Intel report won't end Russia hacking fight

Byron York: Intel report won't end
Russia hacking fight
By BYRON YORK (HTTP://WWW.WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM/AUTHOR/BYRON-YORK) (@BYRONYORK
(//TWITTER.COM/BYRONYORK)) • 12/18/16 7:03 PM
President Obama (/section/barack-obama) has ordered the Intelligence
Community to finish a review of allegations of Russian election hacking
by the time Obama leaves office on Jan. 20.
Don't look for the report to settle anything. After years of what some
Republicans view as administration obfuscation, manipulation and
slow-walking on intelligence ranging from Benghazi (/section/benghazi)
to U.S. Central Command assessments of the Islamic State to the
papers of Osama bin Laden, distrust of the Intelligence Community is
so high in some GOP quarters on Capitol Hill that unless the IC
delivers a document of uncharacteristic openness and transparency,
the debate over Russia's activities and intentions will continue well
into the presidency of Donald Trump (/section/donald-trump).
It hasn't started well. Earlier this month, House Republicans were
mystified by news reports of disagreement between intelligence
agencies over some aspects of Russian hacking, including the Russians'
alleged motivation. On Dec. 12, House Intelligence Committee
Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes sent a letter to Director of National
Intelligence James Clapper saying, in effect: Why didn't you tell us?
Why do we have to learn about this in the media?
Nunes demanded the DNI brief the Intel Committee on the Russia
situation no later than Dec. 16.
It didn't happen. First, DNI flatly refused Nunes' request. And then,
included in an announcement that it would not brief the Electoral
College, the DNI also announced it would offer no more briefings to
lawmakers until after the Obama-ordered report is finished next year.
"Once the review is complete in the coming weeks, the Intelligence
Community stands ready to brief Congress," DNI said in a press
release.
After the first refusal, Nunes noted the DNI is "obligated to comply"
with the House's "constitutionally vested" oversight activities. The
committee is "deeply concerned" by the DNI's "intransigence," Nunes
said in a statement.
After the second refusal, Nunes upped the ante. If DNI officials won't
come to House overseers, he said in a Dec. 16 statement, then House
overseers will come to DNI officials. "As part of its ongoing oversight,
the committee has now planned visits to the FBI (/section/fbi), NSA,
CIA and DIA in January so members can further investigate this issue
in the 115th Congress," Nunes said.
Nunes' statement suggested the standoff over Russian hacking could
at some point change from a war of words to an actual physical
confrontation.
The issue is not that Republicans don't believe Russia tried to hack the
Democratic National Committee or other Democratic-affiliated
organizations. Republicans involved in intelligence issues, like
Democrats involved in intelligence issues, know that Russians (along
with the Chinese) try every single day to hack into various institutions
of American business and governance. They've succeeded many times,
leading to some serious breaches. It's an unending phenomenon.
Over the last several years, some Republicans have been dismayed by
the administration's lack of response. "Russia's cyber-attacks are no
surprise to the House Intelligence Committee, which has been closely
monitoring Russia's belligerence for years," Nunes said in a Dec. 9
statement. "As I've said many times, the Intelligence Community has
repeatedly failed to anticipate Putin's hostile actions. Unfortunately
the Obama administration, dedicated to delusions of 'resetting'
relations with Russia, ignored pleas by numerous Intelligence
Committee members to take more forceful action against the Kremlin's
aggression. It appears, however, that after eight years the
administration has suddenly awoken to the threat."
"Suddenly," that is, after Democrats lost a presidential election. Nunes'
not-so-subtle point was that Russian hacking did not become a hairon-
fire issue for Democrats until it affected their political fortunes.
Beyond that, though, some Hill Republicans believe the Obama
administration has concealed and/or manipulated intelligence at key
times in the last few years. Those episodes do not give Republicans
any confidence that the Obama Intelligence Community will be straight
with them this time. Three examples:
1) On Benghazi (/section/benghazi), Republicans felt they had to pull
teeth to get the story of the Intelligence Community's role in the
administration's blame-it-on-the-video talking points.
2) On the Central Command matter, Republicans felt the
administration distorted intelligence in an effort to suggest more
progress in the fight against Islamic State than had actually occurred.
3) On the bin Laden documents, Republicans have pushed for the
declassification and release of thousands of pages captured when U.S.
forces killed the al Qaeda leader in 2011. Slow-walking would not begin
to describe the administration's response, with few papers released to
this day.
In light of all that, it's fair to say that Republicans have near zero
confidence that the administration will play the Russia election hacking
intelligence straight. If anything, Republicans have a healthy respect
for the ability of IC and White House officials to manipulate
intelligence and spin things their way.
The bottom line is many Republicans who follow intelligence issues
closely are convinced the White House is going to drop an intensely
political document in January, the intended effect of which will be to
delegitimize the election of Trump.
So what do those Republicans think actually happened during the
election? First, they're entirely convinced the Russians tried to hack
the U.S. political process because the Russians try to hack everything.
They believe that Vladimir Putin probably saw Trump as an unserious
candidate who was going to lose; Putin didn't have any more
sophisticated political intelligence than anyone in the United States.
Next, they believe the Russians were able to hack some damaging
material from the Democratic National Committee. (They're not clear
about the John Podesta emails.) They believe the Russians had fun
messing with Clinton, in part because Putin assumed she would be
president, and a continuing target, after the election.
In a larger sense, they believe Putin was trying to show that the U.S.
system is corrupt because Putin is always trying to show that the U.S.
system is corrupt. The number-one thing Russians seek to do is to sow
doubt about the United States.
All of that is conjecture, or mostly conjecture, at this point. And of
course, the administration is likely to produce a somewhat different
picture in January — the big difference being that it will portray Putin
as specifically working to promote the election of Trump. A major
Republican fear is that the administration will release a headlinegrabbing,
blockbuster report alleging some sort of pro-Trump/Putin
plot, but will not release all the underlying intelligence that would
allow Congress to evaluate the administration's conclusions.
That's what Republicans are trying to head off with their demands for
briefings and to see more intelligence. So far, they're making no
progress. They're also fighting a side battle with Democrats over the
creation of a special committee to investigate election interference,
which many Republicans view as a vehicle for Democrats to
grandstand and to extend the Trump-delegitimization process
throughout next year. (So far, GOP leaders appear determined to block
a special committee.)
Finally, there's one huge factor that will come into play next month.
After Trump takes office, the Intelligence Community will be under
new leadership. CIA Director John Brennan will be out, to be replaced
by Republican Rep. Mike Pompeo, a veteran of the House Intelligence
Committee who took part in the various battles with the
administration over intelligence in the past few years. Yes, of course,
the entrenched bureaucracies in the Intelligence Community will stay
in place. But new leaders can make a real difference. And after Jan.
20, the fight over Russian interference might take on a new character.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-intel-report-wont-end-russia-hacking-fight/article/2609959