Election security

Why the Trump-Russia intelligence report doesn't quite add up

The New York Times reported on Thursday that "intelligence officials warned House lawmakers last week that Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get President Trump re-elected."

I'm not convinced that gives full context to the briefing. I suspect a Democratic member asked a briefer something along the lines of "Do you assess that Russia is trying to reelect Trump?" The briefer then probably offered a hedged response in the affirmative. I believe the core of the briefing was likely situated around an assessment that Russia is preparing to ramp up efforts to undermine the election and U.S. civil society.

That's very different from that which the New York Times report implies: a high-confidence national intelligence assessment that Russia is interfering to see Trump triumph over any and all of the Democratic presidential primary field.

First off, any intelligence assessment that Russia is interfering to reelect Trump would require a wide depth of diverse, high-value sources. At the very least, any intelligence product offering that conclusion would be based on highly reliable human source and signal intelligence reporting from or on people close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, the GRU, and each Russian government/contractor arm the United States believes is engaged in the interference effort. Considering the sensitivity with which any Russian 2020 interference operation will be regarded in Moscow (which is keen to avoid new U.S. sanctions or other retaliatory measures and so will work to maintain deniability), it is unlikely that the full degree and election-outcome intent of Russia's interference campaign are yet known. At least to the degree, that is, that would allow the intelligence community to come before the assembled mass of the congressional intelligence committees and offer a high confidence assessment to that effect.