The Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declared additional documents on the assessment of the Russian actions in the evaluation on the assessment of the assessment of the Russian actions in the 2016 electionsclaiming in a social media job And during a White House press briefing, they showed that Obama administration officials “made” information to undermine the candidate of the time, Donald Trump.
His declaration on X said that the documents show the officials of Obama “manufactured the evaluation of the January 2017 intelligence community that they knew how to be false, promoting the lie according to which Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump to win the 2016 elections.”
The Democrats challenged his claims and accused Gabbard of having distorted the conclusions of the intelligence. Wednesday’s report follows a separate set of declassified documents on the issue Released by Gabbard Friday. In a memo accompanying these documents, she also accused Obama administration officials of having plotted a “coup of several years” against Mr. Trump.
Obama’s spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement concerning the first series of documents, “these bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a low attempted distraction,” he said, a probable reference to disorders in the disorders on the release of files related to the child’s sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Rodenbush also said nothing in last week’s documents “undermines the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but has failed to manipulate votes”. Rodenbush did not respond to the last release of equipment.
Gabbard also declared in his declaration X that it was President Trump who had made the decision to declass the report of the Republicans of the Chamber.
Wednesday’s press release was a reported report compiled in 2017 and finalized in 2020 by the republican majority of the House Intelligence Committee – where FBI director Kash Patel was a main staff member at the time, according to two families with the problem. He focuses for a long time on the judgment of the intelligence community that Russian president Vladimir Putin aspired to help President Trump earn The 2016 elections.
It includes discussions on the raw intelligence provided by a human source to the CIA, as well as interceptions of signaling collected by the National Security Agency, which aroused concerns of current and former intelligence officials and the conviction of democrats on the risks it could present to the sources and methods of intelligence.
But the report does not fundamentally change previous assessments of the American information community – or the multiple journals that followed.
“The desperate and irresponsible release of the partisan house intelligence report endorses some of the most sensitive sources and methods that our intelligence community uses to spy on Russia and ensure the security of the Americans,” said the vice-president of the Senate intelligence committee Mark Warner. “And in doing so, the director Gabbard sends a scary message to our allies and assets around the world: the United States can no longer trust to protect the information you share with us.”
An office of the Directorate of the National Intelligence Manager said that the President’s ultimate declassification authority meant that he was not obliged to consult the intelligence agencies concerning the contents of the report.
During the White House briefing on Monday, Gabbard accused President Obama of “directing the manufacture of this intelligence assessment”. She told journalists that documents would be sent to the Ministry of Justice and the FBI to investigate “criminal implications”.
Questioned by the CBS News correspondent, Ed O’Keefe, if she thinks that Obama is guilty of betrayal, Gabbard replied that she would leave criminal charges to the Ministry of Justice, but said that what happened “can only be described as a coup of several years and a betrayal conspiracy against the American people”.
She refused to answer another O’Keefe question directly on how the latest declassified documents modify previous evaluations, since the Senate Intelligence Committee – which then included Sen. Marco Rubio – dedicated an entire volume of his five volume survey to the analysis of the intelligence community.
“”[W]He ensures that the intelligence community is not politicized, said Gabbard. “Look at the evidence and you will know the truth.”
The Republican report of the Chamber Committee is criticizing the examination of the analysis of the evaluation which was devoted to the evaluation of the 2017 intelligence community, or ICA, for several reasons, in particular that its production was precipitated to be released before Mr. Trump took up his duties. He also said that analysts had not taken into account alternative explanations plausible to Putin’s intentions and wondered if they took into account the motivations of the human source, the proximity of Putin or the bias towards Trump.
The report of the Gop Zero Chamber Committee on an element of intelligence contained in a relationship of a human source which, according to her, was subject to a “questionable interpretation” by analysts.
“The unclear fragment (illustrated in fat) is part of a sentence in a [redacted] who reads as follows: “Putin had made this decision [to leak DNC emails] After believing that the Democratic candidate was in better chance of winning the American presidential election and that [candidate Trump] On whom the victory Putin hadwould probably not be able to win a convincing victory, “said a bullet on page 4 of the report.
This adds that an CIA operations senior officer said at the time: “We don’t know what we heard by that” and “five people read it five ways”.
The results align in many areas with a separate profession goodbye Released earlier this month by CIA director, John Ratcliffe, who determined that the level of confidence in the evaluation that Putin aspired to help Trump would have been “moderate” instead of “high”, mainly because he was derived from a source instead of several. The CIA report, however, has included any detailed discussion of the sensitive sources or methods involved.
The proper examination of the intelligence of the CIA which informed the conclusion of Putin’s preference “confirmed that the clause was represented with precision … and that the interpretation of the authors of the ICA of its meaning was the most consistent with raw intelligence”. He noted more broadly than a large part of the profession underlying the 2017 evaluation was “robust and consistent” with analytical standards.
The CIA refused to comment on the report published by Gabbard.
The Democrats seized the disclosure calendar – which they stressed could have been made at any time during the first Trump administration or since he took office for the second time.
“It is appropriate that this poor quality and supporter report was published by the director Gabbard the day the Républicains of the Chamber literally fled Washington, DC, for six weeks rather than publishing the Epstein files that Trump is so desperate to hide,” said Jim Himes, member of the Intelligence Committee of the Chamber’s intelligence.
“Given the precipitated and unusual” declassification “process that the DNI has implemented, I fear that the public publication of this report would compromise sensitive sources and methods and put our national security in danger,” said Himes.
contributed to this report.
