\u201cThere is a direct correlation between diversion from the Epstein files, which Trump and his MAGA followers have demanded to see for years,\u201d Perry said.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s what we know about the allegations Gabbard is making:<\/p>\n
What has Gabbard accused Obama of?<\/p>\n
Gabbard has declassified a 44-page<\/a> report prepared by the House of Representatives intelligence committee in September 2020 that she claims proves that Obama and senior officials in his administration engineered a \u201ctreasonous conspiracy\u201d to suggest that Russia had influenced the 2016 presidential election in favour of Trump.<\/p>\n The report, which was led by House Republicans, reviewed how US intelligence had concluded that Moscow interfered in the elections in a January 2017 Intelligence Community assessment that was published two months after the elections.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is irrefutable evidence that details how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false,\u201d Gabbard said at the briefing, adding that the idea that Russia interfered in the election to promote Trump was a \u201ccontrived narrative\u201d.<\/p>\n Obama\u2019s administration \u201cmanufactured findings from shoddy sources \u2026 In doing so, they conspired to subvert the will of the American people, who elected Donald Trump in that election in November of 2016\u201d, she said.<\/p>\n Gabbard added that she had referred the former president to the Justice Department for a possible criminal prosecution.<\/p>\n Previously, on July 18, Gabbard released a separate batch<\/a> of declassified information containing a trove of documents, including emails (PDF<\/a>) from Obama administration officials in the months leading up to the elections. In it, they concluded that \u201cthere is no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count through cyber means.\u201d<\/p>\n Gabbard said in a statement that the Obama administration went ahead with investigating Russian interference after Trump won the 2016 elections, despite that initial conclusion and despite intelligence agencies like the CIA stating in advance of the vote that Russia could not affect the vote count. Those efforts were made to \u201csubvert the will of the American people\u201d and amounted to a \u201cyears-long coup\u201d against Trump, she said.<\/p>\n President Trump, on Tuesday, accused<\/a> Obama and top officials of his administration of treason. \u201cIt\u2019s time to go after people,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Analysts say the report that Gabbard released on Wednesday, as well as the documents declassified last week, do not appear to provide evidence that Russia did not interfere in the elections to favour Trump, or that Obama ordered the investigation to reach a pre-determined conclusion.<\/p>\n Responding to Gabbard\u2019s claims that the Obama White House ordered an investigation into the matter despite US intelligence agencies repeatedly assessing that foreign adversaries could not launch cyber attacks on the elections, Perry of the Miller Center said there was a valid reason for Obama\u2019s delayed order.<\/p>\n \u201cThere was suspicion on the part of the White House that Russia was interfering with the election, but the Obama administration did not take direct action to prove its suspicion until after the election for fear of being accused by Trump of interfering in it on Clinton\u2019s behalf,\u201d Perry said.<\/p>\n At the time, during the 2016 election campaign, Trump had repeatedly predicted at rallies that he might lose the vote because Democrats wanted to \u201csteal the election\u201d. That atmosphere may have discouraged the Obama administration from doing anything until after the vote, Perry added.<\/p>\n In addition, the documents Gabbard released from Obama officials do not appear to contradict the established conclusions of Russian interference, analysts say.<\/p>\n Obama officials did not allege that vote counts had been manipulated, but rather that Russian hackers had launched covert digital operations aimed at sowing discord in the US during the vote, including by leaking emails of top Democrats, such as Clinton, and trying to influence opinion on social media using \u201cbots\u201d.<\/p>\n The Senate Intelligence Committee report that Gabbard released, in which she hoped to undermine the Obama-era investigations into Russian interference, affirmed that position, although it blamed Obama administration officials for concluding that Russia interfered specifically to favour Trump.<\/p>\n Overall, experts say, Gabbard\u2019s claims are unlikely to get far.<\/p>\n Heather Hurlburt, associate fellow on the Americas Programme at London-based think tank Chatham House, said: \u201cA 2020 Senate investigation \u2013 when Republicans controlled the Senate \u2013 corroborated the intelligence agencies\u2019 findings about tactics Russia used to try to sway the 2016 presidential election.<\/p>\n \u201cGabbard\u2019s latest accusations don\u2019t introduce any new information. Without any new, independently corroborated facts, these allegations don\u2019t seem like a good-faith effort to consider the merits of the original investigation.