New Evidence Exposes Obama’s Attempt to Frame President Trump

Top Intel Officials Framed Trump—and the Timeline Points All the Way to the Top of the White House

A newly declassified report reviewing the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) on Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 election confirms what many have long argued: that top intelligence officials—including John Brennan, James Clapper, and James Comey—coordinated an effort, using the U.S. intelligence community, to brand Donald Trump as a Russian asset. Their goal was to damage Trump’s credibility—first as a candidate, then as a duly elected president.

And now, newly revealed details point to President Barack Obama’s likely involvement in supporting and accelerating that narrative during the final weeks of his administration.

The review, released by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, details how then-CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and FBI Director James Comey orchestrated a rushed and highly irregular assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump. The new report makes it clear: this conclusion was not the product of a broad consensus among intelligence professionals—it was a coordinated attack on Trump from the Obama’s top intelligence directors.

---

Let Your Voice Be Heard - We Need to Send a Message - Your Vote Counts

---

Just weeks after Hillary Clinton’s loss, on December 6, 2016, President Obama ordered DNI Clapper to produce a full review of Russian election activity—with both classified and public versions to be completed before he left office in January. That timeline alone raised red flags. Intelligence officials themselves acknowledged that assessments of this length and political sensitivity normally take months. Compressing the process into just a few weeks guaranteed one thing: career analysts would have little say, and top political appointees would control the message.

And that’s exactly what happened.

According to the review, Brennan, Clapper, and Comey bypassed the usual vetting process, limiting participation from experienced career professionals. These officials are typically responsible for reviewing and validating analytic conclusions—but in this case, they were pushed out of the process altogether.

One CIA analytic manager stated that other managers who would normally be involved “opted out” of the review process entirely, citing the “politically charged environment” and “atypical prominence” of agency leadership in driving the conclusions. That detail is damning. It means that intelligence veterans—people trained to assess threats objectively—either walked away or were excluded while senior officials crafted a report with massive political consequences.

The review also noted that drafts of the assessment saw virtually no revisions, a rarity in major intelligence products. Normally, input from multiple experts results in changes, clarifications, or even dissenting views. The absence of that here suggests the outcome was predetermined—and debate was neither welcomed nor allowed.

While much attention has focused on Brennan and Clapper, the timeline reveals that Obama’s direct order in December 2016 effectively greenlit and accelerated the process, ensuring the ICA would shape public perception before Donald Trump even took office. Rather than allow the new administration to assess the intelligence independently, Obama’s White House ensured the final product landed in headlines and congressional briefings weeks before Inauguration Day.

As John Ratcliffe put it, “This was Brennan, Clapper, and Comey manipulating the process. They silenced professionals and guaranteed an outcome.” But he added something more serious: “This wasn’t just intelligence leaders acting alone. This had White House fingerprints.”

That raises the stakes significantly. If the ICA’s findings were politically driven—and the evidence increasingly suggests they were—then the Obama administration used the power of the U.S. intelligence apparatus to try to delegitimize a duly elected president before he ever took office.

This is why that matters…The ICA wasn’t just another classified report—it became the foundation for the years-long Trump-Russia investigation. It set the tone for the Mueller probe. It justified illegal FISA warrants against reems of innocent people surrounding Trump. It fueled media speculation and partisan attacks. And now we know it was built on a bed of lies—driven not by intelligence consensus, but by a small group of politically motivated Democrats operating under an accelerated timeline set by a lame-duck president.

To this day, no evidence has surfaced proving Trump was a Russian asset. And yet the accusation—originating from a rushed report, tainted process, and bypassed protocols—dominated headlines for years.

The ICA was supposed to offer clarity to the American public. Instead, it was used as part of a larger campaign to cast a shadow over the incoming Trump administration using the credibility of U.S. intelligence as a weapon.

The recent evidence released raises a critical question: To what extent did Barack Obama knowingly allow—or even enable—that to happen?