>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
According to Vance, the evidence shows a coordinated effort to twist Hillary Clinton’s campaign talking points into so-called “intelligence” — while burying anything that contradicted the narrative.
“What they basically did is they defrauded the American people in order to take Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign talking points and turn them into intelligence by defrauding the American people, defrauding the intelligence agencies, lying about what the intel said,” Vance said.
He continued, “They would take something that supported a Hillary Clinton campaign talking point, and they would overemphasize it and exaggerate it. They took anything that actually contradicted that narrative, and they buried it deep. And through that they actually laundered Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign talking points through the American intelligence services. That’s a violation of the people’s trust. That’s a violation of what our intelligence services should be doing, and I absolutely think they broke the law. You’re going to see a lot of people get indicted for that.”
The wave of revelations began last month when Gabbard started releasing long-classified documents from the Obama administration’s investigation into alleged Russian election interference in 2016.
WATCH:
Among the releases was a declassified 2020 House Intelligence Committee report that concluded there was no solid proof Russia backed Donald Trump in 2016 — a direct rebuke to years of media hysteria. Gabbard also released evidence showing that senior intelligence officials knew Russia had not hacked voting systems in a way that could alter the election outcome.
Following those disclosures, the Justice Department created a special “strike force” to examine potential criminal activity uncovered in the documents.
Just last week, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi took steps to convene a grand jury to look into possible charges against Obama-era officials. Grand juries have the power to decide whether or not to hand down indictments.
Predictably, the Obama team and its former intelligence chiefs are pushing back hard. Former CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI James Clapper dismissed Gabbard’s findings, pointing to a 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report claiming analysts faced “no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions.” They also wrote an op-ed insisting the 2017 Intelligence Community assessment never mentioned “collusion” between Trump and Russia.
A spokesperson for Barack Obama himself issued a rare public rebuttal, calling Gabbard’s evidence a “weak attempt at distraction.” Patrick Rodenbush declared, “Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.”
Still, with a DOJ strike force digging into the matter and a Vice President openly predicting criminal charges, the once untouchable Russiagate architects may soon face the legal reckoning critics have demanded for years.
