In this episode of Daniel Davis Deep Dive, I sit down with New York Times national security reporter Julian Barnes to unpack one of the most provocative claims in recent political memory: Did the Obama administration conspires to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency?
Tulsi Gabbard, now serving as Director of National Intelligence, has accused former President Obama and senior intelligence officials of orchestrating a “treasonous conspiracy” to delegitimize Trump through a manipulated intelligence assessment. She alleges that the 2017 report on Russian election interference was politically driven, citing suppressed evidence, dubious sources, and the infamous Steele dossier.
But Julian Barnes pushes back:
“There’s no smoking gun here. There’s no evidence pointing to the president or putting a thumb on the scale.”
The conversation dives deep into the documents Gabbard released, including the December 2016 presidential daily brief and internal emails. Barnes and me explore whether these materials support Gabbard’s claims—or simply reflect a rushed but legitimate intelligence process.
“Just because you disagree with the conclusion doesn’t mean it was criminal or done with ill intent,” Barnes notes.
We also revisit the Steele dossier’s controversial inclusion in the intelligence assessment, with Barnes calling it “a terrible political error” that undermined the report’s credibility—but not its core findings.
This episode is for anyone following the intersection of intelligence, politics, and media. It raises critical questions about transparency, trust, and the fine line between oversight and overreach.
Watch the full interview on Daniel Davis Deep Dive—where facts meet scrutiny.
Share this post