In a letter forwarded to Congress, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe made clear his assessment that the Chinese Communist Party sought to interfere in the 2020 U.S. election. In the letter, he alleges that intelligence about the Chinese Communist Party’s interference in the election was suppressed by the CIA’s management.
In his letter, Ratcliffe cited a report by Intelligence Community Analyst Monitor Barry Zulauf that said some analysts were reluctant to characterize the Communist Party’s actions as interference in the U.S. election because they disagreed with President Trump‘s policies.
Ratcliffe said Analytical Monitor found that for those analysts who believed the CPC interfered in the U.S. election, CIA management acted to pressure those analysts to withdraw their support for the perception that the CPC interfered in the election.
The Washington Examiner published Ratcliffe’s letter and a report by Intelligence Analyst Monitor Zulauf.
The Epoch Times contacted the Office of the Director of Intelligence for confirmation of the documents, but did not receive a response.
Ratcliffe wrote that based on all available intelligence sources, and excluding political considerations or undue pressure, it was concluded that the People’s Republic of China (CCP) sought to influence the 2020 U.S. federal elections.
The report by Intelligence Analyst Inspector Zulauf was presented to Congress on Jan. 7. The Intelligence Community’s assessment of interference in the 2020 election was also sent to Congress on the same day.
In his letter to Congress, Ratcliffe wrote that as director of intelligence with access to all of the most sensitive intelligence gathered by the United States about China (the Chinese Communist Party), “I do not believe that most of the views expressed by analysts in the intelligence community fully and accurately reflect the extent to which the Chinese (Communist Party) government influenced the 2020 U.S. federal elections.”
In his report, Zulauf noted that intelligence analysts apply different criteria to their analysis of Russian and Chinese (CCP) interference in the election. They labeled Russia’s activities as clear election interference, but analysts were reluctant to make the same assessment of China (the Chinese Communist Party).
“Given the differences in the way analysts responsible for analyzing Russia and analysts responsible for analyzing China examine their targets, those who analyze China (the Chinese Communist Party) are hesitant to assess Chinese (Communist Party) behavior as undue influence or interference (in U.S. elections).” Zulauf said.
He added that these analysts have a tendency to disagree with the Trump administration’s policies and thus are reluctant to highlight their analysis of China (CCP). “They (analysts) actually said, I don’t want our intelligence to be used to support those policies,” Zulauf concluded.
He stressed that such behavior by intelligence analysts violates analytical standards that call for independence from politics.
Neither Zulauf’s report nor Ratcliffe’s letter included details of the Chinese Communist Party’s interference in the U.S. election.
Ratcliffe said the report by intelligence analyst Ombudsman Zulauf reveals the politicization of analysts in their assessment of Chinese Communist interference in U.S. elections.
In a Dec. 3 article in The Wall Street Journal, Ratcliffe emphasized that “it is the Chinese Communist Party that is the greatest security threat to the United States and the greatest threat to democratic freedoms around the world since World War II” and that “resisting Beijing’s attempts to reinvent and dominate the world is the challenge of our generation.
Recent Comments