CIA has revised intelligence report for 2016 Russian election interference star-news.press/wp

Washington – CIA officials failed in some cases in a standard analysis of Russian interference efforts in the 2016 elections according to the internal reviews declined Wednesday.

Mental officers gave an unusual short time for the main leader, the main leaders, and the members of the staff have given access to crucial intelligence about Russia, “learned” reviews “learned lessons” reviews.

But the discovery of the 2017 Intelligence evaluation of the 2017 Intelligence evaluation was made up of information war campaigns without trusted information war campaigns, Hillary Clinton and promote Donald Trump in 2016 elections.

“While the general evaluation was believed to be defensive, identified procedural abnormalities and trade issues highlight critical lessons to manage controversial or politically charged issues” Review Say.

Continue direct policy coverage here

Trump and his allies have long ruled out the mind and other reports that Russia was employed by false information and propaganda to try to make scales in the 2016 and its side. They have accused of intelligence and law enforcement officials to connect with Trumpia and challenge questions about the legitimacy of his victory in 2016.

The first Trump Administration has evaluated a special advice on how he evaluated CIA, but did not submit a criminal position and did not submit clear evidence.

Bipartisan Senate’s Intelligence Committee Research in 2020 has coincided with the Intelligence Assessment of 2017 and has not found a reason to discuss its consequences.

Within the second presidency of Trump, his deputies are committed to bringing a greater transparency to the intellectual community and to avoid the attempt to politish its work.

CIA John Ratcliffe promised the review of the internal review this year and declared Wednesday, according to CIA.

The evaluation of the 2016 Mind, President Barack Obama asked after November election, found that Russia wanted to weaken the public faith in a democratic process and helping Clinton and Moscow won the election.

The Russian Cia Mission Center focused on two main leaders in Russia, according to Russia who helped ensure Trump victory aimed at the conclusion of the internal review. The view argued that a single-mind report was supported by a single report, that other judgments supported more information.

The review said the evaluation was done in an unusual short time. Instead of having a complex and politically sensitive test, the authors “had less than a week to” coordinate “with” less than two days “to” coordinate.

Multelligence of multiple intelligence say they felt “suffering” according to the compressed timeline, “according to the review.

The opinion has said that the Higher CIA officials took part in an evaluation effort, “which was not very common in both scope and intensity”. As a result, the defense intelligence agency and the state of the state department and the research bureau were “completely closed”, which was “significant deviation” in the intelligence community from standard practice, according to the review.

The authors of the 2016 evaluation and other CIA officials also have “very opposed”, including the British Intelligence Extelligence by reference to the Trump dossier compiled by Christopher Steele. The dossier Trump collided with Russia.

Finally, the summary of the file was entered into the Annex, with a note that was not used in the assessment to “reach analytical conclusions”.

Reviews also found reasons for praising the 2016 evaluation, saying that a large part of the team’s work was “strong” to show that he had showed a wide professor of trade and there was no sign of systemic problems.

John Brennan, who was the director of CIA at the time of evaluation, told NBC news on Wednesday, he became aware of the review, but had no choice but to read.