Trump Officials Releases New Report
A newly released CIA assessment is reigniting scrutiny over how the intelligence community handled the so-called Trump-Russia collusion narrative, revealing what officials now call “procedural anomalies” and potential political interference during the final days of the Obama administration.
The report, centered on the development of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) released in January 2017, raises sharp concerns about how the narrative of collusion took root and who was behind it.
Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, in a statement accompanying the release, said “all the world will finally see the truth,” and directly named former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper as central figures in shaping what he calls a politically driven operation.
The assessment details that Brennan, Comey, and Clapper took the unprecedented step of inserting themselves directly into the production of the ICA, which was published just days before the presidential transition in January 2017. The review states that the “highly compressed production timeline, stringent compartmentation, and excessive involvement of agency heads” undermined the integrity and independence of the process.
All the world can now see the truth: Brennan, Clapper and Comey manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals — all to get Trump. Thank you to the career @CIA officers who conducted this review and exposed the facts. https://t.co/S7Mxz6xA6P
— CIA Director John Ratcliffe (@CIADirector) July 2, 2025
Notably, only four agencies—the CIA, FBI, NSA, and ODNI—were involved in the ICA, with Brennan allegedly “handpicking” the analysts who would craft the final report. Thirteen other intelligence agencies were excluded. The report also confirms that the now-discredited Steele Dossier was forcibly included in the ICA despite objections from senior CIA Russia experts. The National Intelligence Council, which typically oversees the production of high-level assessments, was sidelined.
According to the CIA’s findings, media leaks during the ICA’s drafting may have influenced the conclusions drawn by analysts, raising concerns about confirmation bias. The assessment characterizes the process as politically motivated, pointing to the White House’s push to complete and release both classified and unclassified versions of the ICA before President Trump’s inauguration.
“This was Obama, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan deciding, ‘We’re going to screw Trump,’” Ratcliffe said in an interview. “They stamped it as Russian collusion and then classified it so nobody could see it.”
The implications of this report are significant. It provides an official acknowledgment that top intelligence officials may have allowed political motivations to shape national intelligence products. It also casts new light on the early origins of the Trump-Russia investigation, which led to years of political fallout and a special counsel probe that ultimately found no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Though critics of the ICA process have long alleged misconduct, this CIA review marks the most direct and detailed internal criticism to date. Whether this leads to further investigation or legal accountability remains uncertain. Calls for accountability are growing louder, particularly among Republican lawmakers who see the report as evidence of abuse at the highest levels of government.