News
Tulsi Gabbard’s Explosive Revelations on Russia Collusion Hoax Shake Washington
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard ignited intense debate in Washington after she released a collection of declassified files. Gabbard claims these documents reveal strong proof that former President Barack Obama and senior intelligence officials plotted to create the story of Russian intervention in the 2016 election.
According to her, this effort aimed to cast doubt on Donald Trump’s win and presidency. These claims sparked sharp arguments, with Democrats and mainstream outlets downplaying the release, while some legal analysts say top Obama-era officials could face serious legal trouble.
Gabbard’s Statement: Claims of a Planned Hoax
On July 19, 2025, Tulsi Gabbard, once a Democratic congresswoman who is now affiliated with Trump’s Republican circle, declassified over 100 documents. She argues these records show an intentional plan by the Obama administration to push an unfounded story about Russia swinging the 2016 election in Trump’s favour.
Speaking at the White House, Gabbard described the plot as an effort to overturn the voters’ choice. “Our findings today show there was a conspiracy at the highest levels in 2016,” she said, naming Obama, James Clapper, John Brennan, James Comey, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, and Andrew McCabe as key participants.
The released records, which include emails and memos, along with a long-hidden September 2020 House Intelligence Committee report, suggest Obama ordered his national security staff to publish a misleading intelligence assessment on January 6, 2017. This report claimed Moscow worked to help Trump.
Gabbard’s team points to other intelligence, gathered weeks before, which stated Russia lacked both the intent and means to hack U.S. voting systems. In one cited exchange, Clapper’s assistant emails intelligence chiefs after a December 9, 2016, National Security Council meeting, instructing them to draft a new assessment “at the President’s request,” outlining “methods Moscow used to influence the 2016 election.”
Gabbard claims Obama and his advisers knowingly relied on weak sources, such as the controversial Steele dossier, to build the collusion narrative. These claims were then leaked to reporters from major outlets such as The Washington Post, she says, even though U.S. agencies didn’t agree before the election that Russia had helped Trump. “This transcends party lines,” Gabbard told Fox News. “Confidence in our democracy is at stake.”
Journalists Analyze the Fallout: Taibbi, Kelly, O’Reilly Respond
After Gabbard released the documents, several well-known journalists pored over them and spoke out. Matt Taibbi, who gained attention for reporting on the Twitter Files, said on The Megyn Kelly Show that the December 2016 White House meeting appeared to be the key moment.
According to Taibbi, after that meeting with Obama, Clapper, Brennan, Rice and others, the intelligence community made a sharp turn in its view of Russian activities. He noted, using the 2020 House report as evidence, that the reassessment came after Obama’s “unusual” instructions, especially from Brennan.
Megyn Kelly, now a podcaster after her time with Fox News, called Gabbard’s move a potential major scandal. On her podcast, Kelly and Taibbi discussed how the Steele dossier, paid for by the Clinton campaign and filled with shaky claims, became part of the intelligence community’s official 2017 assessment.
Kelly highlighted that some intelligence insiders thought the dossier was more online gossip than hard fact, yet high-profile officials like Brennan, Comey, and McCabe pushed for it to be included.
Bill O’Reilly, a leading conservative commentator and 40-year news veteran, said on his show No Spin News that the declassified documents show a misuse of power by the Obama administration. O’Reilly argued Gabbard is exposing what Trump’s supporters suspected for years: that the Russia investigation was politically driven.
He praised Gabbard for her boldness and her journey from outsider Democrat to a close Trump ally, saying, “She is revealing what others in her position have not dared to.”
Democratic and Media Pushback
Democratic lawmakers and media outlets have rejected Gabbard’s accusations, calling them a ploy and based on misleading information. Congressman Jim Himes, the leading Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, dismissed the claims as “baseless” and accused Gabbard of recycling old conspiracy theories to distract from other issues, including the Trump team’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein files.
Senator Mark Warner, a top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, referenced a 2020 bipartisan Senate report which concluded Russia did try to influence the 2016 election. “If there was a conspiracy under Obama, we would have found it,” he said on X, formerly Twitter, labelling Gabbard’s actions as an effort to muddy the historical record and undermine public trust in the intelligence community.
Major news brands, including CNN and The Washington Post, have pushed back on Gabbard’s account, too. The Washington Post published an article arguing her reading of the 2017 intelligence assessment is wrong, since the assessment focused on Russian propaganda efforts, not vote hacking.
The article pointed to four investigations, including reports from Robert Mueller and the 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee, that backed the assessment’s main conclusions. CNN noted that Gabbard’s decision to declassify a redacted intelligence report, which Trump never released, could put sensitive information at risk, setting off warnings from former officials.
