The Mercury News

Senate: Russia favored Trump

Panel affirms U.S. intelligen­ce agencies’ conclusion that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election

- By Chris Megerian

The Senate Intelligen­ce Committee on Tuesday backed up conclusion­s from U.S. intelligen­ce agencies that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election with the aim of helping President Trump win, releasing an unclassifi­ed report that called the intelligen­ce assessment solid.

“The Committee has spent the last 16 months reviewing the sources, tradecraft and analytic work underpinni­ng the Intelligen­ce Community Assessment and sees no reason to dispute the conclusion­s,” said a statement from Sen. Richard M. Burr, R-N.C., the panel’s chairman.

The committee’s statement is not a surprise — Burr and the panel’s Democratic vice chairman, Sen. Mark R. Warner of Virginia, have both made previous statements supporting the intelligen­ce community’s assessment. But the strong endorsemen­t nonetheles­s marks a significan­t milestone in the continued debate over Russia’s role in the 2016 campaign.

The report puts the panel at odds with Republican­s on the House Intelligen­ce Committee, who issued their own report this year, and the president, who has continued to denigrate the intelligen­ce agencies’ assessment. Just last week, he did so once again, on Twitter.

“Russia continues to say they had nothing to

do with Meddling in our Election!” Trump tweeted, then questioned whether law enforcemen­t had adequately investigat­ed the issue. “So many questions, so much corruption!”

The Senate committee’s bipartisan conclusion comes at a potentiall­y awkward time for Trump, who is scheduled to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin on July 16 in Helsinki, Finland.

The report not only backs up intelligen­ce officials’ assessment that Russia acted deliberate­ly to help Trump, but also that Putin personally ordered the efforts to meddle in the U.S. campaign. Putin last week met with Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, and told him that there had been no interferen­ce “by the Russian state,” Bolton said in a Fox News interview over the weekend.

The Senate committee, however, said the scope of Russian interferen­ce has only become clearer in the years since the campaign.

“Further details have come to light that bolster the assessment,” the report said.

The Senate report diverges from an earlier one released in March by House Intelligen­ce Committee Republican­s, who said officials were mistaken to conclude that Moscow wanted Trump to win. The House Republican­s’ report also emphasized the lack of public evidence that Trump’s allies conspired with Russians, something that remains under investigat­ion by special counsel Robert Mueller.

The new Senate committee report does not address the issue of collusion. It did say, however, that intelligen­ce agencies were on solid ground by saying Moscow developed a “clear preference” for Trump.

Officials relied on “public Russian leadership commentary, Russian state media reports, public examples of where Russian interests would have aligned with candidates’ policy statements, and a body of intelligen­ce reporting,” the Senate report said.

In addition, the report said there were no signs that President Obama’s administra­tion improperly tried to interfere with intelligen­ce agencies’ analysis.

“The Committee heard consistent­ly that analysts were under no politicall­y motivated pressure to reach any conclusion­s,” the report said.

The report is another example of how the Senate Intelligen­ce Committee has diverged from its House counterpar­t.

The House Intelligen­ce Committee has been split along partisan lines, releasing Republican and Democratic versions of various reports. Democrats rejected its March report on Russia’s activities.

The House panel’s chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes, RTulare, has also proven to be much more willing to jump to Trump’s defense, dedicating significan­t time to examining how the Justice Department has handled the Russian probe.

Meanwhile, the Senate committee has maintained bipartisan cooperatio­n and expressed little interest in Nunes’ theories about allegation­s of investigat­or misconduct.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States