BURSTDirector of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard is going after her predecessor, pointing to a newly released email as part of her argument that there was an attempt by the Obama administration to undermine President Trump with their investigation of Russia’s 2016 election interference.
A brief email exchange released by Gabbard shows a discussion between then-DNI James Clapper and then-National Security Agency (NSA) Director Mike Rogers in which the NSA director said they needed more time to review information before a coming report to President Obama about Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
In the exchange, which took place in December 2016 after Trump’s victory, Clapper said he understood Rogers’s concerns but that the intelligence community didn't have the luxury of time and the draft they were working on would need to be a “team sport.”
It’s release comes as Gabbar has declassified a number of records about the 2016 election amid demands on the Trump administration to release files related to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The emails show Rogers reached out to Clapper to relay concerns from his team that they hadn’t had enough time to review all the intelligence.
“I know that this activity is on a fast-track and that folks have been working very hard to put together a product that can be provided to the President. However, I wanted to reach out to you directly to let you know of some concerns I have with what I am hearing from my folks,” Rogers wrote.
“Given the expedited nature of this activity, my folks aren't fully comfortable saying that they have had enough time to review all of the intelligence to be absolutely confident in their assessments.
"To be clear, I am not saying that we disagree substantively, but I do want to make sure that, when we are asked in the future whether we can absolutely stand behind the paper, that we don't have any reason to hesitate because of the process. I know that you agree that this is something we need to be 100% comfortable with before we present it to the President - we have one chance to get this right, and it is critical that we do so,” he wrote.
Rogers then asked about the extent NSA would be considered a co-author on the product, saying that if so he would like to see the underlying intelligence directly but added that “if your intent is to create a CIA-only or CIA/FBI-authored product, then I will stand down on these concerns.”
Clapper said he did want to ensure consensus among various intelligence agencies but said more time was not an option as the IC was working to deliver a report to Obama less than a month before the Inauguration.
“It is essential that we (CIA/NSATBIODNI) be on the same page and are all supportive of the report-in the highest tradition of ‘that's OUR story, and we're stickin to it,’” he wrote, adding that a first draft of the report was circulating for review.
“We will facilitate as much mutual transparency as possible as we complete the report, but, more time is not negotiable. We may have to compromise on our ‘normal’ modalities, since we must do this on such a compressed schedule. This is one project that has to be a team sport.
The documents shared by Gabbard are just two in the exchange, and it's not clear how the conversation continued.
Neither Rogers nor a spokesman for Clapper responded to request for comment.
But Clapper has blasted previous document sharing by Gabbard, writing in an op-ed with former CIA Director John Brennan that claims they were seeking to undermine Trump are “patently false” and said the Trump team is seeking to “rewrite history.”
“There is a remarkable irony about this whole affair. Despite claims by Trump administration officials of a nefarious political conspiracy, we did everything we could at the time to prevent leaks of intelligence reports, including Russia’s preference for Mr. Trump, a requirement that President Obama regularly emphasized,” they wrote.
“We knew such reports would be political dynamite. And despite substantial reporting on the matter, we succeeded in preventing such leaks before the election.”
Gabbard’s take, which was amplified by Trump on Thursday morning in a Truth Social post, is that Clapper's email suggests standards were compromised.
“The decision to compromise standards and violate protocols in the creation of the 2017 manufactured intelligence assessment was deliberate and came from the very top,” Gabbard said in a statement.
“Clapper’s own words confirm that complying with the order to manufacture intelligence was a ‘team sport.’”
Gabbard, who has struggled to maintain her standing in Trump’s circle, has recently been praised by Trump in recent weeks for her handling of the 2016 election.
“She’s the hottest one in the room right now,” Trump said last month when speaking about the election documents.
However, the documents released by Gabbard have not backed her claims.
A first set shared by the DNI came as she accused Obama-era leaders of a “treasonous conspiracy.”
But the documents showed Clapper discussing a detail that was never in dispute – that Russia was never able to alter vote tabulations.
Gabbard also released a previously classified report from Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee that questioned whether Russia was aiming to help Trump or simply sow chaos in the 2016 election. Most other intelligence products, however, have concluded the goal was to aid Trump.