Russiagate revisited: new CIA review
This is being treated as news, but didn’t we already know it?:
A bombshell new CIA review of the Obama administration’s spy agencies’ assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump was deliberately corrupted by then-CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who were “excessively involved” in its drafting, and rushed its completion in a “chaotic,” “atypical” and “markedly unconventional” process that raised questions of a “potential political motive.”
Further, Brennan’s decision to include the discredited Steele dossier, over the objections of the CIA’s most senior Russia experts, “undermined the credibility” of the assessment.
The “Tradecraft Review of the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment [ICA] on Russian Election Interference” was conducted by career professionals at the CIA’s Directorate of Analysis and was commissioned by CIA Director John Ratcliffe in May.
The “lessons-learned review” found that, on December 6, 2016, six weeks before his presidency ended, Barack Obama ordered the assessment, which concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin “aspired” to help Trump win the election.
The review identified “multiple procedural anomalies” that undermined the credibility of the ICA, including “a highly compressed production timeline, stringent compartmentation, and excessive involvement of agency heads.”
More at the link.
On the right, many of the comments take the form of saying something like “not only did we already know this, but so what – will these people be prosecuted for their scurrilous lies?” The answer to the last part of that is probably not; I’m not sure that the dangerous and deplorable things they did were actually crimes in the legal sense, and none of them are still in office so they can’t be removed. And yes, we mostly knew what the report says in the general sense, but it’s more specific about the roles of Obama, Brennan, Comey, and Clapper.
Most people formed their ideas about Russiagate long ago and probably aren’t even reading the report, however, especially the details. It’s been almost ten years since Russiagate began – imagine that. And yet it was a shocking thing, and remains so. Ironically, Russiagate has contributed to people’s distrust of everything the government says, including when it emanates from the right – such as this report.
As for the NY Times, it does cover the new report, but the Times’ article has this ho-hum headline that could easily lead a reader to the conclusion that Russiagate was correct: “C.I.A. Says Its Leaders Rushed Report on Russia Interference in 2016 Vote – But the new review of the earlier assessment does not dispute the conclusion that Russia favored the election of Donald J. Trump.”
And here’s the article’s lede:
A C.I.A. review of its assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election criticized the agency’s leadership at the time for rushing the effort but did not dispute the conclusion that Russia favored the election of Donald J. Trump.
The review also criticized John O. Brennan, who was the C.I.A. director when the assessment was written, for his oversight of the project and for too tightly controlling access to sensitive intelligence that formed the basis of the work.
That certainly would be unlikely to cause any Democrat to doubt Russiagate – or to read much further.
Unreal. Worst government scandal in decades, but you’d never know it from the archaic MSM. Way worse than Watergate, Iran Contra, COINTELPRO, or Teapot Dome, etc.
TAR
FEATHERS
A multitude—a KINGDOM—of lies…where lying, misrepresenting and covering up seems to be the only thing they’re capable of.
IOW, All the lies that’s fit to print…
I swear… Comey and Clapper have done more damage to the integrity of the US intelligence apparatus with their shameless shenanigans than anyone I can think of. It just goes to show what happens when you hand that much power to such a pair of amoral, sanctimonious idiots with delusions of grandeur and chips on their shoulders.
Oops! Forgot to mention “…along with spreading hate like an LA wildfire….”
Of course, none of the miscreants will be punished in any way.
This entire scam shows how the “deep state,” can create our of thin air an issue anyway they choose.
It’s safe to say that ANY “information” coming from our govt. has to be initially met with skepticism if not downright disbelief; e.g., Covid, Gulf of Tonkin incident, etc.
One must include the MSM as essential to this Russia scam; they gleefully took the information fed to them by the conspirators and broadcast it to the public.. Not once did they consider questioning the validity of the information they were being fed by the CIA, FBI, etc.
Frankly, those within the govt involved in this scam should be executed ; a public hanging would be ideal.
There is a certain shoulder shrugging required when one says to oneself that yeah, the former President of the United States committed treason against his nation and yeah, there’s no way this truth can be uttered aloud in a public forum carrying with it the force of law and the majesty of conviction. It’s practically an obligatory meh.
I have read that Brennan lied to Congress. I think it is a crime to lie to Congress if you are not a member of Congress.
I know we don’t want to be like ‘them’; but I expect Martha Stewart and General Flynn would say that you don’t need a conviction, or necessarily a crime, to impose punishment. Flynn could be the poster child for the ‘make life so miserable, threaten family, and impose financial ruin’ concept of justice. If you are able to eventually exhaust the target into a guilty plea, that is a bonus.
In fact, if the other side saw it happen to their own a couple of times it might serve as a deterrent the next time–if there is a next time–that they hold the whip.
I still say America is a better place for the issuance of this review. There will be interesting books written about these matters. History is on our side.
Course I’m all for prosecuting the bastids too.
@ huxley > “History is on our side.”
Depends on who writes the history books.
Howard Zinn got a pretty long run with a lot of lies.
https://thenewneo.com/2022/09/24/teaching-zinn-part-i/
https://thenewneo.com/2022/09/29/teaching-zinn-part-ii/
Matt Taibbi adds some context to the report, based on his own reporting over the years. Remember, he comes from a left-wing orientation, and doesn’t particularly like Trump, or Republicans.
He just hates liars.
https://www.racket.news/p/explosive-new-cia-report-details
But is the glass half full or half empty…?
https://instapundit.com/730085/
(Though one may well imagine that Ratcliffe et al. feels the need to tread rather lightly in such dismal, dark and murky matters….)
And so on
https://x.com/HansMahncke/status/1940873182207996394
Do these really count as intelligence anymore
Miguel, did you say WAPO?
Related?
“Oops, Narrative Fail”—
https://tinyurl.com/4kxh5ckd
Concluding graf:
And that missing (WAPO) link…
https://instapundit.com/730157/
@AesopFan: Depends on who writes the history books.
I see history as a three steps forward, two steps back sort of thing.
Zinn was a couple of steps back. While Zinn has written an influential history book still assigned to high school students (and viewers of “Good Will Hunting” 🙂 ), he’s still not considered real history by professional historians, even in this degraded age of academia.
Despite setbacks I remain optimistic. I believe truth, goodness, and perhaps even God are on our side.
What say you?
@ huxley – Sometimes it seems more like 2 steps forward, 3 steps back, but I’m trying to be optimistic!
Watching the hash being made of the history we actually still have copious documentation for, or witnessed ourselves, I have been a lot more suspicious of relatively ancient histories. However, we only have what we have, and must make the best of it all.
“I believe truth, goodness, and perhaps even God are on our side.”
Or as Lincoln said, “Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.”
In the best of all possible worlds, the two statements are tautologies:
God is on our side when we are on His.
https://www.socratic-method.com/quote-meanings-and-interpretations/abraham-lincoln-sir-my-concern-is-not-whether-god-is-on-our-side-my-greatest-concern-is-to-be-on-gods-side-for-god-is-always-right
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
Happy Independence Day!
Some insight from someone very familiar with the national intelligence process:
1. Intelligence Community Assessments (just like NIEs and SOCMs) are drafted under the management of the National Intelligence Council (NIC), a DNI organization. The NIC, normally through the pertinent NIO, selects the drafter(s) — normally from the all-source agencies — and manages coordination.
2. Brennan clearly bypassed this process and apparently went VFR direct to Obama to get concurrence on the CIA doing the drafting and cutting the NIC out of the process. (Obama probably did not know he was being played.)
3. The CIA, NSA, and FBI cut out two of the three all-source Intelligence “agencies” that are almost always involved in NIC products: DIA and INR (State Dept). FBI and NSA are not all-source agencies.
4. CIA played squirrelly games with intel access, cutting out key analysts by not “reading them in” to certain intelligence reporting (Iraq, anyone?).
5. Brennan (who should never have been in charge of an IC document like this), allowed the FBI to add a completely unvetted annex to the ICA. Highly unusual, perhaps unprecedented.
Brennan is a political tool, not a real intelligence officer. He deliberately manipulated a non-political process for political purposes. Shameful.