Russiagate: The Hoax That Ate the Republic
By Jaffa — 29 August 2025
When the “Russiagate” scandal broke in 2016, America’s most prestigious newspapers treated it as gospel. The New York Times and The Washington Post led the charge, framing Donald Trump’s victory as the product of Kremlin interference. For this coverage, both were awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 2018.
Seven years later, the foundation of that story is collapsing. Tulsi Gabbard, now Director of National Intelligence, has accused Barack Obama and his top intelligence chiefs of fabricating Russiagate in order to sabotage Trump’s presidency. According to declassified documents released in July, the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment — the document that entrenched the narrative of Russian interference — was deliberately manipulated under the direction of Obama, CIA Director John Brennan, DNI James Clapper, and FBI Director James Comey.
The Department of Justice, under Attorney General Pam Bondi, has since convened a grand jury and formed a special “strike force” to probe whether these actions amounted to criminal conspiracy. Gabbard herself has described the affair as “treasonous.”
No Reckoning in the Press
For all of this, the institutions most implicated — the Times and the Post — have not issued a word of reckoning. There has been no retraction, no apology, no editorial reflection. Their Pulitzer-winning coverage still stands on the record.
Contrast this with Watergate: in the 1970s, Woodward and Bernstein’s reporting exposed genuine White House criminality, leading to Nixon’s resignation and marking the high-water mark of adversarial journalism. Russiagate is its inversion: a media–intelligence partnership that built a false narrative, rewarded by prizes, and left unexamined even when evidence of fabrication emerges.
Disputed but Not Denied
Former intelligence officials have fiercely contested Gabbard’s disclosures, defending the integrity of the Russia findings and accusing her of mischaracterising the record. Yet these rebuttals have not addressed the specific allegation that dissenting analysts were sidelined and that weak and politicised material — such as the Steele dossier — was elevated to drive a predetermined conclusion.
Strategic Fallout
The consequences extend beyond domestic politics. By enshrining the notion of Russia as an election saboteur, Russiagate locked in a policy consensus of hostility that has since metastasised into the NATO proxy war in Ukraine. What began as a partisan weapon against Trump became justification for policies that have pushed the world closer to a major-power confrontation.
Independent voices such as Aaron Maté, Ray McGovern, and William Binney exposed these weaknesses years ago, arguing that the DNC emails were more likely leaked internally than hacked by Moscow. Their work was dismissed as fringe. Today it looks prescient.
Worse than Watergate
If Watergate was the “worst political scandal of the 20th century,” Russiagate may well define the 21st. The difference is crucial: Nixon’s crimes were exposed and punished, however imperfectly. Russiagate, by contrast, was fabricated at the highest levels of government, promoted by the national press, and remains unacknowledged by the very institutions that sold it to the public.
That silence is telling. For the Times and Post, a reckoning would mean admitting their complicity in a deception that corroded American democracy, poisoned U.S.–Russia relations, and contributed to a war still raging. Instead, they avert their gaze.
The hoax is no longer deniable. What remains to be seen is whether the United States retains the institutional strength to confront it — or whether the press, the intelligence services, and the political establishment will continue to protect one another while the republic rots from within.