessful efforts elsewhere, it firmly concludes that these incidents never posed a credible threat to the integrity of the vote count.
“The targeting of infrastructure not used in casting ballots makes it highly unlikely it would have resulted in altering any state’s official vote,” the document states, adding that “criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes.”
Paul Sperry, a senior journalist with Real Clear Investigations, brought additional light to these developments, reporting on X (formerly Twitter) that sources informed him of text messages and emails demonstrating direct coordination between the Clinton campaign, Obama’s White House, the National Security Council, the State Department, and senior figures within the intelligence community.
According to Sperry’s sources, this coordination began in earnest in July 2016, precisely when the political pressure surrounding the election was reaching fever pitch.
The revelation that Clinton’s campaign aides were actively collaborating with the highest echelons of the federal government to tie Trump to Vladimir Putin adds fuel to allegations that the Russia hoax was a premeditated effort rather than an intelligence-based assessment.
These documents represent the most concrete evidence yet that senior Obama administration officials harbored serious doubts about any significant Russian influence in the 2016 election.
Nevertheless, they proceeded with aggressive investigations and public narratives suggesting otherwise, narratives that dominated media cycles for years and contributed to a pervasive atmosphere of distrust in the Trump administration.
The effect was immediate and lasting—crippling Trump’s ability to govern freely while also tarnishing his presidency with an enduring shadow of suspicion and scandal.
The implications for Obama-era officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey, are particularly grave. Brennan, according to current CIA Director John Ratcliffe, stands accused of deliberately keeping key aspects of the investigation secret from other intelligence agencies while aggressively pushing to include the now-debunked Steele dossier in official intelligence assessments.
The Steele dossier, compiled by ex-British spy Christopher Steele, falsely alleged deep connections between Trump and Russian operatives. Brennan’s maneuvers raise serious questions about whether he misled not only the intelligence community but also Congress, particularly in testimony where he denied the dossier’s influence on the community’s final assessment.
The prospect of Brennan having perjured himself during his congressional testimony is now under serious examination. Although the statute of limitations on perjury may have expired, legal experts suggest that Brennan could still face charges under statutes related to conspiracy to commit perjury or obstruction of justice, particularly if it can be demonstrated that he colluded with others to deceive lawmakers.
Brennan is not alone under this renewed scrutiny. James Comey is also in the crosshairs, not only for his role in launching the Crossfire Hurricane investigation but also for recent behavior that has raised eyebrows.
Earlier this year, Comey posted a cryptic message on social media that many interpreted as suggestive or even menacing. Sources within the intelligence community confirmed that the Secret Service visited Comey following that post, indicating that concerns about his behavior are being taken seriously at the federal level.
The explosive nature of these disclosures has prompted urgent discussions within the Department of Justice and the intelligence community about the potential for criminal investigations into these former officials.
A secret meeting held last weekend between DOJ officials and intelligence leaders resulted in the compilation of a comprehensive 200-page congressional audit detailing the abuses and potential crimes committed during the Crossfire Hurricane probe.
This audit is currently under review, with discussions underway about declassifying additional documents, including detailed notes and transcripts from Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation.
Durham’s work, which concluded in 2023, firmly established that the Trump-Russia connection was baseless, yet much of his findings remain classified or heavily redacted.
Director Tulsi Gabbard’s transparency push is seen as the first step in a broader initiative to reveal the full extent of the political manipulations that infected the nation’s intelligence apparatus.
Her decision to declassify these initial documents signals a commitment to accountability, but it also exposes the staggering depth of governmental overreach that characterized the Russia investigation era.
As one senior official candidly put it, “Obama ordered the ICA to set Trump up and knock him off balance before he could even get started. This was an influence operation far more consequential than anything Putin cooked up. Obama and Hillary schemed the op, and the CIA and FBI ran it.”
These words cut to the heart of what may be one of the most egregious abuses of power in modern American history—a deliberate and coordinated effort by a sitting president, a presidential candidate, and the highest levels of the intelligence community to manipulate the democratic process from within.
If further evidence corroborates these allegations, the political ramifications will be seismic. The integrity of the electoral process, already strained by years of division and distrust, will face even greater skepticism from the public, and the legacy of the Obama administration will be forever tainted by the specter of political espionage.
The investigation into these matters is still unfolding, but insiders suggest that more disclosures are imminent. Additional texts, emails, and classified memos are said to exist, documenting the conversations and agreements between the Clinton campaign and Obama officials in excruciating detail.
These documents could provide the necessary foundation for prosecutions, particularly if they reveal explicit intent to fabricate evidence or manipulate intelligence for political gain.
The public appetite for justice in this case is intense, especially among Trump supporters who have long argued that the system was rigged against their candidate from the start.
The potential appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate these revelations is being actively considered, with some in the administration arguing that only an independent authority can ensure a credible and impartial inquiry.
This unfolding scandal also underscores the critical need for reforms in intelligence oversight and the de-politicization of federal law enforcement agencies. The blending of political motives with the vast powers of intelligence gathering represents a threat not just to political opponents but to the very fabric of democratic governance.
As the nation awaits further developments, the enduring question remains: who will be held accountable, and will the American people ever get the full truth behind the Russia collusion hoax?
The coming months will likely see more declassifications, additional testimonies, and perhaps indictments. The truth, long obscured by layers of bureaucracy, secrecy, and partisan spin, is beginning to emerge.
Whether that truth leads to real accountability or becomes another chapter in Washington’s long history of scandals swept under the rug remains to be seen.
However, the evidence now in the public domain leaves little doubt: the Obama administration, Clinton’s campaign, and top intelligence officials were far more entangled in the creation of the Russia collusion narrative than they ever admitted, and the American people deserve nothing less than the complete, unvarnished truth.
