Did Obama Admin Manufacture Russia Gate Evidence? Isikoff & Taibbi Discuss

Allegations of Manufactured Intelligence

• 💡 Tulsi Gabbard is cited for a claim that the Obama administration's intelligence community ignored previous intelligence and manufactured proof that Russia wanted Trump to win the 2016 election.
• ⚠️ This claim suggests the intelligence community "kneecapped" Trump's first administration by creating this narrative.

Timeline and Evidence of Russian Interference

• 🗓️ The discussion highlights a timeline of intelligence assessments, noting that an IC assessment in September made no mention of Russia wanting Trump to win.
• 🔗 By October 7th, 2016, Russian intentions were considered obvious due to Wikileaks releasing DNC and Podesta emails, following Russian government hackers penetrating the DNC.
• 📄 A draft presidential daily brief in December reportedly stated Russia did not impact election results by hacking infrastructure, but this was later superseded by reports that the CIA believed Russia was trying to help Trump win.

The Steele Dossier Controversy

• 🔍 Matt Taibbi argues that the intelligence community assessment relied on the Steele Dossier, which he describes as unreliable opposition research paid for by an unknown entity, leading to significant errors.
• 🚫 He asserts that the FBI pushed the Steele Dossier, but the CIA initially resisted due to lack of trust in its sourcing.
• 📊 The Steele Dossier is characterized as a "complete fraud" that dominated American politics and was a "black eye" for journalists.

Differing Perspectives on Intelligence

• 🗣️ Michael Isikoff contends that while the Steele Dossier was problematic, it is irrelevant to the fundamentals: Russia launched an unprecedented campaign using cyber means to steal emails and a social media component via the Internet Research Agency to denigrate Clinton and promote Trump.
• 📉 Isikoff points to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, under Devin Nunes and Marco Rubio respectively, concluding Russian interference.
• 🧐 Taibbi counters that there was significant dissent within the intelligence community, with analysts suppressed who believed Russia saw Clinton as manageable and had apprehensions about Trump's instability.
• ⚠️ The NSA did not upgrade its assessment to high, and the FBI publicly changed its mind late in the game, indicating internal disagreement.

Core Disagreements and Misdirection Claims

• 🎯 The core dispute centers on whether Putin himself ordered the interference campaign to help Trump, with dissent on the strength of intelligence regarding Putin's direct role.
• 🎭 Gabbard's claims are framed by Isikoff as misdirection and slight of hand to distract from the reality of Russian interference.
• ❓ The discussion concludes that while the Steele Dossier was flawed and journalists may have been "hoodwinked," Gabbard needs to substantiate her theory that the intelligence community manufactured assessments about Russia's impact on election infrastructure, beyond just the messaging and email hacks.