The CIA declares the intelligence examination report on Russia 2016 electoral interference
Washington – CIA officials failed in some cases to follow standard procedures in an intelligence analysis of Russian interference efforts in the 2016 elections, according to an internal review declassified on Wednesday.
Intelligence agents received an unusually short calendar for the analysis, there was “excessive involvement” by senior leaders and the staff had uneven access to crucial information on Russia, said the “lessons learned lessons” exam.
But the examination did not refute the conclusions of the 2017 intelligence assessment that Russia had carried out an information war campaign designed to undermine the confidence of the Americans in the electoral process, damage Hillary Clinton and stimulate the prospects of Donald Trump in the 2016 elections.
“Although the overall evaluation has been deemed defensible, the procedural anomalies identified and the business problems highlight critical lessons to manage controversial or politically loaded subjects,” said the examination.
Follow the political coverage live here
Trump and his allies have long rejected information and other reports indicating that Russia has used false information and propaganda to try to influence the 2016 elections and give the ball in favor of Trump. They accused officials of the intelligence and the application of the laws of plotting to bind Trump to Russia and cast a doubt about the legitimacy of Trump’s electoral victory in 2016.
A special lawyer appointed under the first Trump administration has largely examined how the CIA has designed its evaluation, but has not filed any criminal accusation and has not pointed out any clear evidence that the process was tainted by political prejudices.
A bipartite survey of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020 was approved with the 2017 intelligence assessment and found no reason to challenge its conclusions.
In Trump’s second presidential term, his deputies promised to bring more transparency to the intelligence community and prevent any attempt to politicize his work.
CIA director John Ratcliffe ordered the internal exam this year and declassified it on Wednesday, according to the espionage agency.
The intelligence assessment of the 2016 vote, which was requested by President Barack Obama of the time, after the November elections, revealed that Russia was looking to undermine public faith in the democratic process, denigrating Clinton and that Moscow “aspires” to help Trump to win the election.
According to the internal journal, two senior leaders of a CIA mission center focusing on Russia opposed the conclusion that Russia was aimed at ensuring Trump’s victory. They argued that the point of view was mainly supported by a single intelligence report while other judgments were saved by more information.
The examination said that the evaluation had been carried out in an unusually short calendar. Instead of having months to prepare a complex and politically sensitive analysis, the authors had “less than a week to write the evaluation” and “less than two days to coordinate it formally” with other intelligence agents.
Several intelligence officers “said they felt” blocked “by the compressed calendar”, according to the review.
The examination said that senior CIA officials were strongly involved in the evaluation effort, which “was very unusual both in scope and intensity”. Consequently, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Intelligence and Research Office of the State Department were “completely excluded” from the analysis, which was a “important gap” of the standard practice of the intelligence community, according to the journal.
The authors of the 2016 evaluation and other CIA officers also “strongly opposed”, including a reference in the analysis to the so-called “Trump file” compiled by the former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. The file had not verified the allegations concerning Trump ending with Russia.
In the end, a summary of the file was included in an annex, with a warning that it was not used “to draw analytical conclusions” in the evaluation.
Examination of the 2016 evaluation also revealed reasons to praise the effort, saying that a large part of the team’s work has shown a “robust” profession with an extensive supply and that there was no sign of systemic problems.
John Brennan, who was director of the CIA at the time of the evaluation, told NBC News on Wednesday that he was aware of the exam but had not yet had the chance to read it.
