In a stunning new revelation, Tulsi Gabbard, U.S. Congresswoman and Director of National Intelligence, has once again raised questions about the 2016 presidential election and the role of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the alleged Russian interference.
During a recent interview with the New York Post, Gabbard shared her belief that Russia had expected Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election and had not acted in a way that would suggest they were aiming to help Donald Trump win.
These claims have reignited the "Russiagate" controversy, stirring up debates over the legitimacy of the Russian interference narrative and the political motivations behind it.
Gabbard’s statements come amidst increasing scrutiny of the intelligence surrounding Russian involvement in the 2016 election and its lasting consequences.
She questioned why the Kremlin would hold back sensitive information about Clinton's health and behavior, only to release it after the election had concluded.
Her remarks have raised significant questions about the true nature of the Russian government’s actions and whether there was a political agenda behind the timing of their release of certain documents.
In the interview, Gabbard expressed her view that Russia, contrary to the prevailing narrative, had no direct interest in helping Donald Trump secure the presidency.
She cited evidence from the House Intelligence Committee’s 2020 report, which revealed that Russia might have had intelligence on Clinton’s physical and emotional state during the campaign.
The report suggested that Clinton was using "heavy tranquilizers" to manage her emotional struggles, including "uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and cheerfulness."
Despite the damning nature of this information, it was reportedly withheld from the public, and Gabbard questioned why it was not released during the campaign, especially if Russia's goal was to help Trump win.
“If Russia aspired to help Trump get elected, why wouldn’t they release the most damaging information about Clinton to aid his cause?” Gabbard questioned in the interview.
She argued that Russia’s delay in releasing information about Clinton’s mental and physical health was evidence that the Kremlin had expected Clinton to win.
Instead of acting with a clear intention to disrupt the election in favor of Trump, Gabbard proposed that Russia’s actions were motivated by a desire to weaken Clinton, but not necessarily to help Trump ascend to the presidency.
Gabbard suggested that the documents detailing Clinton’s health were intentionally withheld because they would have been more politically useful if released closer to Clinton’s potential inauguration.
She posited that the timing of these releases was strategic, intending to undermine Clinton once she had secured the presidency. According to Gabbard, Russia’s strategy shifted based on Clinton’s political trajectory, and this approach contradicted the widely accepted narrative that Russia was actively working to elect Donald Trump.
Gabbard’s comments, particularly her claim that Russia’s interference was part of a broader strategy to subvert American democracy, have added fuel to the fire of the “Russiagate” conspiracy theory.
This ongoing investigation has been plagued with controversy, from the original allegations of Russian interference to the handling of information about the role of U.S. political figures in these events.
Gabbard has long been outspoken about the need for transparency in the investigation and has called for accountability from those involved in spreading what she perceives as a false narrative.
In July, Gabbard made waves by submitting criminal referrals to the Department of Justice (DOJ), asserting that the evidence she uncovered from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) pointed to a deliberate conspiracy to undermine President Donald Trump’s candidacy in 2016.
According to Gabbard, the investigation had uncovered proof that individuals within the government sought to sabotage Trump’s campaign and later his presidency, creating a false narrative of Russian collusion that led to years of political turmoil.
“President Obama’s covert mission was essentially to subvert the will of the American people,” Gabbard stated in a White House press briefing. She claimed that the false narratives surrounding Trump’s ties to Russia had been constructed with the goal of delegitimizing his election and ultimately creating what she referred to as a “yearslong coup” to challenge his presidency.
Gabbard’s accusations have prompted a new round of investigations and heightened scrutiny of those involved in promoting the Russiagate theory. These developments have led to a growing movement within the Republican Party to pursue criminal charges and hold accountable those believed to have perpetuated false information about Russian interference in the election.
In the wake of Gabbard’s referrals to the DOJ, Fox News reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi had signed an order directing a federal prosecutor to present evidence before a grand jury regarding a potential criminal conspiracy surrounding the Russiagate investigation.
This move signals that the DOJ is taking Gabbard’s findings seriously and is exploring the possibility of criminal charges against those responsible for allegedly fabricating or misrepresenting the scope of Russian interference in the election.
Sources familiar with the investigation confirmed that Bondi viewed the evidence as cause for deep concern and that further investigation into potential bribery or public corruption offenses may be warranted.
Gabbard’s referrals have certainly added a new layer to the ongoing investigation, bringing fresh allegations of political manipulation and conspiracy to the forefront of the national discourse.
The grand jury investigation could have significant political ramifications, particularly if it leads to criminal charges against individuals tied to the previous administration or high-ranking members of the intelligence community.
The DOJ’s investigation will likely focus on whether there was a coordinated effort to undermine Trump’s candidacy and presidency, and whether this effort involved improper use of government resources or political influence to create a false narrative.
The role of the media in shaping public opinion about Russiagate cannot be overlooked. Throughout the investigation, the media has been a key player in pushing the narrative of Russian interference, often focusing on sensational details of the alleged collusion between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin.
Gabbard has been vocal in her criticism of the media’s handling of the Russiagate story, accusing outlets of spreading misinformation and fueling a political witch hunt.
In particular, Gabbard has pointed to the way the media presented the findings of the House Intelligence Committee’s report, which detailed Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 election.
She argued that the report’s findings were selectively presented to fit a narrative that painted Trump as complicit in Russian interference, while downplaying the possibility that key players within the U.S. government had a vested interest in undermining Trump’s presidency.
The media’s role in shaping the public’s perception of the Russiagate investigation has been the subject of considerable debate. For many, the media’s coverage has been a driving force behind the narrative of Russian collusion, even in the absence of concrete evidence.
Gabbard’s push for transparency and her calls for accountability from those involved in perpetuating the Russiagate story are part of a broader effort to hold the media and political figures accountable for their role in what she sees as a manufactured political crisis.
The fallout from the Russiagate scandal continues to reverberate through American politics. As the investigation continues, questions about the role of the intelligence community, the media, and political figures in perpetuating the narrative of Russian interference will likely remain central to the debate.
Gabbard’s claims about the intentional withholding of damaging information about Hillary Clinton add a new layer of complexity to an already tangled web of political intrigue.
For many, Gabbard’s recent revelations serve as a reminder of the deep divisions within the U.S. political system and the extent to which political figures have been willing to go to maintain power and influence.
Whether or not Gabbard’s accusations will lead to criminal charges or further investigations remains to be seen, but her push for accountability and transparency has already had a significant impact on the national conversation.
As the investigation into the Russiagate scandal continues to unfold, the nation remains divided over the true extent of Russian interference in the 2016 election and the role of U.S. political figures in fostering or hindering the narrative.
Tulsi Gabbard’s outspoken criticism and calls for accountability have added a new dimension to the ongoing controversy, and her efforts to uncover the truth about the origins of the Russiagate investigation may yet have lasting implications for American politics.
Whether or not criminal charges are brought against those involved in the scandal, Gabbard’s push for transparency has already ignited a new conversation about the power of the media, the intelligence community, and political figures in shaping the narrative of national security and foreign interference.
As the investigation continues, the truth may yet come to light, revealing the full scope of the conspiracy and its impact on the future of American democracy.