Obama’s spokesperson called the claims “ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” and reminded the media that Obama ordered the Russia probe in 2016 to help protect U.S. voting systems. Some critics say Gabbard is trying to rebuild her reputation with Trump, who once questioned her commitment after disputes on Iran.
Legal Pressure on Obama-Era Officials
Since the documents became public, the Justice Department confirmed it has started a review. James Clapper, Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence, is reportedly working with lawyers to address the possible investigation. Clapper, who oversaw the 2017 intelligence assessment, denied any wrongdoing, calling the accusations “false and baseless” in a CNN interview.
Observers are watching John Brennan, Obama’s CIA director, who some legal analysts believe is at risk of prosecution. Lawyer Mike Davis told The Glenn Beck Program he thinks Gabbard’s evidence could justify charges against Brennan, Clapper, and others for misleading Congress. Davis said, “If they kept the coverup going after they left office, they can’t hide behind presidential immunity.”
The Justice Department is investigating Brennan and James Comey, the former FBI director, following a referral from current CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who criticized how the 2017 assessment was put together.
Comey remains a focus of attention, since the documents suggest he strongly pushed for the Steele dossier to be included in the 2017 report, even while knowing its reliability was questionable. According to Gabbard’s office, both Comey and McCabe admitted, in transcripts from House hearings, that there was no hard evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
Legal experts warn that any cases could be affected by the statute of limitations and recent Supreme Court rulings on presidential immunity.
The Justice Department has set up a task force to review Gabbard’s disclosures. This move may lead to grand jury appearances by Adam Schiff, Susan Rice, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, and possibly Obama. Schiff, a key figure during the House’s Russia probe, is accused of continuing the collusion story.
Susan Rice is named as a central attendee at the December 2016 meeting described in the documents. While officials are keeping details private, the formation of this group suggests rising stakes.
Wider Impact on U.S. Politics
Gabbard’s actions have reopened old arguments about the Russia probe, an issue that shaped Trump’s first term. Her supporters, including Trump, see her disclosures as solid proof that the investigation into his campaign was never genuine.
Trump has used social media to share images implying Obama and others should be jailed, and called the documents “rock-solid evidence” of major wrongdoing.
On the other side, critics warn that releasing such material could reveal sensitive sources or methods, risking national security. Democrats argue this renewed focus on 2016 takes away from ongoing issues, like the Epstein case or pressing foreign affairs.
“The Trump administration seems willing to release anything except the Epstein files,” Senator Warner joked.
Gabbard herself has become a symbol of change, shifting from a Democratic presidential hopeful to a top Trump appointee. Her history, including previous comments sympathetic to some Russian views, made her nomination as Director of National Intelligence controversial. Yet Trump has praised her recent work, describing her as a standout at a recent Republican gathering.
Conclusion
Tulsi Gabbard’s document release has returned the Russia collusion story to centre stage. Her supporters, including well-known journalists, regard the documents as clear proof of long-suspected misconduct at the highest levels of government.
Meanwhile, Democrats and most media voices reject the claims as a political distortion of well-established facts. What happens next in the legal arena is still unclear, but the Justice Department’s new task force could shape how history remembers the Obama administration.
Washington now faces a high-stakes fight over facts, accountability, and trust in the country’s institutions.
Related News:
Tulsi Gabbard DC Sparks Firestorm
News
Pentagon Readies 1500 Soldiers for Deployment in Minnesota
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Minnesota is under intense pressure after the Pentagon directed about 1,500 active-duty troops based in Alaska to get ready for a possible move to the state. The order comes as protests spread in response to a large federal immigration enforcement effort led by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The operation has brought thousands of federal agents into Minneapolis and nearby communities for raids and related actions.
The troops are mainly from the Army’s 11th Airborne Division, stationed at Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks, Alaska. They are trained for extreme cold and harsh conditions. Defense officials, speaking on background, said the units are on a “prepare-to-deploy” posture. They stressed that no final call has been made to send them to Minnesota.
The move follows repeated warnings from President Donald Trump that he may invoke the rarely used Insurrection Act, a 19th-century law that can allow active-duty forces to be used in domestic law enforcement, if state and local leaders can’t control protests that have sometimes slowed or blocked federal agents.
The current unrest began in early January after an ICE officer fatally shot Renee Nicole Good, 37, during an encounter in Minneapolis. The death sparked immediate anger. Demonstrations quickly expanded into larger protests aimed at ICE sites, hotels used by federal teams, and staging areas.
