The analysts who crafted the corrupt Intelligence Community Assessment (“ICA”) on Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election on behalf of disgraced former CIA Director John Brennan remain active at the CIA, a source familiar with the assessment told The Federalist. Multiple other sources familiar with the House intelligence committee’s investigation into the Russia-collusion hoax added that HPSCI interviewed the specific people responsible for writing the ICA. And as The Federalist reported earlier this week, that HPSCI staff report established that the ICA was “significantly worse and significantly more corrupt than conveyed in the memorandum released last week by CIA Director John Ratcliffe.”
Taken together then, it seems there are two possible conclusions: Either Director Ratcliffe’s efforts to clean out the agency have hit a snag, or the CIA director is quietly seeking to hold Brennan’s collaborators accountable — just as he has done in the case of Brennan and former FBI Director Comey, who now reportedly face criminal referrals based on the CIA’s investigation into the ICA.
Last Tuesday, Director Ratcliffe released a report summarizing the CIA’s probe into the crafting of the ICA. That CIA report detailed numerous problems related to the assessment of Russia’s activities in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. The CIA report, among other things, concluded the ICA should not have attributed “high confidence” to the conclusion that “Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances.” The ICA also should not have included the Steele Dossier in its annex or referenced it in the text of the report, the CIA concluded.
The CIA’s investigation into the ICA exposed damning information related to former CIA Director John Brennan’s role in producing the bogus report, as well as details implicating the then-FBI Director James Comey in the get-Trump conspiracy. But as The Federalist reported earlier this week, “the CIA report pales in comparison to the real corruption at play, according to sources familiar with a separate HPSCI staff report.”
According to sources, HPSCI, under the leadership of then-Chair Devin Nunes, “found the ICA significantly worse and significantly more corrupt than was conveyed in the CIA report.” As The Federalist further reported, “[t]he staff report also reveals more details related to the ICA’s report on Russia’s 2016 influence campaign.”
Now another source familiar with the HPSCI staff report has told The Federalist that the analysts who actually drafted the ICA report for Brennan are still with the CIA — some maybe even having been promoted after compiling the faulty report in violation of standard operating procedures.
Given the serious flaws exposed last week by CIA Director Ratcliffe and that the ICA on Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election was significantly more corrupt than the CIA’s report revealed, that the analysts that assisted Brennan and his ilk in the get-Trump effort remain at the Agency raises grave concerns.
A spokesperson for the CIA did not respond to The Federalist’s questions concerning what Director Ratcliffe has done, or will do, to ensure these analysts’ faulty and biased tradecraft is not continuing under Trump 2.0. The CIA also did not comment on whether the analysts responsible for the bogus ICA will face disciplinary action or are themselves the subject of a criminal referral.
Hellbound and Down 