The two top intelligence officials in former President Barack Obama’s administration denied Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s assessment that they and others politicized the Russia election interference investigation.

Former CIA Director John Brennan and James Clapper, who held Gabbard’s position under Obama, wrote an op-ed for the New York Times thoroughly rejecting that they engaged in “treasonous conspiracy” to undermine President Donald Trump.

Recommended Stories

• C-SPAN adds CeaseFire to non-partisan lineup
• Declassified Durham annex reveals FBI ignored evidence of a Clinton plan to create Russia hoax
• Fact-checking Brennan and Clapper's false Russiagate narrative in New York Times op-ed

FACT-CHECKING BRENNAN AND CLAPPER’S FALSE RUSSIAGATE NARRATIVE IN NEW YORK TIMES OP-ED

“That is patently false,” they wrote. “In making those allegations, they seek to rewrite history. We want to set the record straight and, in doing so, sound a warning.”

While the pair admit some critics say the investigation could have been handled better, “multiple, thorough, yearslong reviews of the assessment have validated its findings and the rigor of its analysis.”

The two cited a bipartisan Senate assessment of Russian election activities, which featured sign-off by Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he served in the Senate. The assessment found that the intelligence officials were “under no politically motivated pressure” when they made the Russia report.

Clapper and Brennan also misleadingly claimed that Justice Department special counsel John Durham, who was appointed during Trump’s first term, found no evidence of an “Obama administration conspiracy against Mr. Trump.” Durham found significant wrongdoing throughout the start of the Russia investigation.

“Every serious review has substantiated the intelligence community’s fundamental conclusion that the Russians conducted an influence campaign intended to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election,” they wrote.

Clapper and Brennan also sought to defend themselves on three issues: the discredited Steele Dossier, whether their intelligence assessment on Russia made a judgment about Russian interference in the election, and alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia.

The Steele Dossier is a series of memos written by a former British intelligence agent about the Trump campaign’s collusion with Russia at the behest of Democrats and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Clapper and Brennan opposed the idea that the Steele Dossier played a significant role in the intelligence assessment, instead noting “the dossier was not used as a source or taken into account for any of its analysis or conclusions.” Documents declassified by CIA Director Ratcliffe and Gabbard show Brennan pushed aggressively for the Steele dossier to be presented with the intelligence community assessment about Russian meddling.

Clapper and Brennan said the dossier was only used as a “separate annex only to the most highly classified version of the document that contained the assessment,” with the annex explaining why the dossier was not used in the assessment. But documents revealed by the Trump administration suggest the dossier was in fact used as evidence to support the conclusion that Russia wanted to help Trump win.

The pair also said the intelligence assessment did not conclude anything about Russian cyberattacks affecting the outcome of the 2016 election. “Russian influence operations might have shaped the views of Americans before they entered the voting booth, but we found no evidence that the Russians changed any actual votes,” they wrote.

Lastly, the pair wrote that there was “no mention of ‘collusion'” in the intelligence assessment, “nor any reference to the publicly acknowledged contacts that had taken place.” The ICA did, however, conclude that Russia aspired to help Trump win, and Gabbard and Ratcliffe have declassified records that suggest Brennan and Clapper did not have credible evidence to support that conclusion.

The two former intelligence officials said they “did everything we could” to prevent the report from being leaked and politicized. “We knew such reports would be political dynamite,” they wrote.

They argued the Trump administration officials are the ones politicizing the reports in an attempt at a “calculated distortion of intelligence.” Clapper and Brennan called on the Trump administration to take bipartisan action in stifling Russia’s efforts to interfere in U.S. elections.

“We find it deeply regrettable that the administration continues to perpetuate the fictitious narrative that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election. It should instead acknowledge that a foreign nation-state — a mortal enemy of the United States — routinely meddles in our national elections and will continue to do so unless we take appropriate bipartisan action to stop it,” they concluded.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe said earlier this week that Brennan and Clapper could face charges regarding the intelligence assessment. “We’re gonna continue to share the intelligence that would support the ability of our Department of Justice to make fair and just, bring fair and justice claims against those who have perpetrated this hoax against the American people and this stain on our country,” he said.

GABBARD REFERS OBAMA FOR PROSECUTION BUT STOPS SHORT OF SUGGESTING ‘TREASON’ CHARGES

Gabbard referred Obama and other top aides to the DOJ for prosecution last week, but stopped short of slapping them with treason charges.

“There is irrefutable evidence that details how President Barack Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew that was false,” Gabbard claimed. “The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment. There are multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence that confirm that fact.”