\u201d<\/p>\n On Wednesday, the Justice Department, under Attorney General Pam Bondi, announced the creation of a \u201cstrike force\u201d that will assess Gabbard\u2019s claims and consider potential next legal steps.<\/p>\n In a statement, Bondi said the Justice Department would \u201cinvestigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice\u201d.<\/p>\n She did not give details about what the next steps might be.<\/p>\n Obama, as a former US president, enjoys civil and criminal immunity for actions undertaken during his time as president, which are regarded as \u201cofficial\u201d. This could represent a stumbling block for any prosecutions, analysts say.<\/p>\n Indeed, in a landmark decision<\/a> siding with Trump in July 2024, the Supreme Court confirmed that presidents have absolute immunity when they carry out \u201cofficial acts\u201d. Trump, at the time, was being prosecuted<\/a> for actions during his first presidency, which, prosecutors said, amounted to an attempt to influence the 2020 election results.<\/p>\n Perry of the Miller Center said Obama\u2019s order for an investigation constituted an \u201cofficial act\u201d. The Justice Department could attempt to argue that investigating Moscow\u2019s interference in the US elections was not a core presidential duty, but that would likely be a weak assertion, she said.<\/p>\n Several intelligence reports concluded<\/a> that Russia did try to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, including investigations by two Justice Department special counsels, a Republican-led House committee on intelligence, which was recently released, and the Senate intelligence committee. The matter is one of the most extensively scrutinised in US election history. Russia, for its part, has denied the allegations<\/a>.<\/p>\n Trump and his allies frequently refer to the investigations as a \u201choax\u201d because they also attempted to examine links between Trump, his associates, and Russian operatives.<\/p>\n In January 2017, two months after the election, US intelligence agencies initially concluded that Russia had been responsible for cyberattacks on the email accounts of top Democrats, and for sowing discord on social media, using bots and trolls. The CIA said that the Kremlin orchestrated and codenamed the operation Project Lakhta.<\/p>\n FBI investigations also focused on individual Trump officials, such as George Papadoulous, who was indicted<\/a> for providing false statements to the FBI regarding his relations with Russians.<\/p>\n Papadoulous was found to have known about the Russian operation, but there was no evidence that he had shared that information with the Trump campaign.<\/p>\n During Trump\u2019s first presidency, the Justice Department probed the conduct of the intelligence agencies regarding the investigations and found that there had been no \u201cpolitical bias\u201d involved.<\/p>\n The most followed report<\/a> was released by special counsel Robert Mueller in 2019. It concluded that the \u201cRussian government interfered in the 2016 election in a sweeping and systematic fashion\u201d through social media campaigns that favoured Trump, because Moscow assessed that it would benefit from a Trump presidency.<\/p>\n The operations sought to damage Clinton\u2019s image by hacking into email accounts of members of the Clinton campaign and leaking them to the public, the report stated. There was no criminal indictment, however, because Mueller concluded that there was no evidence that Trump\u2019s campaign coordinated with Russian agents.<\/p>\n![\"Donald](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AP25020643118619-1737398780.jpg\")
From left, former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President George W Bush, former First Lady Laura Bush and former President Barack Obama, arrive before the 60th Presidential Inauguration in the Rotunda of the US Capitol in Washington, on Monday, January 20, 2025 [Chip Somodevilla\/AP]
\nAre Tulsi\u2019s claims correct?<\/p>\n![\"Former](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/337a0bb12d884781b26741a27b776353_18.jpeg\")
Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, left, and former Deputy Special Counsel Aaron Zebley are sworn in for testimony before the House Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, July 24, 2019 [Jim Watson\/AFP]
\nWill there be a criminal investigation now?<\/p>\n![\"Mueller](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/1538e6fe4fe748999218c6a98396c9e7_18.jpeg\")
Four pages of special counsel Robert Mueller\u2019s report on the witness table in the House Intelligence Committee hearing room on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Thursday, April 18, 2019 [Cliff Owen\/AP]
\nWhat did US intelligence agencies conclude about Russian election interference?<\/p>\n
![\"Anti-Brexit](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/2022-07-17T000000Z_2007234027_RC2SDV9UYAYJ_RTRMADP_3_BRITAIN-POLITICS-CHEQUERS-1689670684.jpg\")
Anti-Brexit demonstrator Steve Bray protests near Chequers, the official country residence of the prime minister, near Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom, July 17, 2022 [Peter Nicholls\/Reuters]