New subpoenas seek years of records related to the 2016 intelligence assessment on Russian interference, as former intelligence officials challenge the legal basis of the inquiry.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The U.S. Department of Justice has issued a new round of subpoenas as part of an ongoing Florida-based investigation examining both the federal government’s response to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and actions taken against President Donald Trump, according to multiple individuals familiar with the matter.
An earlier wave of subpoenas, issued in November, sought documents related to the preparation of the January 2017 U.S. intelligence community assessment released during the final days of the Obama administration. That assessment concluded that Russia conducted a multipronged effort to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
The latest subpoenas broaden the scope of the inquiry. According to people who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic investigative demands, recipients are now being asked to provide records extending beyond the period surrounding the 2017 publication and covering subsequent years.
The Justice Department declined to comment on the investigation.
The subpoenas reflect continued activity in one of several criminal inquiries pursued by the Justice Department concerning Trump’s political opponents and former government officials involved in the Russia investigation.
Among those who have received subpoenas are former intelligence and law enforcement officials. Lawyers for former CIA Director John Brennan have stated that he has been informed he is a target of the investigation but that they have not been told of any “legally justifiable basis for undertaking this investigation.”
The original intelligence community assessment found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign aimed at undermining public confidence in U.S. democracy and harming Clinton’s electoral prospects, while expressing a “clear preference” for Trump.
That conclusion, along with subsequent investigations into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russian operatives, has remained a central grievance for President Trump. He has repeatedly criticized the findings and vowed accountability for officials involved in initiating or advancing the investigations.
Multiple government reviews have examined Russia’s actions during the 2016 election. Bipartisan congressional inquiries and the investigation led by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded that Russia interfered through cyber intrusions targeting Democratic emails and a coordinated social media campaign designed to sow discord and influence public opinion. Mueller’s report stated that the Trump campaign welcomed Russian assistance but did not establish a criminal conspiracy between campaign officials and Russian operatives.
The Florida-based inquiry appears to revisit the preparation of the intelligence assessment, including the inclusion of material from the so-called “Steele dossier.” The dossier, compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and funded by Democratic opposition research, contained allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia. Some of its claims were unverified.
A classified version of the intelligence assessment included a summary of the dossier in its annex. Critics have argued that its inclusion undermined the credibility of the broader findings.
In July, current CIA Director John Ratcliffe released a declassified tradecraft review of the intelligence community assessment. The review did not dispute the conclusion that Russia interfered in the election but cited “multiple procedural anomalies” in the assessment process. It criticized Brennan’s handling of the dossier’s inclusion and asserted that he “showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness.” The review quoted Brennan as having written, “my bottomline is that I believe that the information warrants inclusion in the report.”
Brennan has previously testified before Congress and stated in his memoir that he opposed incorporating the dossier into the main assessment because its sources and substance had not been validated. He has said the FBI advocated for its inclusion and has maintained that the dossier did not inform the core analytic judgments of the assessment.
In a letter last December to the chief judge of the Southern District of Florida, Brennan’s attorneys questioned the legal basis of the Florida investigation. They wrote that prosecutors had not clarified what potential crimes were under review and described the inquiry as “manufactured.”
Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted last year by the Trump administration’s Justice Department on charges of false statements and obstruction, though that case was subsequently dismissed.
It remains unclear whether the expanded investigation in Florida will lead to criminal charges. The subpoenas, however, signal that federal prosecutors continue to scrutinize decisions and findings related to the 2016 Russia inquiry nearly a decade after the election.
Original article
Comments