ADMIN

 

Breakdown of the full report:

Overview: The document reviews the tradecraft and procedural anomalies in the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian election interference. ​
ICA Origins Context ​

The ICA was developed amid conflicting public statements about Russia's role in the 2016 election. ​
Media leaks suggested definitive conclusions before the assessment was completed, creating anchoring bias. ​
President Obama directed a comprehensive review of Russian activities related to the election.

Procedural Concerns

The review identified multiple procedural anomalies, including a compressed timeline and excessive agency head involvement. ​
The timeline for drafting the ICA was less than a week, with only two days for formal coordination.
Stakeholders felt "jammed" by the timeline, leading to a focus on language precision over substantive edits. ​

Rushed Timeline Justified? ​

The rushed timeline raised questions about potential political motives behind the White House's tasking. ​
A more measured approach could have deflected questions about bias and adhered to standard practices. ​

Compartmentation Challenges

Uneven access to compartmented information hindered collaboration and contributed to analytic differences. ​
Key intelligence was restricted, limiting the ability of analysts to engage in robust debate.

Agency Head Involvement

Unusual senior involvement in the ICA's development compromised analytic rigor and limited coordination. ​
The National Intelligence Council was marginalized, deviating from standard procedures for IC assessments. ​

Prejudicial Workforce Message ​

A note from Brennan to CIA analysts indicated a consensus before the ICA was coordinated, potentially stifling debate. ​
The decision to include the Steele Dossier undermined the credibility of the ICA's key judgment. ​

Tradecraft Concerns

Procedural anomalies affected the tradecraft applied to the judgment that Putin "aspired" to help Trump win. ​
The ICA's tradecraft was generally robust, but specific issues were identified, including confidence levels and source transparency. ​

Strong Tradecraft Examples ​

The ICA sourced 173 reports from CIA, NSA, and FBI, demonstrating strong adherence to tradecraft standards. ​
The review found that the "aspired" judgment did not merit a "high confidence" level due to limited sources.

Lessons Learned

The review highlighted the importance of adhering to established processes and tradecraft standards. ​
Key lessons include the need for sufficient time for analysis, equitable access to information, and careful consideration of confidence levels.

 

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center

Email me when people reply –