Declassified Documents Expose Clinton-Endorsed Strategy to Discredit Trump with Russia Allegations

Newly released declassified intelligence has revealed explosive details about the 2016 U.S. presidential election, including a plan allegedly approved by Hillary Clinton to link then-candidate Donald Trump to Russian interference—despite a lack of evidence. The plan, according to documents uncovered during Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation, was intended to shift public focus away from Clinton’s own email controversy and instead frame Trump as a beneficiary of Russian political interference.

The documents allege that Clinton signed off on a strategy developed by one of her foreign policy advisers, Julianne Smith, to promote a narrative tying Trump to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The aim was to convince voters that Trump’s campaign had colluded with foreign actors, specifically Russian intelligence services, to gain an advantage in the election.

One of the memos states: “Clinton approved a plan proposed by one of her foreign policy advisors, Julianne Smith, to smear Donald Trump by magnifying the scandal tied to the intrusion by the Russian special services in the pre-election process to benefit the Republican candidate.”

The Durham investigation, which spanned several years and examined U.S. intelligence activity surrounding the 2016 election, unearthed the documents now at the center of renewed political debate. At the request of Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), several top officials—including FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi—authorized the declassification of these findings.

In a statement, Grassley condemned what he described as a failure by the FBI and other agencies to thoroughly examine the Clinton campaign’s potential role in crafting the Russia narrative. “These intelligence reports and related records, whether true or false, were buried for years,” he said. “History will show that the Obama and Biden administrations’ law enforcement and intelligence agencies were weaponized against President Trump.”

He went on to say that the fallout from this politicization has caused “critical damage to our institutions” and called for the Trump administration to address it with “maximum speed and transparency.”

Adding to the controversy, Director of Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently released additional declassified memos that appear to challenge long-standing claims about Russian interference. According to one document addressed to then-President Barack Obama in 2016, U.S. intelligence officials had concluded that neither Russian nor criminal actors had impacted the outcome of the election.

“Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure,” the memo read. It acknowledged that while voter registration systems in some states were targeted, no actual votes were altered or compromised.

“The targeting of infrastructure not used in casting ballots makes it highly unlikely it would have resulted in altering any state’s official vote,” the memo stated. “Criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes.”

Paul Sperry, a senior investigative journalist, added fuel to the fire with claims that communications exist between the Clinton campaign and Obama-era officials. In a post on social media, Sperry stated: “I’m told there are texts/emails indicating Hillary Clinton campaign aides directly coordinated with the Obama White House, NSC, State Dept, and Intelligence Community officials in efforts to dig up dirt tying Donald Trump to Vladimir Putin.”

These revelations are now prompting discussions of accountability. According to sources familiar with the matter, federal investigators are laying the groundwork for potential legal action against several former high-ranking intelligence officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey. Both were instrumental in launching and overseeing the Crossfire Hurricane investigation—an FBI operation that sought to establish whether Trump’s campaign had illicit ties to Russia.

Critics argue that the probe, which dominated headlines and deeply impacted the early days of Trump’s presidency, was fueled by partisan motivations and unverified intelligence. Many of its key claims stemmed from the now-discredited Steele Dossier, a document paid for in part by the Clinton campaign.

As pressure builds on those who orchestrated the original narrative, many believe that the current developments could mark a turning point. For Trump and his supporters, the latest findings serve as validation for long-held beliefs that his campaign was unfairly targeted for political reasons.

What happens next remains uncertain, but the evidence now entering the public domain is poised to reignite debate over the integrity of the 2016 election and the conduct of powerful institutions that were entrusted to remain neutral in one of the most divisive political eras in modern American history.