Many protesters, including people from Somali, Hmong, and Mexican communities hit hard by the raids, say federal agents have used aggressive tactics. They point to tear gas and pepper balls during clashes as proof that the response has gone too far.
As tensions rose, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz activated the Minnesota National Guard over the weekend to support local law enforcement and emergency management. Guard members have not yet been sent into street operations.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has repeatedly described the arrival of about 3,000 ICE and Border Patrol agents as an “occupying force” that has “invaded” the city. He has warned that sending in the military would escalate the situation and cross constitutional lines.
DOJ Opens Inquiry Into Walz and Frey
The crisis has also moved into the legal arena. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a criminal investigation into Governor Walz and Mayor Frey over allegations they worked together to obstruct federal immigration enforcement.
Sources familiar with the case, reported by outlets including CBS News, CNN, and The New York Times, say the inquiry is tied to public comments by the two Democratic leaders. In those statements, they urged residents to protest peacefully, record ICE activity, and push back against what they called unlawful raids.
Federal officials, including Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, have accused Walz and Frey of “encouraging violence” and helping create unrest that interferes with federal officers. That kind of conduct can be charged as a felony under conspiracy-related statutes. A grand jury is also said to have issued subpoenas, although neither Walz nor Frey had confirmed receiving formal notice as of late last week.
Both leaders have responded sharply. Walz called the investigation a “dangerous, authoritarian tactic,” saying it uses the justice system to punish political opponents. Frey described it as “an obvious attempt to intimidate” him for speaking out in defense of Minneapolis residents and local public safety officials amid what he called federal “chaos and danger.” Frey said he will comply if subpoenaed and insists he and Walz “have done nothing wrong.”
The DOJ step adds fuel to a growing federal-state standoff. Critics see it as payback against Democratic leaders who have challenged the Trump administration’s mass deportation push. Minnesota has also filed a lawsuit against the federal government, arguing the enforcement actions violate state authority under the Tenth Amendment.
What This Could Mean for Minnesota
The Pentagon Minnesota deployment preparation highlights just how serious this moment has become. Using active-duty troops inside the United States is rare and highly contested. It would also bring fresh comparisons to past domestic deployments, including the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Civil rights groups warn that troop involvement could raise the risk of excessive force and push the protests toward even more confrontation.
As of January 19, 2026, demonstrations continue in subzero weather. Rival rallies have appeared, and security is heavier around federal buildings and operational sites. The White House has signaled it will keep moving forward with Operation Metro Surge, the name tied to the Minneapolis-focused enforcement effort.
Whether the standby order turns into an actual deployment may depend on what happens next on the streets, including any spike in violence or a drop in protests through talks and cooling tensions. For now, Minnesota remains a central front in the wider fight over immigration enforcement, federal power, and the limits of protest during a deeply divided time.
The days ahead will keep attention on civil rights, executive authority, and the military’s role at home. Watchers across the country are also tracking any new federal actions, including a possible Insurrection Act Trump Minnesota move tied to the ongoing Minneapolis immigration raids protests 2026.
Related News:
Trump Threatens Minnesota With Insurrection Act Over ICE Protests
News
Trump Positions U.S. Military Assets Closer to Iran Amid Deadly Crackdown
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Iran’s nationwide protests have entered a third week, and President Donald Trump is stepping up the U.S. military posture in the Middle East. Key U.S. assets are shifting closer to Iran as Trump issues sharp warnings to Tehran.
The moves come as human rights groups describe an exceptionally violent crackdown, with reports that security forces have killed thousands.
Trump’s comments, often posted on Truth Social, have fueled talk of possible U.S. action. At the same time, he has signaled he may pause strikes after claims that the killing has slowed.
Anti-government protests spread across all 31 Iranian provinces in late December 2025. Demonstrations began amid economic collapse, hyperinflation, and anger over corruption. Many protests later turned into open demands to end clerical rule. Large numbers of Gen Z protesters and people from different ethnic communities have joined, calling for freedom and democracy.
The state response has been severe. Reports say security forces, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and police, have used live fire, metal pellets, and beatings against crowds described as mostly peaceful. A near-total internet blackout since early January has made verification harder, but accounts from exiled groups and witnesses describe widespread bloodshed.
Death toll estimates vary and remain difficult to confirm. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency has reported more than 2,500 deaths. Iran International, citing internal documents, reported claims of up to 12,000 killed over two nights, January 8 to 9, 2026, during the peak of the crackdown.
