This week, the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, released a once-classified House Intelligence Committee report that sheds new light on the 2016 election and what foreign intelligence services, including Russia’s SVR, knew about the Democratic Party’s inner workings.
A newly declassified report unveiled that Russia had access to secret DNC information concerning Hillary Clinton’s health. The report claimed that Clinton was facing psychological and physical ailments that were concealed even from her close advisors, causing alarm among Obama and Democratic leaders who feared it would impact her election prospects significantly.
These revelations, previously hidden, bring up questions on Russia’s knowledge and motives during the 2016 race.
While much of the 2016 narrative centered on potential ties between Donald Trump and Moscow, newly revealed sections indicate that Russia possessed damaging information about Clinton but chose not to disclose it.
By September 2016, Russian intelligence had accessed DNC communications highlighting internal concerns about Clinton’s mental and physical health:
- Obama-era panic: President Obama and senior Democratic leaders were reportedly troubled by Clinton’s declining health, labeling it as ‘extraordinarily alarming’ with possible severe negative ramifications on her campaign. This concern was closely guarded, even from senior campaign advisors.
- Psychological condition: SVR sources allegedly obtained DNC documents describing Clinton’s ‘intensified psycho-emotional problems,’ including uncontrolled anger, dependency on tranquilizers, and a power-thirsty mentality.
- Physical health ailments: The report reveals SVR’s awareness of Clinton’s health issues.
One striking revelation is that Russia refrained from leaking the most damaging information it had on Clinton, raising questions about their intentions and strategic moves during the election.
Analysts speculate that Russia might have anticipated a Clinton victory and kept the health-related data for leverage post-election. The declassified report, previously withheld, was authorized for full release by Tulsi Gabbard, the current DNI, emphasizing transparency and the public’s right to know the truth about the 2016 events.
The disclosures contribute to the narrative that the Russia-Trump collusion tale was not fully disclosed, with significant context deliberately omitted. The situation prompts a global query: Why was the focus of the election scandal predominantly on Trump, when Russia had potentially more damaging details about Clinton?
These new details:
- Challenge the credibility of the Steele Dossier
- Imply that foreign adversaries had deep insights into Democratic conflicts
- Raise concerns on intelligence dissemination in the Obama-era administration
Hillary Clinton is yet to respond to the released material. While her team dismissed health-related rumors as conspiracy theories, the DNC’s internal communications seem to contradict these public denials.
The declassified House report depicts:
- A divided and anxious Democratic Party concerning the nominee’s health
- A foreign entity having access to this internal panic
- A narrative possibly influenced more by politics than actuality
Q: Who declassified this information? A: The full report was revealed by DNI Tulsi Gabbard, now under President Trump’s administration. Q: Which agency intercepted the intel? A: Russia’s SVR allegedly accessed internal DNC communications about Clinton’s health. Q: Is there independent verification of Clinton’s conditions? A: Although no medical records confirming the claims are public, internal discussions within the DNC and SVR intercepts are cited. Q: Why didn’t Russia disclose this if they interfered? A: Analysts speculate that Russia retained the data for potential post-election leverage, assuming Clinton’s victory. Q: What political repercussions could this revelation have? A: It questions the notion that Trump was the primary beneficiary of Russian interference and casts doubt on transparency within the past intelligence administrations.
