In a meeting that mixed diplomacy with political theater, former President Donald Trump publicly accused Barack Obama of orchestrating a criminal plot tied to the 2016 election.
Speaking from the Oval Office in the presence of Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., Trump claimed there is evidence supporting his allegations, though legal experts and critics have questioned their validity.
Trump’s Accusation
On Tuesday, Trump called on the Department of Justice to pursue legal action against Obama, asserting that the former president directed an intelligence operation intended to influence the 2016 election against him. “After what they did to me, it’s time to go after people. Obama has been caught directly,” Trump said.
He described Obama as “the leader of the gang” behind the alleged effort, adding that figures including President Joe Biden, former FBI Director James Comey, former DNI James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan were involved. Trump characterized their actions as criminal and “treasonous,” alleging a coordinated attempt to obscure or manipulate the election outcome.
Context and Background
The accusations stem in part from a criminal referral filed by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Gabbard alleges that Obama illegally commissioned a post-election intelligence assessment aimed at undermining Trump’s victory and that intelligence agencies were acting “at the President’s request.”
These claims contrast sharply with the findings of the Mueller investigation, which concluded that Trump’s campaign did not conspire with Russia. Nevertheless, Trump insisted, “Look, he’s guilty. It’s not a question,” labeling the intelligence effort as a “seditious coup” led by Obama and Hillary Clinton.
During the Oval Office event, Trump also addressed the Jeffrey Epstein case, criticizing media coverage of Ghislaine Maxwell and suggesting that additional documents to be released by Gabbard would implicate Clinton and other Democrats, particularly in relation to the Steele dossier, which Trump dismissed as “made-up fiction.”
Trump’s Framing
Trump portrayed Obama as the central orchestrator of what he described as election interference, claiming that key political and intelligence figures were complicit. He suggested that these actors believed classifying information would shield them indefinitely, a strategy he insisted would not succeed.
Conclusion
Trump’s repeated allegations against Obama, framed as both criminal and treasonous, continue to fuel political controversy. While formal investigations have found no evidence of criminal conspiracy, the claims amplify partisan divisions and underscore how the 2016 election remains a lightning rod for debate over evidence, allegation, and political narrative.