Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Trump: Russia didn’t interfere in the election. GOP-led Senate panel: Yeah, it did.

We still don’t know if the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) and Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) lead the Senate Intelligence Committee. They side with the US intelligence community — and not President Donald Trump — that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) and Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) lead the Senate Intelligence Committee. They side with the US intelligence community — and not President Donald Trump — that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) (right) and Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) lead the Senate Intelligence Committee. They sided with the US intelligence community’s assessment.
Alex Wong/Getty Images

A GOP-led Senate panel concluded on Tuesday that the US intelligence community’s 18-month-old conclusions about the 2016 presidential election — that Moscow meddled to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump— were “well supported.

The Senate Intelligence Committee released a seven-page summary that corroborates much of what the CIA, NSA, and FBI concluded back in January 2017, and praises their report as “a sound intelligence product” — despite President Donald Trump’s continued insistence that Russia didn’t interfere to help him and his criticism of the intelligence assessment as biased against him.

“The Committee has spent the last 16 months reviewing the sources, tradecraft and analytic work underpinning the Intelligence Community Assessment and sees no reason to dispute the conclusions,” Intelligence Committee Chair Richard Burr (R-NC) said in a statement.

The report does point out that the CIA and FBI had “high confidence” that Russia was trying to help Trump win, but that the NSA only had “moderate confidence” of that finding. However, the committee writes that they found “the analytical disagreement” between the agencies “was reasonable, transparent, and openly debated” — not the result of political bias.

This report doesn’t address the question of whether or not the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to interfere with the election. Special counsel Robert Mueller is continuing to investigate that possibility.

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s report comes as Trump is preparing to meet Putin on July 16 in Helsinki. Trump says he will raise the topic of election meddling with the Russian leader.

The committee hasn’t said its final word on this

Back in January 2017, three US intelligence agencies concluded that Putin ordered an “influence campaign” against Clinton to help Trump. Yet Trump himself has repeatedly voiced doubt about this assessment since.

Back in May, however, Sens. Burr and Mark Warner (D-VA), the intelligence committee’s top officials, previewed today’s findings by announcing they agreed with the intelligence community’s conclusions.

“Our staff concluded that the [intelligence community’s] conclusions were accurate and on point,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said in a joint statement with the panel’s chair, Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC). “The Russian effort was extensive, sophisticated, and ordered by President Putin himself for the purpose of helping Donald Trump and hurting Hillary Clinton.”

“There is no doubt that Russia undertook an unprecedented effort to interfere with our 2016 elections,” Burr said.

Now they’ve released more details about their conclusions. But they said that they’re still preparing a “comprehensive, classified report” on the topic, which they plan to release in unclassified format eventually. So they haven’t said their final word on the topic just yet.

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters