/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F339869%2Fd79bb2ab-945b-43cb-87ae-2bea59bebed2.jpg)
Image: AP Photo/Mindaugas Kulbis
A report from United States intelligence agencies released on Friday says Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted Donald Trump to become president. But the public release doesn't do much to show exactly how the intelligence community came to that conclusion.Â
For what it's worth, the report's writers acknowledge this up front.Â
"...while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods," it says.Â
So, while the report says Putin and Russian government officials wanted Trump in the White House, many viewed it as a ho-hum regurgitation of information many people already knew.
This is the non-alcoholic beer of intelligence reports.
— Spencer Ackerman (@attackerman) January 6, 2017
Anyone stating unequivocally that Russia hacking didn't cause Trump to win, or that it did cause Clinton to lose has no evidence. Yet.
— Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd) January 6, 2017
But this is not a courageous document. It is evidence that the typical " oh but sources and methods" types won out.
— Susan Hennessey (@Susan_Hennessey) January 6, 2017
Still, others seized on the moment to call more attention to Russian meddling in the election, and their desire for Trump to address the information found in the report.
Mr. Trump: It's time to denounce what Russia and Putin did, even if it helped you win. Believe it or not, this is more than just about you.
— George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) January 6, 2017
Trump dismissed the idea that foreign governments influenced the presidential race in a statement earlier on Friday, saying that "there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election."
The whole thing felt rather anticlimactic. There wasn't much to change the minds of anyone who didn't believe Putin had a hand in influencing the U.S. election. That said, the report may have only been a start.
The lack of technical data in this intelligence report makes it extremely unlikely that it will persuade skeptics or be the final word here.
— Spencer Ackerman (@attackerman) January 6, 2017
We'll see what comes out before Trump's Jan. 20 inauguration.Â

Comments