Tulsi Gabbard Unmasks Hillary Clinton’s Buried Secrets: Durham Files, Media Complicity, and Political Smears

In a stunning revelation that’s shaking the political world, former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has exposed a series of secrets Hillary Clinton allegedly tried to keep hidden, sparking renewed debate over political corruption, media bias, and the legacy of the 2016 election. Gabbard’s explosive comments, referencing newly declassified documents from the Durham report and her own experiences with Clinton’s smear tactics, have reignited controversy over the actions of some of America’s most powerful figures.

.

.

.

The Durham Report: A Pandora’s Box

The latest chapter in the Clinton saga began with the release of the Durham annex, a set of documents declassified in 2023 that shed new light on the inner workings of Clinton’s 2016 campaign. As Gabbard explained in her recent appearance on Pod Force One, the files contain “quite shocking statements” implicating Clinton and her allies in a coordinated effort to distract from her own controversies by manufacturing scandals against Donald Trump.

Among the most damning revelations: Clinton’s emails were deleted “just in time,” according to then-DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, to avoid further scrutiny. The annex details communications between Clinton’s campaign and associates of billionaire George Soros, spelling out a deliberate operation to “dirty up Donald Trump” and shift the media narrative away from Clinton’s own problems.

Media Complicity: The Mainstream’s Role

Gabbard didn’t stop at the campaign’s tactics. She called out the mainstream media for their role in “whitewashing” Clinton’s record, arguing that journalists routinely listed Clinton’s impressive titles and credentials while ignoring her actual record.

“They would list off all of these titles, these fancy titles that she’s carried, but none of them actually looked at her record,” Gabbard said. “That’s why today we’re covering it all—because we’re not here to follow parties blindly. We’re here for common sense.”

This critique of the media’s complicity has struck a chord with independent thinkers and critics of establishment politics, many of whom see the press as an extension of the political elite rather than a check on its power.

Dirty Tricks: The Anatomy of a Smear Campaign

The Durham annex goes further, detailing how Clinton’s staff—with support from “special services”—prepared “scandalous revelations of business relations between Trump and the Russian mafia.” According to the report, Clinton approved a plan proposed by advisor Julianne Smith to smear Trump by magnifying the scandal tied to the alleged Russian intrusion into the pre-election process.

The annex also cites an email from Leonard Bernardo, a senior vice president at the Soros Foundation, which reads: “Julie says it will be a long-term affair to demonize Putin and Trump. Later, the FBI will put more oil into the fire.”

The ripple effects of these actions would be felt for years, as the infamous Steele dossier and subsequent Russia Gate investigations dominated headlines and shaped public perceptions of Trump’s presidency.

Obama’s Involvement: A Legacy at Stake

Perhaps most surprisingly, the documents reveal that President Obama was briefed on Clinton’s plans before the election. At the time, Obama reportedly expressed concern about his legacy being “tainted by Hillary Clinton and her controversy,” claiming he wanted to stay out of the fray.

However, as Gabbard noted, Obama’s stance shifted. In January following the election, on Obama’s orders, a new intelligence assessment was released, largely based on the now-debunked Steele dossier. This report helped launch Russia Gate—a story that would dominate American politics and shape the national conversation for years.

The “Russian Asset” Smear: Tulsi’s Personal Battle

Gabbard’s critique of Clinton is not merely academic. She herself was targeted by Clinton, who infamously referred to Gabbard as a “Russian asset” during the 2020 presidential race. The accusation, which Gabbard described as a calculated smear, was repeated so often that it became a talking point during her confirmation hearings, with Democratic senators circling back to the claim like a broken record.

“Hillary Clinton, as I said then, is the queen of war mongers,” Gabbard stated. “From a fundamental foreign policy view, what she was advocating for versus what I was advocating for could not have been more different and diametrically opposed.”

Gabbard pointed to Clinton’s role in the Libya intervention, recalling the infamous moment when Clinton laughed about the brutal death of Muammar Gaddafi: “We came, we saw, he died.” For Gabbard, this was emblematic of Clinton’s hawkish approach and willingness to use smear tactics against opponents.

Inside the DNC: Tilted Scales

Gabbard’s experience as vice chair of the Democratic National Committee in 2016 gave her an insider’s perspective on the party’s inner workings. She observed firsthand how the scales were “tilted heavily for Hillary Clinton” by Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other party officials, with the mainstream media complicit in promoting Clinton as the “most qualified candidate ever to run for president.”

Yet, as Gabbard emphasized, few in the media bothered to scrutinize Clinton’s actual record—her votes, her foreign policy decisions, and the outcomes of her actions as a senator and Secretary of State.

Propaganda and Public Perception

The broader lesson, according to Gabbard, is the power of propaganda. “Repeat a lie often enough and people stop questioning it. It becomes accepted without a second thought,” she warned.

Fortunately, Gabbard believes, the American people ultimately saw through the narrative. When it came time to vote, Clinton did not make it to the White House—a result Gabbard attributes in part to public skepticism of the establishment script.

A Legacy of Distrust

The revelations from the Durham annex and Gabbard’s account have deepened public distrust of political elites and the mainstream media. For many, the Clinton campaign’s alleged tactics are emblematic of a broader problem: the willingness of powerful figures to manipulate narratives, deploy smear campaigns, and rely on media complicity to maintain their grip on power.

As Gabbard put it, “We’re not here to follow parties blindly. We’re here for common sense.”

What’s Next?

The fallout from Gabbard’s exposé and the Durham annex is likely to continue. Calls for accountability and transparency are growing, with demands for further investigation into the actions of Clinton, her campaign, and the officials involved in shaping public perception.

For Gabbard, the fight is personal—but it’s also part of a larger movement to challenge the status quo, demand honesty from leaders, and restore faith in American democracy.

As the story unfolds, one thing is clear: the secrets Hillary Clinton tried to bury are now out in the open, and the public is watching closely.