The CIA has published a 'tradecraft review' of the 2016 'Intelligence Community Assessment' which had claimed that Russia had interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
The review found what had been obvious to anyone. The 2016 assessment had not followed the normal process for such papers but had based its conclusions on no or insignificant evidence.
Or, as the NY Post headlines: Obama’s Trump-Russia collusion report was corrupt from start
A bombshell new CIA review of the Obama administration’s spy agencies’ assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump was deliberately corrupted by then-CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who were “excessively involved” in its drafting, and rushed its completion in a “chaotic,” “atypical” and “markedly unconventional” process that raised questions of a “potential political motive.”
Further, Brennan’s decision to include the discredited Steele dossier, over the objections of the CIA’s most senior Russia experts, “undermined the credibility” of the assessment.
At that time the ICE was leaked to various media outlets. It was finally published shortly before Trump's first inauguration.
Up to today there is no public evidence that Russia hacked the Democratic National Council and/or released DNC material to Wikileaks. After today's new intelligence report (pdf) there is still no such evidence. … There are rather wild assertions and a lot of conjecture but zero facts that could be accepted as proof.
When I wrote the above on January 6 2017 I tried to set it the story into the bigger picture:
When Hillary Clinton was defeated in the U.S. presidential election the relevant powers launched a campaign to delegitimize the President elect Donald Trump.
The ultimate aim of the cabal is to kick him out of office and have a reliable replacement, like the Vice-President elect Pence, take over. Should that not be possible it is hoped that the delegitimization will make it impossible for Trump to change major policy trajectories especially in foreign policy. A main issue here is the reorientation of the U.S. military complex and its NATO proxies from the war of terror towards a direct confrontation with main powers like Russia and China.
The cabal consists of President Obama, the defeated candidate Hillary Clinton, neoconservatves like the State Department's cookie dispenser Victoria Nuland, the Republican senators McCain and Lindsay and the military-industrial complex. (One of the few neocons planted near to Trump, former CIA director James Woolsey, threw the towel today and left the Trump transition team.)
A major role in directing the plot has fallen to Obama's consigliere John Brennan, the current director of the CIA. Another role has been delegated to the various military and NATO think tanks like the Atlantic Council and the British RUSI and reliable proxies within the media.
The current emphasis of the campaign is on the release of emails and papers from the Clinton campaign through Wikileaks. It is alleged that some releases were gained through hacking, planned and executed by the Russian government. Trump had announced that he plans to seek good relations with Russia, the power that the cabal had earlier chosen as the new enemy de jour.
But there is a problem. There is no real evidence that a "hack" ever happened. There is no evidence that Russia is involved. None at all.
The whole scheme, supported by the made up 'Intelligence Community Assessment', was used to, more or less, sabotage Donald Trump's first two years as president.
It also helped to create negative sentiment against all things Russia. This was revenge for Russia's disruption of U.S. plans for Ukraine. It had taken Crimea, the big prize the 2014 coup plotters had hoped to gain, off the table. The negative sentiment against Russia, especially from Democrats, has prevailed since.
That the CIA, under Director John Ratcliffe, is now condemning the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment as shady does not mean that he is willing to apply the lessons learned from its faulty creation to today's intelligence products.
He will, just like then CIA Director John Brennan, fake anything that is needed to support his and his presidents policies. Just look at this from the day before Trump ordered bombing Iran:
CIA Director John Ratcliffe reportedly told the White House that Iran is nearing the technical threshold for a weapon. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt echoed this, saying Iran needs only a political decision to begin building a bomb, which could take as little as two weeks.
Some US officials cite “Israeli” intelligence, particularly Mossad’s estimate that Iran is just 15 days away from producing a bomb.
However, others within the American intelligence community challenge that timeline, maintaining that Iran would likely need several months to a year to complete a functional weapon.
Ratcliffe was clearly bullshitting when he repeated the Mossad claims in the White House. Just like he was bullshitting when he later asserted that Iran's program has been set back for years.
All claims made by 'Intelligence Agencies', independent of having been made in 2016, 2025 or in the future, have be taken with huge loads of salts. Intelligence claims are made to support policies, not because they are truthful.