On Thursday, MSNBC’s Ana Cabrera ran a segment on her eponymous show regarding the recent Russian election interference report from DNI Tulsi Gabbard. NBC News Justice Reporter Ryan Riley was asked about the details, which led to him talking in circles about the minority of the report and how “in the weeds” it supposedly was.
After Cabrera made it very clear that she believed this report was all just a cover-up for the Epstein files, because obviously people were incapable of focusing on two things at once, she asked Riley about the details of the documents, teeing him up to muddy the waters and to discuss and dismiss the those details in broad strokes (Click “expand”):
CABRERA: The administration clearly looking to change the subject from Epstein to Obama making these baseless claims. What are the details of this document DNI Tulsi Gabbard had released yesterday?
RILEY: Yeah, I mean, this gets really, really into the weeds here, Ana. I mean, what you’re talking about is something that happened so long ago, first of all. And making those bold pronunciations that, you know, are just not backed up by what they released from the podium of the White House, is certainly one of the more unusual things that we’ve seen; even during a very unusual time period in our nation's history. But, you know, at the core here, what you have to remember is that there is this bipartisan look at all of this and that those claims. Those bold claims that they’re making are just not backed up by the evidence.
And we’ve seen this trend happen over and over and time and time again with a lot of these bold pronunciations up front, and then actually, when it comes down to it, there's some minor detail, and I think a lot of Americans just end up sort of losing the thread. It’s very difficult to sort of follow this all the way through and think back nine years what we’re talking about here in terms of what — you know — is being examined.
So, they're making bold pronunciations that I think are really tossing off a lot of the heat that they’re facing regarding the Epstein files from their own base.
Riley started by saying this report gets really into the weeds and that it happened so long ago. Eluding that whatever came out was baseless because it happened a while ago, hardly the start you want when trying to prove something to be minor.
He then went on to say that the way they released the documents was unusual, “even during a very unusual time period in our nation’s history,” which seems to be the go-to phrase nowadays for Democrats talking about the Trump administration. Essentially, trying to hand wave away any evidence impropriety.
Regardless, instead of bringing up a factual basis and evidence from the report, Riley just called the report a “minor detail” making it seem like the American public was just too dumb to follow this through and think back just nine years ago.
Cabrera, visibly annoyed that he won’t share the “details” he’s referring to, pressed him more on the topic (Click “expand”):
CABRERA: So, can you clear it up though? What do we know about what the facts are in terms of what happened in 2016? What do the independent reports say? What does that bipartisan Senate intel report say? An intel report, by the way, which was led by then chairman of that committee, then-Senator Marco Rubio.
RILEY: Precisely, you know that —- I mean, the fact is, is that, you know, Russia was trying to interfere in the 2016 election. That’s something that we’ve gone over time and time again.
The what they’ve been focusing on in some of the documents that they’ve released is that there has been a little bit of a sped up procedure, is what they allege, that this was a little bit quicker than normal. That some of the intelligence officials had to speed this up, and it didn’t go through the sort of normal protocols, but I mean, that's really, really in the weeds here.
What we’re —- when we’re talking about the overall, the bipartisan agreement that, you know, that it was the objective of Russia to interfere in the 2016 elections has been shown. You know, there are indictments related to this later, there's a lot of information out there about Russia's efforts nine years ago to interfere in the election.
Riley said that the documents released by DNI Gabbard only showed a “speed up of procedure" and that everyone knows that Russia interfered with the 2016 election.
The problem was that’s not what the documents argued at all! They claimed that the Obama administration knew that Russia did nothing in the way of actually helping Trump win in 2016, but still pushed it anyways. Sorry if that’s “in the weeds” or too long ago, but the American people deserve to know of intelligence failures.
NBC News, who Riley works for, even published this article in 2016, pushing the narrative that Russia helped Trump win directly following the initial CIA report.
This wasn’t just a “speed up of procedure,” it was a narrative pushed through despite unclear sources with multiple CIA officials unsure if what was going into the report was true. For example, the report cited an officer that said “We don’t have direct information that Putin wanted to get Trump elected.”
The full transcript is below. Click "expand" to view:
MSNBC’s Ana Cabrera Reports
10:18:54 AM
July 24th, 2025(…)
ANA CABRERA: Joining us now, NBC News Justice Reporter Ryan Riley and MSNBC National Security and Intelligence Analyst Chris O’Leary. Ryan, the administration clearly looking to change the subject from Epstein to Obama making these baseless claims. What are the details of this document DNI Tulsi Gabbard had released yesterday?
RYAN RILEY: Yeah, I mean, this gets really, really into the weeds here, Ana. I mean, what you’re talking about is something that happened so long ago, first of all. And making those bold pronunciations that, you know, are just not backed up by what they released from the podium of the White House, is certainly one of the more unusual things that we’ve seen; even during a very unusual time period in our nation's history. But, you know, at the core here, what you have to remember is that there is this bipartisan look at all of this and that those claims. Those bold claims that they’re making are just not backed up by the evidence.
And we’ve seen this trend happen over and over and time and time again with a lot of these bold pronunciations up front, and then actually, when it comes down to it, there's some minor detail, and I think a lot of Americans just end up sort of losing the thread. It’s very difficult to sort of follow this all the way through and think back nine years what we’re talking about here in terms of what — you know — is being examined.
So, they're making bold pronunciations that I think are really tossing off a lot of the heat that they’re facing regarding the Epstein files from their own base.
CABRERA: So, can you clear it up though? What do we know about what the facts are in terms of what happened in 2016? What do the independent reports say? What does that bipartisan Senate intel report say? An intel report, by the way, which was led by then chairman of that committee, then-Senator Marco Rubio.
RILEY: Precisely, you know that —- I mean, the fact is, is that, you know, Russia was trying to interfere in the 2016 election. That’s something that we’ve gone over time and time again.
The what they’ve been focusing on in some of the documents that they’ve released is that there has been a little bit of a sped up procedure, is what they allege, that this was a little bit quicker than normal. That some of the intelligence officials had to speed this up, and it didn’t go through the sort of normal protocols, but I mean, that's really, really in the weeds here.
What we’re —- when we’re talking about the overall, the bipartisan agreement that, you know, that it was the objective of Russia to interfere in the 2016 elections has been shown. You know, there are indictments related to this later, there's a lot of information out there about Russia's efforts nine years ago to interfere in the election.
(...)
