This week, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a once-classified House Intelligence Committee report that sheds light on what Russia knew about the Democratic Party’s inner workings during the 2016 election.
The report disclosed that Russia gained access to secret DNC information regarding Hillary Clinton’s health. It revealed psychological and physical ailments that were kept hidden even from her advisors, causing concern among Democratic leaders.
This revelation prompts questions about Russia’s intentions and its impact on the 2016 race.
While discussions often revolved around ties between Donald Trump and Russia, the report highlights Russia’s decision not to leak damaging information about Clinton. By September 2016, Russian intelligence had uncovered concerns about Clinton’s health within DNC communications.
Key Findings:
- President Obama and Democratic leaders were alarmed by Clinton’s health decline, considering it a serious campaign impediment.
- Clinton was described in DNC documents as having psycho-emotional problems such as uncontrolled anger and dependency on tranquilizers, with an intense thirst for power.
Russia opted not to disclose the most damaging details about Clinton, leading analysts to speculate on the Kremlin’s motives.
Revelations from the report raise doubts on the Russia-Trump collusion narrative and underscore the need for transparency in intelligence handling.
These disclosures challenge the narrative surrounding Clinton’s health, highlighting a divided Democratic Party and Russia’s insight into this internal turmoil.
Visual Analysis:
- The declassified report discredits the Steele Dossier and suggests deeper foreign involvement in Democratic affairs.
- It urges review of how intelligence dissemination was managed during the Obama administration.
Despite the revelations, Clinton has not responded to the report which contradicts previous statements denying health concerns.
The report paints a picture of a political agenda overshadowing the truth, emphasizing the impact of foreign visibility into US elections.
