A declassified memorandum from the CIA, released on Wednesday, casts doubt on the conclusions drawn by intelligence agencies regarding Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The memo questions the determination that Russia acted to support Donald Trump, the Republican candidate who ultimately won the presidency. The document was produced under the direction of CIA Director John Ratcliffe, a staunch supporter of Trump, who had previously criticized the Russia investigation during his time in Congress.
The memo calls into question a 2017 intelligence assessment that implicated the Russian government, led by President Vladimir Putin, in a campaign intended to benefit Trump. However, it does not take into account later investigations, including a 2020 report by the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee, which concurred with the conclusion regarding Russia’s intentions and influence.
This eight-page document is part of an ongoing initiative by Trump and his allies in government to reexamine the Russia investigation, which led to several criminal charges and overshadowed much of Trump’s first term. The investigation left lingering disputes and fueled Trump’s long-standing distrust of the intelligence community. Ratcliffe has been actively challenging the intelligence agencies’ decision-making processes during the investigation.
Ratcliffe, previously known for his vocal support of Trump and aggressive questioning of former special counsel Robert Mueller during his 2019 testimony, has used his position to declassify Russian intelligence that alleged derogatory information about Democrats in the 2016 election, despite admitting the information’s questionable veracity. The recent review, initiated by Ratcliffe in May, aimed to evaluate the intelligence community’s 2017 assessment on Russian interference, with a particular focus on the assertion that Putin sought to aid Trump’s electoral success.
The report highlights several “anomalies” in the intelligence assessment, attributing them to a hurried timeline and dependence on unverified information. This includes opposition research funded by Democrats about Trump’s Russian connections, gathered by former British spy Christopher Steele. The report specifically criticizes the inclusion of a summary of the Steele dossier in the intelligence community assessment, arguing that it lent undue credibility to unsubstantiated claims, thus compromising the analytical integrity of the judgment.
Despite these criticisms, Ratcliffe’s report stops short of directly contradicting any existing intelligence. Russia’s alleged support for Trump has been documented in various intelligence findings and endorsed by the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020. Robert Mueller’s 2019 report also supported these conclusions, asserting that Russia interfered in favor of Trump and noting that while the Trump campaign welcomed the assistance, it did not engage in a criminal conspiracy.
Brian Taylor, a Russia expert at Syracuse University’s Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs, stated that the new report doesn’t alter any foundational evidence and doesn’t address existing evidence. Taylor suggested that the report’s release could be intended to bolster Trump’s claims that investigations into his associations with Russia are politically motivated.
According to Taylor, competent intelligence analysts are tasked with providing objective analysis rather than telling leaders what they want to hear, warning that catering to leadership desires can lead to flawed intelligence. Intelligence agencies routinely conduct after-action reviews to improve future operations, but it’s rare for such evaluations to be made public.
Ratcliffe has expressed intentions to release information on various public issues, having already declassified documents on the assassinations of President John Kennedy and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, as well as the origins of COVID-19.