It took six months.
Six months of media clawing, deep-state leaking, and coordinated “fact-checking” to try and neuter Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
Six months after the American people watched the same names who mocked, lied about, and criminally obstructed him for four years pretend nothing happened.
And then came Tulsi.
In a move that felt like thunder cracking over the Potomac, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard stood before a lectern on July 18 and used a word few in Washington dare to whisper, let alone shout: treason.
Not in some hyperbolic tweet. Not in an off-the-cuff comment. But in a detailed report backed by newly declassified documents, official assessments, and internal memos from the heart of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus. My teammate Matt Margolis shared what happened in a VIP column.
For years, conservatives have been saying that this story that the media foisted upon the American people in the wake of Donald Trump’s historic victory was fabricated from the highest levels. Tulsi Gabbard’s release obliterates any lingering doubt. Start with the intelligence consensus in 2016: our agencies agreed Russia lacked both the intent and the capacity to alter the outcome of the election. Yet following Trump’s defeat of Hillary Clinton, everything changed overnight. A critical assessment for the President’s Daily Brief — one that found Russia “did not impact recent U.S. election results” — was mysteriously shelved.
The next day, the White House became ground zero for plotting. Obama summoned the heads of the FBI, CIA, and DNI to rework the intelligence, discarding prior analyses in favor of an assessment that would implicate Russia in undermining the election that didn’t go the way it wanted. The fix was in. It didn’t matter that facts didn’t support such claims; what mattered was crafting a story to delegitimize the incoming president.
Then came the media blitz, an operation as coordinated as any campaign. Anonymous intelligence sources funneled classified tidbits to compliant legacy outlets. A “politicized assessment,” assembled at Obama’s direction, emerged on Jan. 6, 2017 — a weapon wielded to ignite years of politically motivated investigation and division. Evidence was no object. The infamous Steele Dossier, which even its creators described as unreliable, was used to lend a veneer of legitimacy to the intelligence assessment. The people orchestrating this attack on Trump’s presidency knew full well the dossier was trash. They just didn’t care.
Her accusation wasn’t vague. She named the names we've all known for years: Obama. Brennan. Clapper. Comey. She claimed these men orchestrated a deliberate “conspiracy to manipulate intelligence” to delegitimize the 2016 election and destroy the duly elected president.
If true, it is the greatest political scandal in modern American history. If that is false, she has just set herself up for political and legal destruction. Either way, we’re about to find out whether this country still has a functioning spine.
The Sept. 12, 2016, Memo: The Lie Before the Storm
Among the newly declassified documents is a report dated Sept. 12, 2016, an internal intelligence assessment stating unequivocally that Russia “does not have and will probably not obtain the capabilities to alter actual vote tallies, voting machine totals, or voter registration databases in a way that would affect the outcome of the election.”
That assessment was clear, confident, and written before Trump won the election.
Which raises a rather uncomfortable question: Why did it vanish from public view the moment Hillary Clinton lost the election?
If that memo had been released in the weeks following the election, it could have calmed the waters. Instead, Obama administration officials allowed, some say encouraged, a narrative that Russia had hacked democracy itself. We were told the election was compromised. Anchors used the phrase “attacked our democracy” like it was scripture.
And yet the people saying it, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, had already read the memo. They knew the truth.
But the truth didn’t matter. And, to an extent, in some silos, it still doesn't.
The December Pivot: When the Truth Got Sidelined
According to Gabbard’s release, a high-level meeting took place in the White House Situation Room sometime in early Dec. 2016. Obama, Susan Rice, Brennan, Comey, Clapper, they were all there.
What followed, Gabbard claims, was the decision to suppress contradictory intel and lean heavily on the Steele dossier as the cornerstone for an intelligence community “assessment” that would suggest Trump’s win was illegitimate.
That meeting produced the Jan. 7, 2017, report that claimed Russian interference had benefited Trump. But here’s what the public didn’t know:
- The analysts who drafted that report were hand-selected by John Brennan, with dissenting opinions excluded.
- The NSA, known for caution, expressly stated low confidence in the findings.
- And buried in the footnotes was the bombshell: No evidence of changed vote totals. None.
The so-called “consensus” was no consensus at all. It was the equivalent of three varsity kids in the cafeteria deciding that the school dance was rigged for everyone. Except instead of disco balls and punch, the result was a three-year investigation, mass censorship, global embarrassment, and impeachment.
The Real Collusion Was Bureaucratic
We were told Russia colluded with Trump. The truth? Obama’s top intel brass colluded with each other.
They didn’t need evidence; what they needed was narrative.
They used classified access to manipulate public perception, leveraged the media to create panic, and built a house of cards so fragile it collapsed under its own contradictions.
The irony? Their meddling actually damaged faith in democracy far more than anything Russia ever did.
Three Mountains to Climb
Now, six months into President Trump’s second term, his administration faces a trio of obstacles that will determine whether justice is served, or whether we’re stuck in a country where the guilty write the rules.
The Legacy Media
They’re already treating Tulsi’s move as one from a Trump aide seeking retribution. MSN believes her memo contradicts an actual, objective Senate investigation.
Gabbard’s memo alleges the Obama administration relied on the Steele Dossier in claiming that Russia interfered in the election.
Gabbard’s claims run counter to a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation that found Russia interfered in the 2016 election and noted that although Trump’s contact with Russian officials presented a “grave” intelligence threat, it was not clear if the president’s allies knowingly worked with Russia to bolster Trump’s chances of victory.
The same outlets that breathlessly promoted the Steele dossier, which never apologized for the Mueller nothing burger, are now crying foul because the truth is inconvenient.
Make no mistake: these are not journalists. They are PR agents for the people Gabbard just exposed.
The Courts and DOJ
Now comes the real test. Gabbard says she’s handed every document to the Department of Justice for prosecution. But that depends on two questions: Will the DOJ act? Or does enough of the swamp exist to disappoint us again?
There’s precedent. People were frog-marched for less during the Trump-Russia investigations. If the DOJ hesitates now, it sends a clear message: the rules only apply to the regime's enemies. Equal justice becomes a myth.
The American People
This is the wild card. Some people are exhausted and simply want to move on. Others remain unaware; they’ve been fed media narratives for nearly a decade. But there’s a growing segment of the population that remembers when it all unfolded and kept receipts.
They’ve been called names. Mocked. Shadow-banned. Fired.
Now they’re watching a former Democrat congresswoman drop a political neutron bomb on Obama’s legacy, and they’re wondering if maybe, just maybe, they were right all along.
Final Thoughts: Was It Treason?
The left has used that word freely for years. They flung it at Trump for suggesting he’d like better relations with Moscow. They used it on his staff and his supporters. They called questioning the FBI’s conduct “un-American.”
I want to believe Tulsi that her evidence is solid enough to sway fair-thinking lefties. I know there are fewer remaining objective people on the left than those who believe in (sorry) Bigfoot.
I vividly remember Lindsey Graham on Fox not so many years ago, fists clenched, promising that the truth would expose the illegal activities that Obama and his sycophants kept shoveling down our throats, and he. Did. Nothing.
There were so many other examples of promises made by prominent Republicans that would fill other columns. The thud of silence followed each one, dropped by cowards saying just enough to be reelected.
So let’s be honest. If what Gabbard claims is valid, that high-ranking officials manipulated intelligence to frame a sitting president, undermine an election, and gaslight the nation, then what else would you call it?
Treason isn’t just a word: It’s a line in the sand.
The question now is whether anyone in power has the guts to cross it.
