X/@JesseBWatters
Being leggy on Fox News, Jesse Watters stirred a fresh round of controversy when he suggested that the former President Barack Obama himself turned the intelligence agencies into a “public relations arm” of the Obama administration to push the narrative of Russian collusion against Trump. The allegation gained renewed attention after journalist Michael Shellenberger and former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard allegedly discovered new evidence supporting it.
Advertisement
In the explosive segment, Watters said Obama undermined elections in the public’s mind while accusing Trump of doing so. “They knew they didn’t have actual intel or evidence to bring charges against Trump,” said Watters, asserting that the entire Russia investigation was indeed a smear campaign meant to tarnish Trump’s name.
One video that followed withwedsters shows him explaining anew-revealed documents that allege intelligence agencies were used as instruments against Trump. According to Watters, the documents allegedly demonstrate that the Obama team leaked unsubstantiated information to the media to lend an air of credibility to the claims against Trump.
As per usual, social media erupted in different directions on the implications of such allegations. One user replied sarcastically, “Right… And none of Trump’s picked people in his first administration had ANY connection to Russia, right?” Procuring a link to a 2017 Reuters article on the Russian ties of several people associated with Trump.
Another comment approached from a darker place: “I hope you have a good lawyer,” directed toward a Watters supporter. The legal threats grew so thick that yet another user ominously came on, “There are rumblings in DC that an indictment and raid are coming,” referring to Obama-era officials.
There has been massive backlash to the Watters narrative. A detailed fact-check demolished Gabbard’s assertions one by one, accusing the former Hawaii representative of being basically full of E’s, and a distraction tactic away from the Epstein scandal. The very long counter-narrative expounded upon how two different intelligence reports, one classified and one publicly available, reached substantially the same conclusions about Russian interference without evidence of intelligence fabrication.
Some answers leaned toward cynicism about whether any accountability would actually emerge. “Nothing will negatively happen to Obama,” one lamented. “Trump, and his admin are shouting about how anti-democracy the Democrats are, but Trump has no backbone to stop them.”
Due to the timing of these allegations, many eyebrows have been raised, with many implying that it is a distraction from the recently unsealed Epstein files. “Tulsi Gabbard distracting Trump supporters from the Epstein files with Obama Russia files,” was noted by one.
The heated debate continues with the core question still unaddressed: Did the Obama administration cross legal and ethical lines while dealing with the Russia investigation? Watters and his allies answer this with a firm yes, citing the new documents as evidence, with critics insisting it is merely another instance in the long line of attempts to rewrite the history of Trump’s turbulent presidency.
What makes this latest controversy especially explosive is that it touches on the very heartbeat of democracy, on how the intelligence community gets politicized, and the ongoing fight as to who in America even gets to decide on the notion of “truth.” With election season kicking into high gear, these allegations will be a key ingredient in heated discussions later.
The clip affords one of Watters’ most lively moments: animated with gestures as he lays out his argument. Good portions of the delivery come from a place of righteous indignation that his supporters will most definitely buy into. Whether one is convinced by his argument, however, may have less to do with any new evidence put forth and more to do with the current place of that person on the political spectrum.
Advertisement
One thing is for sure: This will definitely not be the last we hear of Obama, Trump, and the Russia investigation. “We will let history decide,” one commentator remarked, though with today’s vehemently polarizing climate, even history seems open to interpretation.