Intelligence Review on Steele Dossier Raises Concerns

The former Director of the CIA during the Obama administration emphasized that despite warnings from analysts, the Steele Documents were included in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) regarding Russia’s influence on the 2016 election. This was revealed in a recent CIA review.

John Brennan, who was the CIA chief at the time, played a crucial role in the decision-making process. According to ongoing discussions, these Steele documents have come under scrutiny.

The review indicates that choices made by the analysts regarding the Steele Dossier contradicted fundamental trade principles, thereby undermining the credibility of significant decisions regarding national security.

The documents, which alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, predominantly drew on publicly available information, like news reports, rather than high-level intelligence. Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, was connected to Fusion GPS, which was indirectly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign through Perkins Coie.

Furthermore, the CIA review highlights that several senior CIA officials were against incorporating the Steele Dossier into the assessment, arguing it did not adhere to essential standards of reliability.

On December 29, the CIA’s Deputy Director of Analytics cautioned Brennan about the questionable reliability of the documents. However, the review notes Brennan seemed more focused on maintaining narrative consistency than on valuing analytical rigor.

When high-ranking officials attempted to express their concerns about the flawed nature of the documents, the review stated that Brennan seemed more influenced by how well these documents fitted into existing narratives than by genuine analytical issues.

The review also pointed out other irregularities in the ICA process, including tight timelines and limited information sharing.

The 2017 ICA concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin “explicitly preferred to see President Trump” win, aiming to undermine public faith in the U.S. electoral process.

Current CIA Director John Ratcliffe initiated the review, asserting that past agency leaders made efforts to damage President Trump through their actions.

Ratcliffe criticized figures like Obama, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan, suggesting they orchestrated a misleading narrative. He mentioned that it appeared there was intent to create an unassailable blame on the Intelligence Community’s ratings.

While the Ratcliffe review condemned previous leaders, some contend it did not progress as expected.

In a striking assertion, Representative Rick Crawford claimed that the CIA’s portrayal of the 2016 ICA on Russian election interference falls significantly short of the truth. He expressed frustration over the agency’s tendency to issue reports filled with inaccuracies and omissions concerning the full extent of Russian interference.

Crawford, who chairs the Permanent Selection Committee on Intelligence, stated that the CIA has essentially held the ICA hostage for seven years and mentioned that these reports were created under tight constraints imposed by the agency.

He argued these limitations include restrictions on sharing crucial documents with Congress. Even after numerous attempts to gather information, they still lack a comprehensive report.