Norway-based Iran Human Rights said it documented at least 3,428 protester deaths by mid-January, including children, along with thousands injured and more than 18,000 arrests. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned what they describe as unlawful lethal force, arbitrary arrests, and attacks on medical sites, warning these could amount to crimes against humanity.
Footage said to be smuggled out shows people running from gunfire, bodies stored in makeshift morgues, and families grieving. Iranian officials have labeled protesters as foreign-backed “rioters” and warned of rapid trials and executions. One reported case involves 26-year-old Erfan Soltani, who was said to receive a death sentence shortly after being detained.
The violence builds on a long pattern of repression, including the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests and earlier crackdowns. Many observers now describe the current unrest as potentially the deadliest since the 1979 Revolution.
Trump’s Warning to Iran
Trump has used blunt language in public statements. On Truth Social, he urged Iranians to “KEEP PROTESTING” and “TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS.” He also promised “HELP IS ON ITS WAY” and said those responsible for the killings would “pay a big price.” He warned of “very strong action” if the government began hanging protesters or continued large-scale killings.
In interviews, Trump said Iran’s leaders face “tremendous” economic pressure and repeated that the U.S. was “locked and loaded.” He pointed to the June 2025 U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities as proof of U.S. willingness to act. Trump also said he had “very important sources” indicating the killings had paused, and he suggested that helped him hold off on immediate strikes. Still, he emphasized that “all options remain on the table.”
His messaging has lifted morale for some protesters, but it has also worried regional partners who fear a wider conflict.
U.S. Military Buildup
The U.S. military posture is shifting in visible ways. Sources say at least one U.S. aircraft carrier strike group is moving toward the Middle East. More air, ground, and naval assets are expected to follow in the coming days and weeks. The repositioning gives Trump a broader menu of options, from limited strikes on regime command sites to larger operations.
This comes after a recent drawdown that left fewer major assets close by. Some carriers, including the USS Gerald R. Ford, were redirected to the Caribbean after prior missions. The U.S. has also evacuated nonessential personnel from locations such as Al Udeid in Qatar, a sign officials are preparing for possible Iranian retaliation against U.S. bases. Defense planners say these steps keep choices open without committing the U.S. to a full war.
Analysts note that the on-station force level is smaller than during the 2025 Israel-Iran clashes. Even so, the U.S. can still act quickly, including with long-range bombers flying from the United States. The current U.S. aircraft carrier movement and broader Iranian military buildup appear aimed at deterrence, while also signaling support for protesters without direct involvement on the ground.
Congress Responds With Caution
Lawmakers in Washington are split. Leading Republicans have voiced support for Iranian protesters while pushing caution on military steps. Senators, including Kevin Cramer and Roger Wicker, have pointed to sanctions and diplomacy as preferred tools, and they have said they were not fully briefed on any plan for strikes.
Democrats have raised sharper objections. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer stressed that major military action would require congressional approval under the War Powers Act. Other Democrats warned that strikes could backfire and push some Iranians to rally around the regime.
Polling suggests the public remains uneasy. Many Americans oppose U.S. strikes on Iran and say Trump should seek congressional approval first. Recent U.S. actions in Venezuela have also added to bipartisan concerns about the scope of presidential power overseas.
Related News:
Trump Takes Bold Stand on Corporate Giants Snapping Up American Homes
News
Erika Kirk’s Early EMP Documentary Fuels CIA Grooming Rumors
WASHINGTON, D.C. – American conservative politics, plus the online spaces that feed on conspiracy claims, rarely stay quiet for long. A new flashpoint hit in early January 2026 when an old documentary clip resurfaced featuring Erika Kirk, the CEO of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) and the widow of the late Charlie Kirk.
Jimmy Dore, a comedian and political commentator known for blunt criticism of establishment power, jumped on the clip and called it a possible “smoking gun.” In his framing, the footage raises uncomfortable questions about Kirk’s early access to national security circles and whether those links go back further than most people knew.
The viral segment shows a younger Erika Frantzve (Kirk’s maiden name) speaking about the risks of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack and how it could knock out the U.S. power grid. In the same film, she appears alongside well-known national security voices, including former CIA Director R. James Woolsey. Some social media accounts first claimed the documentary was a hidden or “buried” CIA project, which added fuel to the rumor mill.
The Documentary Source: Black Start and Why It Went Viral Again
The clip comes from Black Start, an independent documentary made by filmmaker Patrea Patrick through Heartfelt Films LLC. The movie was released publicly around 2017, with some interviews and material that appear to date back to about 2013.
