Intro to ‘Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To
Influence The 2016 Elections’
Blog Editor John R. Houk
By Fred Fleitz
Posted 4/6/17
The Dems and the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) have been
hell-bent to disqualify President Trump since election day 2016. All
disqualification agendas seem to gravitate around President Trump colluded with
Russia to win over Crooked Hillary.
It is my belief the “collusion” accusation is horse pucky,
but Russian attempts to manipulate the American voter is very possible. AND if POSSIBLE
turns into reality, Russia needs to suffer any kind consequences the Trump
Administration is willing to inflict. By inflict I mean at least with a Cold
War-style agitation to see how far the Russians are willing to confront the
still most powerful nation in the world which of course is the United States of
America.
That being said, the continuous disparaging of President
Trump should be examined by the Trump Administration Department of Justice for
crimes by Dems, the Left MSM, current government civil servant lifers loyal
to BHO AND former Obama Administration Officials INCLUDING the treasonous
former President Barack Hussein Obama.
My thoughts on American collusion with evil leads me to a
Fred Fleitz article entitled, “Was Obama’s White House Politicizing
Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections”.
***************
Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To
Influence The 2016 Elections
By Fred
Fleitz
April 6, 2017
The
truth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies did not conclude that Russia
tried to interfere in the election or help Trump win. Not even close.
Although
there are strong indications the Obama administration abused intelligence
collection by U.S. agencies to gather information on the Trump campaign to leak
to the news media, it also appeared to abuse another U.S. intelligence mission:
intelligence analysis.
Congressional
Democrats and the mainstream media consider it gospel truth that all 17 U.S.
intelligence agencies unanimously concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016
presidential election to help Donald Trump win. But should we treat this
assessment as true in light of major errors in U.S. intelligence analysis in
the past and its politicization? Is something gospel truth just because U.S.
intelligence agencies say it is?
The
truth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies did not conclude
that Russia tried to interfere in the election or help Trump win. Not even
close.
What Intelligence Has Really Confirmed About Russia
U.S.
intelligence agencies issued two assessments on Russian interference in the
2016 presidential election. The first was an October 7 statement by the Office
of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) that said WikiLeaks disclosures of Democratic emails during the
election were “consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed
efforts” but did not say there was any evidence of Russian involvement.
Moreover,
although this statement said the U.S. intelligence community held this
position, the memo was issued by only two agencies, and was called a “Joint DHS
and ODNI Election Security Statement.” Hillary Clinton seized on this statement
in the last presidential debate on October 19 by inaccurately claiming “We have
17, 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military who have all concluded that
these espionage attacks, these cyber attacks, come from the highest levels of
the Kremlin.”
The
fact that this memo was not an intelligence community document issued by all
agencies with equities in this issue was very unusual. It also was suspicious
that an unclassified intelligence analysis so advantageous to one presidential
candidate was issued just before the election and only two weeks before the
last presidential debate. In my view, this looked like looked like a clumsy
attempt by the Obama White House to issue an intelligence assessment to boost
Clinton’s presidential campaign and hurt the Trump campaign.
The
second intelligence assessment on this question, issued on January 6, 2017, I
believe represents a serious instance of a presidential administration
manipulating U.S. intelligence analysis to issue a politicized analysis to
sabotage an incoming president from a different political party. The January 6
analysis found that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election and
hurt Hillary’s candidacy to promote Trump. The assessment said this
interference came at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What About All the Missing Intelligence Agencies?
Like
the October memo, congressional Democrats and the news media have said this was
the unanimous conclusion of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. But also like
the October memo, this was not the case. The January 6 assessment was an
“Intelligence Community Assessment.” Such analyses are usually issued and
cleared by most if not all U.S. intelligence agencies and have a statement on
the first page that usually reads “this is an IC-coordinated assessment.”
The
January 6 Intelligence Community Assessment lacked such a statement because it
reflected the views of only three U.S. intelligence agencies: Central
Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and National Security
Agency. The CIA and FBI concluded with high confidence that Russia intervened
in the election to help Trump win. NSA concluded this with moderate confidence.
Why
did other U.S. intelligence agencies with major equities in this issue not
participate in the January 6 assessment? Why were the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security part of the
October assessment but not the January one? Where were the Defense Intelligence
Agency, the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the
military intelligence agencies?
The
January assessment also was very unusual because it was such a conclusive
analysis of a very controversial subject with no dissenting views. Based my CIA
experience, this is unprecedented and makes me wonder whether intelligence
agencies that may have dissented were deliberately excluded.
There
also is the question as to whether this assessment was written to conform to a
predetermined conclusion by the Obama White House to undermine the Trump
administration. The U.S. intelligence community has played political games like
this before with interagency assessments to promote political agendas. One of
the most notorious examples of this was the controversial 2007 National
Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program that was intended to undermine
President Bush’s Iran policy.
There Are Indications Intelligence Has Been
Politicized
CIA
Director John Brennan’s role in approving this assessment raises serious
questions about whether it was manipulated for political reasons. Brennan has
been heavily criticized for politicizing intelligence for the Obama
administration. This includes the role he played in the 2012 CIA talking points
on the Benghazi terrorist attacks. He also has been openly and extremely
hostile toward Trump before and after the election.
Given
FBI Director James Comey’s statements at a recent House Intelligence Committee
hearing that the conclusion in the January 6 assessment that Russia intervened
in the election to help Trump was based on logic and not
evidence, it is hard to believe this was not a pre-cooked conclusion driven by
the highly partisan Brennan.
I
strongly believe that if there were any evidence that Russia intervened in the
election to help Trump win, or that Russia and the Trump campaign collaborated
to affect the outcome of the election, this intelligence would have been leaked
by Obama holdovers in government and the so-called “Deep State” to The
New York Times long ago. The fact that Comey could not point to such
evidence and this information has not been leaked suggests there is no such
evidence because this didn’t happen.
The
current congressional investigations of possible Russian interference in the
election and the Obama administration’s misuse of U.S. intelligence collection
to surveil the Trump campaign must also include whether intelligence analysis
was politicized to damage Trump’s candidacy and presidency. These
investigations must look at how the above analyses were drafted, who drafted
them, and why some agencies did not participate. The committees also need to
uncover any evidence of the White House trying to influence the outcome of
these assessments or excluding certain agencies from participating.
It
is time to call out Democrats and reporters who portray the idea that Russia
intervened in the election to help Trump win as established truth because it is
the unanimous assessment of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. I expect the
congressional investigations will conclude this claim is false and actually
represented a deliberate effort to manipulate intelligence analysis to
undermine the Trump presidency.
________________
Fred
Fleitz is senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for
Security Policy. He worked in national-security positions for 25 years with the
CIA, the State Department, and the House Intelligence Committee. Follow him on
Twitter @fredfleitz.
Copyright
© 2017 The
Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment