Former CIA Official Challenges Tulsi Gabbard’s Claims on US Intelligence & Russian Election Interference | CNN Politics

Retired CIA official Susan Miller, who helped create the 2017 report on Russian interference in the U.S. election, is ready to defend herself against any potential charges from the Trump administration. She mentioned discussions with her team about legal options during a recent interview.

Miller’s comments come after Tulsi Gabbard, the former Director of National Intelligence, accused the Obama administration of pressuring her team to manipulate the intelligence report to benefit Hillary Clinton. Gabbard has claimed to have made criminal referrals to the Justice Department concerning this issue.

In her conversation with CNN, Miller firmly denied these accusations. She stated that neither President Obama nor then-CIA Director John Brennan influenced their findings. “If we had faced any pressure, we would have quit,” she said.

Miller emphasized that the intelligence used in their report was solid and verified. She noted that they had briefed Trump on their findings at the time. Importantly, she clarified that the report was not based on the Steele dossier, a controversial document involving claims about Trump and Russia.

While acknowledging that Russian attempts to sway the 2016 election were clear, Miller expressed uncertainty about whether those efforts actually affected voter decisions. “We can’t tell if it worked without polling every voter,” she remarked.

The White House has backed Gabbard, calling the intelligence report a “total hoax” aimed at undermining Trump’s presidency. In her defense, Miller warned against the implications of Gabbard’s rhetoric, suggesting it might create an environment where analysts feel pressured only to present pro-Trump narratives, potentially stifling honest assessments within intelligence agencies.

The debate over the intelligence report reflects larger divisions in U.S. politics. According to a recent Pew Research survey, 60% of Americans believe that intelligence agencies face significant pressures from political figures. This climate may make it difficult for analysts to operate freely and provide unbiased information.

Miller concluded that her team operated with integrity and based their conclusions on thorough research. “We looked at everything,” she said, rejecting claims that their work lacked analytical rigor. It’s a concern echoing among former intelligence officials who have publicly stated the need for independence in intelligence assessments, especially in a politically charged environment.

In the backdrop of this debate lies the ongoing conversation about foreign interference in democracies, a topic that resonates deeply today as nations like Russia continue to face scrutiny regarding their influence on electoral processes around the globe.



Source link