Clapper’s Email Reveals Tensions Over Russian Election Interference Narrative
In an email released on Wednesday, James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, responded to concerns raised by former NSA Director Mike Rogers regarding the portrayal of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s relationship with Donald Trump during the 2016 election. The email emphasizes Clapper’s stance that Putin had a clear preference for Trump and interfered to support him.
The email references a 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) concerning Trump and Russia, a topic of contention between Clapper and Rogers. Rogers expressed worry about the rushed timelines and compartmentalized intelligence used to create the ICA. He mentioned that some NSA analysts had not fully accessed the essential intelligence needed for a thorough evaluation.
Clapper did not comment directly when reached for clarification. However, he indicated urgency in producing joint reports related to Russian interference in the DNC and DCCC hacks and expressed his concerns about the situation. He noted that while team members aimed to be thorough, the accelerated pace was leaving them unsettled about the quality of their assessments.
Furthermore, Clapper pointed out that if the NSA was to be a co-author of the ICA, he expected to review even the most sensitive data personally related to its conclusions. Rather than defending the underlying intelligence, he encouraged a team-oriented approach, stating the importance of unity among the CIA, NSA, FBI, and ODNI. He described it as a situation where “that’s our story and we’re stuck with it.”
Adding to the narrative, recent declassified documents from DNI Tulsi Gabbard revealed that intelligence reports under President Obama were sometimes manipulated or cherry-picked to fit a particular narrative regarding Trump. These documents, which had been confined to the CIA for years, suggested a coordinated effort to mislead the public about the nature of Russian interference, casting doubts on the integrity of the intelligence assessments.
Clapper’s email further emphasizes the idea that intelligence assessments can sometimes devolve into “team sports,” working within a structured yet flawed system. Official support from major agencies like the CIA, FBI, and NSA was present, but the origin of the ICA’s findings rests heavily on CIA analysts chosen by John Brennan, who expedited the evaluation process just before Christmas.
Critics argue that such manipulations misled the public, as the primary figures behind the Russian interference narrative presented what they claimed was reliable intelligence, when in fact it was often based on less-than-solid foundations.
As investigators continue to work on declassifying more documents related to Russiagate, it appears there are deeper issues concerning transparency and the accuracy of intelligence that are still emerging.
