A new, scandalous CIA review reveals that the Obama administration’s campaign to discredit Donald Trump during the 2016 election was tainted by severe procedural malfeasance. What was supposed to be an objective assessment of Russian interference in the election was instead manipulated by top intelligence leaders, namely John Brennan, James Comey, and James Clapper. Their excessive involvement and rushed timeline raised serious questions about political motives that jeopardized the integrity of our intelligence community.
Brennan’s reckless decision to include the discredited Steele Dossier, overruling critical objections from senior CIA Russia experts, profoundly undermined the credibility of the analysis. The “Tradecraft Review of the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment” was initiated to scrutinize these damning circumstances, exposing how these leaders corrupted a vital national security process.
The review, commissioned by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, highlights multiple procedural violations that not only compromised the report’s validity but also excluded key intelligence agencies from the assessment, essentially creating a politically charged echo chamber to vilify Trump and his supporters. This calculated exclusion raises alarm bells about the motives behind the narrative being pushed.
On December 6, 2016, weeks before leaving office, Obama commanded the assessment that stated Vladimir Putin “aspired” to aid Trump’s electoral victory. The CIA report identifies a “chaotic” production timeline and the “excessive involvement” of agency heads as factors that tainted the integrity of the assessment.
The review rebukes the decision to include the controversial Steele Dossier, pointing out that it was crafted purely from unverified opposition research, contradicting fundamental intelligence practices. Despite the internal dissent, Brennan’s insistence illustrates a troubling preference for political narrative over factual accuracy.
The CIA analysis sheds light on how the leadership’s engagement stifled rigorous debate among analysts and resulted in compromised conclusions. The politicization of intelligence isn’t just reckless; it’s dangerous. Brennan, Comey, and Clapper knowingly set the stage for years of baseless attacks on Trump, propelling the “Russian collusion” narrative that consumed our political discourse.
Ratcliffe, at the helm, proclaimed that this was not merely an intelligence failure—it was a deliberate act of political sabotage. Their actions directly led to the two-year Mueller investigation, which thankfully debunked the lies but at the cost of wasted taxpayer dollars and years of distraction.
The review makes it abundantly clear that the intelligence community was weaponized for political ends, violating the trust that Americans place in these institutions. The decision to use the Steele dossier as a part of the assessment was a significant breach of integrity that raised the stakes in U.S. foreign policy and jeopardized national security.
The blatant disregard for traditional oversight procedures and the sidelining of career professionals signal a critical failure in leadership—not just within the CIA, but across the intelligence community. If these leaders can twist facts and divert processes for political gain, then we are facing a historical precedent that must not go unchecked.
Ratcliffe emphasizes that those who manipulate intelligence for political motives should be ostracized from any influence in our political landscape. This sort of behavior cannot be tolerated if we want a nation where intelligence operates independently—free from the clutches of partisan interests.
In closing, let us be clear: the ramifications of these actions extend far beyond the past, setting a concerning precedent for the future of our intelligence and its role in a democracy. We must hold accountable those who politicize our intelligence—because, in the end, trust is indispensable for our national security.
