Former CIA chief John Brennan and ex-National Intelligence Director James Clapper pushed back strongly against claims from the Trump administration that they manipulated information during a significant Russian investigation that dominated Trump’s early presidency.
“This is clearly incorrect. When they make these accusations, it feels like they’re trying to change the narrative. We just want to correct the record,” they stated in a guest piece for a major publication.
National Intelligence Director Tarshi Gabbard suggested that the previous Obama administration, including Clapper and Brennan, fueled the narrative of Russian interference in the 2016 election, which allegedly led to an extensive conspiracy investigation shadowing Trump’s presidency. Trump has labeled the actions of Obama, Clapper, Brennan, and former FBI director Comey as “serious treason.”
“It’s been noted by some that analyses of Russian activities may not have been as solid, and thorough, longstanding reviews could have scrutinized their findings. One example being the bipartisan Senate report,” wrote Brennan and Clapper, referring to an investigation that highlighted pertinent details.
In a significant admission, Obama officials noted that there wasn’t “empirical evidence” tying a Trump-Russia conspiracy, according to the House Intelligence transcript.
The duo remarked, “All credible assessments show that Russians ran a campaign aimed at aiding Trump’s 2016 election bid.” They pointed out that misrepresentation from the current administration was excessive, but that they aimed to clarify a few critical points. It’s essential to note, they mentioned, that this was a personal viewpoint.
Brennan and Clapper stated that a dossier compiled by Christopher Steele—an ex-intelligence officer and funded by entities connected to Hillary Clinton—was not employed as a source of their analysis. However, they acknowledged that it was included as a “separate appendix” in certain classified documents from the FBI.
Officials from the intelligence community clarified that their evaluations did not assert any judgment regarding the influence of Russian efforts on the election results.
“While Russian influence might have swayed public opinion before voting, there’s no proof they changed actual votes,” they explained.
Clapper joined a talk show to refute the allegations, asserting their falsehood, while Brennan expressed bafflement on another channel about why he was under investigation.
“Ultimately, contrary to wild claims from the Trump administration, our assessment made no mention of ‘collusion’ between the Trump campaign and Russia, nor recognized any contacts that were publicly acknowledged,” Brennan and Clapper added.
They expressed concern that true politicization stemmed from officials within the Trump administration, especially targeting figures like Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe.
“This kind of manipulation is a deliberate distortion of intelligence by the administration, especially from its national intelligence and CIA heads, which are supposed to remain impartial. We regret that the current administration continues to push the unfounded narrative denying Russian interference in the 2016 election. It’s crucial that we take bipartisan measures to address this,” concluded Clapper and Brennan.
The White House has yet to respond to queries regarding this matter.
