DECLASSIFIED BOMBSHELL: OBAMA ADMIN BURIED EVIDENCE TO PUSH RUSSIA HOAX

Representative Tulsi Gabbard has claimed that a declassified document from the Obama administration in December 2016 indicated that Russia did not hack or alter the results of the 2016 US Presidential election.

According to her, the intelligence briefing from the CIA, NSA, and DHS was buried, and the following day, the Obama administration called for a new assessment that ultimately led to the investigation into Russian interference, which was heavily influenced by the Steele Dossier. This revelation suggests that the entire narrative surrounding the "Russia hoax" could have been based on flawed or politically motivated intelligence.

This claim, if true, would be a significant development in the ongoing debate over the origins of the Russia investigation and the validity of the findings that led to it. Gabbard, who is known for her independent and often controversial stances, has provided documents to the Department of Justice and called for prosecutions of those involved in what she describes as a "treasonous conspiracy."

The implications of this are that key figures in the Obama administration, such as John Brennan and James Comey, may have acted inappropriately or even illegally in the handling of sensitive information and the subsequent framing of the investigation. It also raises questions about the integrity of the intelligence community and the role it plays in shaping public perception and influencing political outcomes.

The reaction from  President Donald Trump and others has been one of vindication, with Trump stating, "They're crooked as hell." This development is likely to intensify the political discourse around the investigation and its aftermath, potentially leading to further inquiries and calls for accountability from those who initiated and promoted the narrative of Russian election interference.

However, it is important to note that this information comes from a single source, and the veracity and context of the documents provided by Gabbard are yet to be fully verified and analyzed by independent entities. The situation remains complex and evolving, and it is essential to approach any new information with a critical eye to understand its potential impact on the historical record and ongoing political dynamics.

Source@ Mario Nawfal