New Evidence: Obama Administration’s “Coup” Against Trump?

By Staff, The Nevada Conservative

On July 18, 2025, Acting Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a bombshell — a freshly declassified report alleging that President Barack Obama, along with his national security team, orchestrated a deliberate campaign to undermine President Donald Trump’s 2016 victory. Far from a routine intelligence assessment, the matter is now framed as a coordinated effort to “manufacture intelligence” and effectively carry out a years‑long coup through political weaponization of the Intelligence Community Director of National Intelligence+1Director of National Intelligence+1.

⚖️ The Core Accusations

According to DNI Gabbard, the evidence follows a clear timeline of malfeasance:

1. Pre‑Election Findings Flushed:In the months before November 2016, the Intelligence Community reportedly assessed that Russia was “probably not trying … to influence the election by using cyber means.” This was a steady conclusion up until the election Director of National Intelligenceemptywheel.

2. Post‑Election Reversal:Just days after the election — December 7, 2016 — talking points were prepared specifically for then‑DNI James Clapper emphasizing that “foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks … to alter the US Presidential election outcome.” More contradicting intel followed on December 9, when an NSC meeting occurred Director of National Intelligence.

3. “At the President’s Request”:That same day, Clapper’s office reportedly pushed a directive to IC agencies — CIA, FBI, NSA, DHS, and ODNI — to craft a new intelligence assessment detailing Kremlin cyber activity, explicitly “per the President’s request” Director of National Intelligence.

4. Strategic Leaks to Drive the Narrative:The White House allegedly authorized leaks to major outlets, including The Washington Post, alleging Russia “attempted … to interfere in … the outcome of an election” via cyber means — a direct inversion of the prior internal assessments LegiStorm+1ODNI+1Director of National Intelligence.

5. January 6, 2017: The Turning Point:Finally, an Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) was released on January 6, 2017 — a document that sharply contradicted previous findings, precisely aligning with the emotional tenor the White House sought Director of National Intelligence.

   
   
   
   

The Steele Dossier and Manufactured Claims

Perhaps most damaging, Gabbard asserts that this January 2017 report rested on knowingly flawed and politicized information — the so‑called Steele Dossier — already deemed unreliable by many Director of National Intelligence. In her words:

“This was politicized intelligence … used as the basis for countless smears seeking to delegitimize President Trump’s victory,” contributing to Mueller probes, House impeachments, elevated US‑Russia tensions, and more Director of National Intelligence.

A Call for Accountability

Gabbard minced no words:

“Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people … Every person involved … must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law … to ensure nothing like this ever happens again.” youtube.com+10Director of National Intelligence+10x.com+10

Gabbard has forwarded all documents to the Department of Justice, asserting the American people and “President Trump, his family … deserve accountability” Director of National Intelligence.

Parsing the Implications

This revelation raises a serious question: Is our Intelligence Community truly apolitical?

For conservatives, the idea that intelligence assessments could be weaponized — not just leaked, but deliberately reverse‑engineered — is deeply dangerous. It undermines the very foundation of trust in our national institutions. If facts become malleable, democracy itself is in peril.

• Pre‑election findings are meant to be based on intelligence, not wishful thinking or political convenience.

• Leaking selectively to push an agenda converts honest analysts into propaganda arms.

• Post‑election reversals — designed for political blowback — transform oversight into overt political warfare.

A Pattern of Politicization?

This is not the first accusation aimed at the Obama administration regarding Russiagate. Critics have long claimed that the Steele Dossier was used to secure FISA warrants and drag out investigations. Now, Gabbard claims it was also used as a basis for intelligence products released to shape public opinion.

If proved accurate, the implications are vast:

• A sitting president directing intelligence agencies to produce desired narratives crosses an ethical and legal Rubicon.

• The “manufactured coup” rhetoric — though strong — gains traction when internal assessments are contradicted by public documents.

• Every member of that 2016 NSC meeting — from James Clapper to John Brennan, Susan Rice, FBI’s Andrew McCabe, Loretta Lynch, and John Kerry — comes under scrutiny emptywheelDirector of National Intelligence.

What Happens Next?

1. DOJ Review:The Justice Department now has declassified documents and a criminal referral. The question is whether they will pursue formal charges or conduct a limited inquiry.

2. Congressional Oversight:Republican‑controlled House committees may launch hearings to examine who knew what, when — and on whose orders.

3. Judicial Response:If prosecutions follow, courts will determine the credibility and weight of the evidence behind the alleged coup.

Skepticism & Counter-Narratives

Not everyone is convinced. Critics (including some Republicans) argue:

“It isn’t really a secret that Russia tried to interfere with our election … I was not able to find a single statement or email exchange that implied this investigation was driven by the Obama administration” reddit.com.

“There is a full release of the relevant documents and now there is criminal referral to the DOJ … MedvedTrader: ‘We will see how DOJ proceeds.’” reddit.com

Nevada’s Perspective

Here in Nevada — where conservative voters prize integrity, transparency, and the rule of law — this story strikes a chord.

• Did our Intelligence Community get politicized from the top?

• If an administration can manufacture “intel” to serve political ends, who watches the watchers?

• And, finally, what safeguards are in place — or should be in place — to ensure intelligence serves truth, not ideology?

A Patriot’s Response

For conservatives, this moment calls for sober reflection, not sensationalism. Investigations are needed — not only to determine who did what, but to restore faith in our institutions.

🔹 If the charges hold up, those responsible must answer — through hearings, convictions, or public accountability.🔹 If not, the documents should still be released in full, in unredacted form, so the American people may judge for themselves.

Final Thought

President Reagan once said, “Trust, but verify.” Now, we must demand transparency, not just tap the intelligence infrastructure for national defense — but to defend our democracy itself.

As this story unfolds, The Nevada Conservative will report with candor and patriotism. Because one thing remains true: No matter who holds office, the sanctity of our system depends on truth — even when it's hard to hear.