Trump Allies Face Potential Accusations as Gabbard Fuels Russia Interference Claims
Washington D.C. – A special prosecutor has been appointed to investigate potential accusations related to the probe into Russian interference in the 2016 US election, following claims made by National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard.While the specific accusations and targets remain unclear, this move intensifies a long-running political battle over the origins and legitimacy of the inquiry.
Gabbard recently published documents questioning the findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to favor Donald Trump. She has directly accused former President Barack Obama, ex-CIA Director John Brennan, and former FBI head James Comey of “high treason.”
Trump reacted to the news on social media, stating, “Truth always wins. This is great news.”
The initial investigation, led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, resulted in convictions of several Trump allies but did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Moscow and the Trump campaign. Trump has repeatedly labeled the investigation a “witch hunt.”
Recent weeks have seen Gabbard assert that the Obama management falsely attempted to link Trump to Russia, claiming they knew Russians hadn’t hacked voting machines. An Obama spokesperson dismissed this as a “distraction,” particularly amidst ongoing controversy surrounding the Epstein case, clarifying Obama never claimed votes were manipulated, only that other forms of interference occurred.
Republican Senator Chuck Grassley released emails purportedly showing the Clinton campaign attempted to “frame” Trump and fabricate the Russia collusion narrative. These emails originated from a report by Special Counsel John Durham, who identified FBI errors but found no evidence disproving Russian interference. Durham’s investigation yielded three cases – two acquittals and one guilty plea for an FBI lawyer for false testimony.
Republicans highlighted an email allegedly showing Hillary Clinton approving a plan to tie Trump to Russia. However, both the alleged sender and recipient stated they never saw the message, and Durham’s report questioned its authenticity, suggesting it could be a fabrication from russian hackers.
