Last Updated on July 3, 2025
A new CIA report exposes a deliberate Russiagate fraud led by former intelligence chiefs John Brennan, James Comey, and Jim Clapper. John Ratcliffe, CIA Director, commissioned the report.
It shows they excluded agencies, ignored dissent, and used the discredited Steele dossier to harm Trump’s 2016 victory.
Thus, this intelligence manipulation caused years of controversy. It consumed Trump’s first term.
Origins of the ICA
On December 6, 2016, President Barack Obama ordered the ICA to examine Russian interference in the 2016 election. Published on January 6, 2017, it claimed Vladimir Putin sought to weaken U.S. democracy, discredit Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and boost Trump’s chances.
It relied on a narrow scope, using only four agencies—ODNI, CIA, FBI, and NSA—while excluding 13 of 17 U.S. intelligence agencies, including the Defense Intelligence Agency and State Department’s intelligence arm.
This selective process sparked concerns of collusion hoax tactics. Furthermore, According to Matt Taibbi’s reporting, Brennan’s handpicked CIA analysts bypassed the National Intelligence Council, which typically ensures balanced assessments, raising suspicions of bias and rushed judgment that undermined the ICA’s legitimacy.
Brennan handpicked the CIA analysts to compile the ICA and involved only the ODNI, CIA, FBI and NSA, excluding 13 of the then-17 intelligence agencies. He sidelined the National Intelligence Council and forced the inclusion of the discredited Steele dossier despite objections of the authors and senior CIA Russia experts, so as to push a false narrative that Russia secured Trump’s 2016 victory. “This was Obama, Comey, Clapper and Brennan deciding ‘We’re going to screw Trump,’” said Ratcliffe in an exclusive interview. “It was, ‘We’re going to create this and put the imprimatur of an IC assessment in a way that nobody can question it.’” — [Matt Taibbi, Racket News]
Steele Dossier Controversy
The Steele dossier, a debunked report alleging Trump-Russia ties, fueled the Russiagate fraud. It hurt the ICA’s credibility. Senior CIA Russia experts warned against its use. The Deputy Director for Analysis emailed Brennan on December 29, 2016. It risked “the credibility of the entire paper.” Yet, Brennan pushed its use. Consequently, the dossier’s unproven claims were added to the ICA. This raised ICA misconduct and harmed analytic integrity.
The new CIA report criticizes the intel chiefs for including the Steele Dossier in the report, saying that “ran counter to fundamental tradecraft principles” and “undermined the credibility” of his key conclusions. That isn’t just a post-factum conclusion, however. The report reveals: CIA’s Deputy Director for Analysis (DDA) warned in an email to Brennan on 29 December that including it in any form risked “the credibility of the entire paper.” — [Matt Taibbi, Racket News]
Suppressed Dissent
Brennan, Comey, and Clapper blocked dissenting voices, amplifying agency bias. For example, NSA analysts had only “moderate confidence” in Putin aiding Trump, citing limited sources and possible other views.
They noted Trump’s unpredictable nature made him a risky choice for Russia, favoring Clinton’s known policies. Likewise, two senior CIA Russia mission center leaders opposed the “aspire” judgment in a December 30, 2016, email to Brennan.
They argued it lacked evidence and seemed political. Nevertheless, Brennan ignored these concerns. He claimed a consensus before discussion, a move the report says stifled open debate and pressured analysts to align with his narrative.
FBI’s Role and Motives
The FBI’s push for the Steele dossier raises questions about its motives in the dossier scandal. In October 2016, FBI officials told the New York Times no clear Trump-Russia link existed.
However, by early December, the FBI shifted to support the CIA’s narrative, a change that baffled some analysts. According to Matt Taibbi’s reporting, the FBI’s participation hinged on including the dossier, despite its lead investigator, Peter Strzok, privately questioning its reliability.
Thus, this move likely provided cover for the FBI’s controversial FISA surveillance of Trump aide Carter Page, approved in October 2016. It drove Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s two-year probe, which found no collusion.
According to the report: FBI leadership made it clear that their participation in the ICA hinged on the Dossier’s inclusion and, over the next few days, repeatedly pushed to weave references to it throughout the main body of the ICA. — [Matt Taibbi, Racket News]
Lasting Impact
The flawed ICA sparked a media frenzy. Leaks of its January 2017 briefing to Trump, including dossier details like the “pee tape,” amplified the Russiagate fraud.
Furthermore, the rushed timeline—completed in just 30 days—excluded agencies like the Defense Intelligence Agency, suggesting a political effort to harm Trump’s victory.
The report notes the ICA was submitted hours before publication, limiting review. Additionally, Ratcliffe’s findings expose intelligence manipulation. They show the need for honest analysis to protect democratic processes from such abuses.
Community Reaction
The report caused outrage on X. Many called Brennan, Comey, and Clapper’s actions treasonous collusion hoax tactics. Consequently, these findings confirm suspicions of a plot to frame Trump. They prompt calls for accountability.
Thus, the dossier scandal further erodes trust in intelligence agencies. It highlights the need for fair, unbiased assessments.
