Senate group confirms that Russia supported Trump, contradicting the House



[ad_1]

The Senate Intelligence Committee unequivocally confirmed the conclusion of the intelligence community that Russia has developed a "clear preference" for the then Donald Trump candidate in the 2016 elections and sought to 39, help win the White House.

The assessment, announced in an unclassified summary released Tuesday, represents a direct repudiation of the commission's counterpart in the House – and President Trump Donald John TrumpTrump: Democratic voters will support Republicans because of criticism of ICE Barrett, Kavanaugh among the candidates who met with Trump: Trump administration report recommends not to allow China Mobile access to the US market itself, who has always rejected claims that Moscow sought to strengthen his candidacy by his electoral interference.

"The Committee has spent the last 16 months examining the sources, the craft and the analytical work that underpin the Intelligence Community Assessment and sees no reason to dispute the findings," said the President Richard BurrSenate Mammoth Pass The Koch-backed group targets two Senate Republicans on spending in the six-figure advertising blitz How Comey stepped in to kill the WikiLeaks MORE immunity agreement (RN .C.) Said in a statement.

According to the Senate panel, the so-called "intelligence community intelligence" or "ICA" is a "intelligent production of intelligence"

Russian political preferences and media content have shown that Moscow was seeking to denigrate Secretary Clinton, "the unclassified summary reads.

The ICA supported not only the comments of Russian public officials and state media, but also on support the assessment that Putin and the Russian government have developed a clear preference for Trump, "the committee said.

Senate investigators also rejected the idea that the ICA was inappropriately influenced by politics, as claimed by some Trump supporters.

The committee says that it has reviewed "thousands of pages of source documents" and interviewed all leaders involved in ICA development, agency directors and directors to line analysts, and heard that analysts were not politically motivated. pressure to reach conclusions. "

A Subtle Difference of Confidence Between the NSA and the CIA and the FBI on the Assessment That Russian President Vladimir Putin Wanted to Help Trump's Electoral Opportunities" Suitably Reproduces Analytical Differences and Was Affected in a professional and transparent manner. "

Another contradiction with the statements of the Trump allies, the Senate panel also found that a search for opposition funded by the Democratic Party, known as the Steele record , "has not illuminated the analysis of the ACI – including the main conclusions."

It was "because it was 39, unverified information and that it had not been disseminated in the form of serialized intelligence reports, "notes the Senate report.

Overall, the Senate Committee report was a flawless contradiction of p of the main claims of Trump allies in the House.

In March, the House Intelligence Committee released its report on 2016 election interference, concluding that the small group of intelligence officials who conducted the assessment in January 2017 did not meet the standard of appropriate evidence to make such a judgment.

The House committee declined to assess whether the underlying claim of the intelligence community – namely that Putin had a clear preference for Trump – was correct, said one of the members from the GOP who was leading this investigation at the time. What the panel contested, according to Rep. Mike Conaway Kenneth (Mike) Michael Conaway The Trump Era Increases Technology Worker Revolt Defense Night: VA Selects Breezes Through Confirmation Hearing | House votes for negotiations on defense bill | Religious leaders are pushing Republicans for the new GOP MORE tax law (R-Texas), is "how they came to it and the underlying documents that they used."

The Senate Committee is still required to prepare a consolidated report of outstanding conclusions about ACI, which once finalized the purpose of an examination for classification as a public release

. The interference is also still ongoing, with interim reports such as this published on an ongoing basis.

– John Bowden contributed. Updated at 3:44 pm

[ad_2]
Source link