The film focuses on weak points in the U.S. electrical grid and what could take it down, including cyberattacks, physical attacks, natural threats like solar flares, and high-altitude EMP events that could cause major, long-lasting blackouts.
In the resurfaced section, Erika Kirk, then in her mid-20s, delivers a calm, structured presentation. She talks through EMP dangers, basic mitigation ideas, and the chain reaction that could follow a grid failure. The setting looks like a talk given to people with a security or technical background.
Woolsey appears in the documentary as well, and in some circulating edits, he’s labeled as a former CIA leader tied to national security and energy. Woolsey has spent years warning about EMP risks and pushing for grid hardening, so his presence has become a central part of the debate.
Dore’s commentary focused on what he sees as unusual access. He pointed to the polished delivery and the audience as signals that this wasn’t a random appearance. In his view, young outsiders don’t usually get a platform in rooms like that without real connections. He also suggested her comfort level reads like prior coaching or preparation for high-stakes discussions.
Family Backstory
As the clip spread, online commentators started tying it to Kirk’s family history. One common thread involves her mother, Lori Frantzve, who founded companies such as GTeK (later connected in online discussions to E3Tek Group or AZ-Tech International). Those businesses have been linked to Department of Defense (DoD) and Homeland Security contract work, with topics that include network security, risk work, and EMP-related protection tech.
A separate piece of old footage also made the rounds, a 2020 interview clip where Erika Kirk described her family’s move to Arizona. In that clip, she said the relocation was tied to her mother’s growing DoD-related work.
That move also put the family within reach of Fort Huachuca, an Army base known for intelligence training, drone operations, and ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) programs. In conspiracy spaces, those details often get stitched together into a bigger story. Supporters of the theory argue that growing up around defense contracting, plus early exposure to EMP topics, could have created an on-ramp to intelligence networks.
Claims of CIA Links
The loudest claims say Erika Kirk has direct or indirect ties to the CIA, and they treat the documentary clip as proof. Some conspiracy-focused accounts have labeled it a “buried CIA video” or a “leaked briefing,” suggesting she was delivering insider-level knowledge or working in intelligence-adjacent roles.
Public reporting and fact checks push back on that. Black Start has been described as an independent film, not a CIA production, and it has been available publicly (including on YouTube). It features a range of public figures and commentators, including Fox News contributor Jeanine Pirro and former Congressman Trent Franks. Kirk also is not prominently credited on IMDb, and her presence fits a simpler explanation for many viewers: she had subject-matter exposure through family ties to defense and security work, not secret agency involvement.
Dore has treated the story as part of a wider pattern. Even if the CIA claim doesn’t hold up, he argues the overlap between intelligence circles, contractors, and political movements still matters. He has also used the clip to talk about influence and access in conservative organizing, a topic that gained fresh attention after Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September 2025, which elevated Erika into TPUSA leadership.
Critics of the conspiracy narrative say the story is being used to target Kirk during a painful period and a major leadership change. Kirk has compared these kinds of claims to a “mind virus,” saying they feed on tragedy and turn it into content.
Why It’s a Big Story in 2026
This resurfaced clip landed at a moment when trust in major institutions is already low. It also touches a real policy issue, EMP threats and grid security, which figures like Woolsey have warned about for years. The clip sits at the crossroads of national security fear, internet speculation, and political influence, which is why it keeps spreading.
Under Kirk’s leadership, TPUSA remains a high-profile force, so attention comes with the job. The debate around this footage has settled into two camps. One side sees a young speaker drawing on family experience and a public documentary setting. The other side sees early access that feels too connected to ignore. Either way, the revived Black Start segment has kept the conversation going, and it doesn’t look like it will fade soon.
Related News:
Turning Point USA Under Scrutiny Over Alleged Shady Dealings
-
Crime3 weeks agoYouTuber Nick Shirley Exposes BILLIONS of Somali Fraud, Video Goes VIRAL
-
Politics1 month agoIlhan Omar’s Ties to Convicted Somali Fraudsters Raises Questions
-
News1 month agoWalz Tried to Dodges Blame Over $8 Billion Somali Fraud Scandal
-
Asia2 months agoAsian Development Bank (ADB) Gets Failing Mark on Transparancy
-
News3 months agoThe Democrats’ Great Betrayal, Champions of the Working Man to Handmaids of the Elite
-
Politics3 months agoThe Democratic Party’s Reckoning: From People’s Champion to Elite Enclave
-
Politics3 months agoThe Democrats Now the Party of White Voters with College Degrees
-
Politics2 months agoSouth Asian Regional Significance of Indian PM Modi’s Bhutan Visit



