Fact-Checking Tulsi Gabbard’s Claim of a ‘Coup’

Russian Influence in 2016 Election: DNI Gabbard’s Claims of Obama Administration Conspiracy Lack Foundation

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has ignited controversy by claiming to have uncovered “overwhelming evidence” that former President Barack Obama and his administration manipulated intelligence to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency. However, a closer examination reveals her allegations rely on misleading interpretations of intelligence assessments.

Gabbard’s claims center on what she portrays as a contradiction between intelligence assessments before and after the 2016 election. She has announced a criminal referral to the Department of Justice and FBI based on documents she says show evidence of a “treasonous conspiracy” and a “years-long coup” against Trump.

The core of Gabbard’s allegation is that intelligence assessments before the election consistently concluded Russia was not trying to influence the outcome, but abruptly changed after a December 9, 2016, National Security Council meeting. She points to a January 6, 2017, intelligence report that concluded Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign to help elect Trump.

However, Gabbard’s argument conflates two distinct issues: Russia’s attempts to hack voting infrastructure and its broader influence operations. The pre-election assessments she cites focused primarily on Russia’s inability to successfully manipulate voting systems or alter vote tallies – not on whether Russia was attempting to influence voter opinion through other means.

“No one ever claimed Russia altered votes, but everyone claims that Russia tried to interfere on Trump’s behalf,” noted Senator Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. This distinction is crucial to understanding why Gabbard’s claims of contradiction are unfounded.

The January 2017 intelligence assessment – which Gabbard portrays as a politically motivated reversal – actually maintained that Russia did not successfully manipulate vote tallying systems. It focused instead on Russia’s social media campaign and the hacking and release of Democratic National Committee emails – activities aimed at influencing public opinion rather than altering votes directly.

Multiple subsequent investigations have reinforced the findings about Russian interference. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation established that Russia interfered “principally through two operations” – a social media campaign favoring Trump and computer intrusion operations against the Clinton campaign. While the investigation “did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government,” it confirmed Russian interference efforts.

A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report released in April 2020 similarly concluded the intelligence community assessment presented “a coherent and well-constructed intelligence basis for the case of unprecedented Russian interference.” Republican Senator Richard Burr, then committee chairman, stated they “found no reason to dispute the Intelligence Community’s conclusions.”

Even Marco Rubio, now Trump’s Secretary of State and a member of that committee, acknowledged in August 2020: “We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling… Let there be no doubt, the Russians did meddle.”

Obama’s office responded to Gabbard’s allegations, stating: “Nothing in the document issued undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.”

Trump has seized on Gabbard’s claims, posting a fake video showing Obama being handcuffed and claiming there is now “Irrefutable EVIDENCE” of “THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY!” At a July 22 press conference, Trump declared that Gabbard had “caught President Obama absolutely cold” and called for “very severe consequences.”

When asked why previous investigations had not reached her conclusions about a “treasonous conspiracy,” Gabbard responded: “There is no rational or logical explanation for why they failed,” suggesting a “direct intent to cover up the truth.”

Gabbard, who left the Democratic Party in 2022 after serving as a congresswoman from Hawaii, has provided no substantive evidence that intelligence was manipulated for political purposes. Her allegations appear to misrepresent the nature and scope of Russian interference efforts that have been documented across multiple independent investigations.