In a stunning escalation of political warfare between current President Donald Trump and his predecessor, former President Barack Obama has broken his silence to deny explosive allegations that he led a covert effort to initiate a baseless investigation into Trump’s 2016 campaign—a scandal Trump now openly describes as “treason.”
The exchange follows the release of newly declassified documents that cast serious doubt on the legitimacy of the Russia collusion probe and suggest it may have been orchestrated at the highest levels of the outgoing Obama administration.
Speaking Tuesday from the White House, President Trump accused Obama of being the "ringleader" of the effort to green-light a politically motivated intelligence operation that ultimately led to a multi-year investigation, significantly hampered his presidency, and damaged trust in American democratic institutions.
“Based on what I read, and I read pretty much what you read, it would be President Obama. He started it,” Trump said. “And Biden was there with him and Comey was there and Clapper, the whole group was there. Brennan. They were all there in a room, right here, this was the room.”
Then, turning up the volume, Trump declared: “If you look at those papers, they have him stone-cold and it was President Obama. It wasn’t lots of people all over the place, it was them, too. But the leader of the gang was President Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. Have you heard of him?”
“He’s guilty, it’s not a question,” the president continued. “This was treason. This was every word you can think of.”
The president’s remarks came just hours after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified a trove of intelligence documents that, according to her, reveal “overwhelming evidence” that the Obama administration manufactured the Russian collusion hoax to damage Trump politically after his upset victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The documents include internal CIA memos, briefings, and emails, some of which show direct communications with then-President Obama.
The revelations flatly contradict sworn congressional testimony given by former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey.
Both men had insisted that the so-called Steele Dossier—a document now widely discredited—was not the foundation of the Russia investigation. They also claimed that Russian interference was both significant and successful in its intent to aid Trump.
But the declassified documents say otherwise.
According to one memo, the authors explicitly told then-President Obama that their analysis concluded “Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent U.S. election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.”
Another section reads, “Criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes.”
Despite these private assessments, Obama’s intelligence leadership pressed forward with a politically explosive public narrative, implying that Russia had materially interfered in the election to favor Trump—a narrative that fueled public outrage, gave rise to the Mueller investigation, and engulfed the Trump administration in controversy for nearly three years.
In response to Trump’s fiery accusations, former President Obama issued a rare public statement—delivered through his longtime spokesman Patrick Rodenbush—denying any wrongdoing and rejecting the conclusions drawn from the newly declassified materials.
“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” Rodenbush said. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one.”
“These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” the statement continued. “Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.”
He also cited a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee—chaired at the time by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)—which affirmed that Russia did engage in influence operations, though it concluded that no actual votes were changed or ballots tampered with.
Still, the growing body of evidence is hard to ignore. Gabbard, in a high-profile Fox News interview, laid out her findings and placed the blame squarely on Obama and his senior security officials, including Brennan, Comey, Clapper, and then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice.
“It lays out, these over 100 documents that I declassified and released, spells out in great detail exactly what happens when you have some of the most powerful people in our country directly leading at the helm, President Obama and his senior-most national security cabinet... essentially making a very intentional decision to create this manufactured, politicized piece of intelligence with the objective of subverting the will of the American people,” Gabbard stated.
According to Gabbard, the intelligence community knew from the beginning that Russia had little impact on the 2016 results and was, in fact, more inclined to see a Clinton victory—believing they had damaging information on her that could be used for leverage post-election. This flies in the face of the official story that the Kremlin’s cyber activities were part of a coordinated effort to elect Trump.
With Trump’s direct accusations now backed by newly uncovered documents, the stakes have risen significantly. An FBI probe has reportedly been reopened to assess whether Brennan, Comey, or other officials may have misled Congress under oath. Legal experts note that perjury charges could be on the table if it is proven that any statements made in official testimony contradicted what the intelligence community knew internally.
Moreover, Trump’s use of the term “treason” is unlikely to fade anytime soon. While legal scholars caution that the term has a very specific definition under U.S. law—requiring levying war against the United States or aiding its enemies—the political ramifications are vast.
For Trump’s supporters, the word encapsulates what they’ve long suspected: that deep-state actors within the Obama administration actively sought to sabotage his presidency before it began.
The scandal has now eclipsed much of the daily political news cycle, with even traditionally skeptical outlets beginning to question the timeline and the veracity of Obama-era intelligence procedures. The focus has also begun to shift to Vice President Joe Biden, who was reportedly present during several key meetings where the intelligence was discussed.
White House insiders suggest that President Trump may push for a formal investigation into Obama’s role, though others caution that the Justice Department would need to meet an extremely high threshold to pursue charges against a former president.
Still, congressional Republicans are wasting no time. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) announced that the committee will hold a series of hearings to review the new documents and take testimony from current and former officials.
“If this was a political hit job carried out at the highest levels of the U.S. government to undermine a duly elected president, then we owe the American people full transparency and accountability,” Comer said in a statement.
Meanwhile, progressive Democrats have accused Trump and Gabbard of engaging in political theater, attempting to rewrite history for electoral advantage.
They argue that the Mueller investigation—despite its limitations—did yield evidence of Russian attempts to sow discord and establish contact with Trump campaign figures, even if it didn’t result in conspiracy charges.
But the damage may already be done. With Trump on the campaign trail, the Russia hoax is once again front and center, not as a defensive burden but as a rallying cry. “They didn’t just spy on my campaign,” Trump declared Tuesday, “they created the story to justify the spying. And now we know who was behind it.”
Whether the controversy leads to indictments, public apologies, or further political polarization remains to be seen. What is certain, however, is that the long shadow of 2016 still hangs heavily over Washington—and President Trump appears determined to make sure the truth, as he sees it, comes out.
