Add news
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010June 2010July 2010
August 2010
September 2010October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011March 2011April 2011May 2011June 2011July 2011August 2011September 2011October 2011November 2011December 2011January 2012February 2012March 2012April 2012May 2012June 2012July 2012August 2012September 2012October 2012November 2012December 2012January 2013February 2013March 2013April 2013May 2013June 2013July 2013August 2013September 2013October 2013November 2013December 2013January 2014February 2014March 2014April 2014May 2014June 2014July 2014August 2014September 2014October 2014November 2014December 2014January 2015February 2015March 2015April 2015May 2015June 2015July 2015August 2015September 2015October 2015November 2015December 2015January 2016February 2016March 2016April 2016May 2016June 2016July 2016August 2016September 2016October 2016November 2016December 2016January 2017February 2017March 2017April 2017May 2017June 2017July 2017August 2017September 2017October 2017November 2017December 2017January 2018February 2018March 2018April 2018May 2018June 2018July 2018August 2018September 2018October 2018November 2018December 2018January 2019February 2019March 2019April 2019May 2019June 2019July 2019August 2019September 2019October 2019November 2019December 2019January 2020February 2020March 2020April 2020May 2020June 2020July 2020August 2020September 2020October 2020November 2020
News Every Day |

Intel community readies postmortem on foreign interference in 2020 election

The U.S. intelligence community has begun compiling an authoritative account of foreign interference and influence efforts made during this year's election — a report that could answer whether the nation's defenses held up as well as they initially appeared.

The product, including a potential public release by or sometime in January, could also guide the incoming Biden administration and Congress as they look to protect future national elections. And it could bolster or undermine last week’s declaration by a group of local, state and federal officials that "[t]he November 3rd election was the most secure in American history."

“Before we reach [a] conclusion, let’s wait for the after-action report, so we can really get an analysis of what did happen and what didn’t happen,” said Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

A 2018 executive order initially called for the intelligence community to produce such a report, and Congress last year enshrined that requirement into law. The analysis is coming as President Donald Trump continues to fling baseless accusations of election fraud, and follows pre-election warnings that countries including Russia were waging cyberattacks on state and local governments while flooding social media with disinformation.

Despite the alerts, the latest presidential election shows no obvious signs of being derailed by the kind of massive foreign influence operation that helped upend 2016.

“Something very sizable happened in 2016," said Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who is under consideration to be President-elect Joe Biden's spy chief. "The real question is, why didn’t it [this time]? Why was it less in ’18 and less this year? ... I’m very interested in knowing what worked and what didn’t so that if we had some successes we can repeat them,” King said.

Reopening old fights: The examination requires the director of national intelligence, in consultation with individual intelligence agencies, to analyze possible foreign interference and submit a classified assessment within 45 days following a U.S. election. The report must include the nature of the meddling, methods and persons involved, as well as responsible foreign entities.

An unclassified version is supposed to be available within 60 days after the election.

An ODNI spokesperson confirmed that “work is underway," but wouldn't say which agencies would contribute to the findings or which organization would take the lead coordinating the final result.

The report was partly inspired by the intelligence community's nonpartisan assessment in early 2017 that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election for reasons that included aiding President Donald Trump, according to a House Intelligence Committee official. The official said by making a report more regular, it would remove the political considerations, and encourage further transparency by the intelligence community.

The pending assessment could cause another election security battle between Capitol Hill Democrats and the outgoing administration.

The two sides jousted over the topic for months earlier this year.

Democrats initially argued that the administration wrongly placed China in the same league as, and often ahead of, the threat posed by Iran and Russia. Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe soon vowed to rein in briefings to Congress about election security, citing concern about leaks, only to reverse course and announce he would continue to brief leadership and the Senate and House intelligence committees.

While the two sides have reached a kind of truce, Democrats remain suspicious that any finding from the clandestine community could end up slanted. Those concerns escalated after administration officials said Ratcliffe went off script last month when he alleged during a news conference that Iran was meddling in the election in order to “damage President Trump.”

Acting Senate Intelligence Chair Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) dismissed the suggestion that the report’s language would be politicized, saying the administration protected the last election “excellently.”

He said he also doubts that the evaluation would reveal something, such as a breach of voting infrastructure, that lawmakers don’t already know. “I think we would have heard about that,” Rubio said.

However, the product probably will offer “details about whatever attack there might have been, what were the most effective steps taken to prevent it,” he said.

“What’s important is to separate two things: interference with the actual mechanisms of voting and then influence. There’s still plenty of influence efforts going on and those are year-round at this point,” Rubio told POLITICO. “But the interference, the actual messing with a local jurisdiction, that’s the one area where you can take the most immediate action. There’s been tremendous improvements in our ability to do so. We’ll learn more when they issue the report.”

Warner said he would expect information from the individual agencies to be a “truthful rendition” of what occurred during the election, but added that if ODNI scrubs the data to please the president “that would bother me a great deal.”

In a statement, House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said that to help "inoculate" the public against future interference, Americans must be armed "with the best information, the assessment must be precise, comprehensive, and free of political influence."

Keep worrying: In the meantime, lawmakers and experts agree that this is no time for the U.S. government or the public to take their eyes off threats to election security, despite the absence of any signs that foreign meddling swayed the 2020 contest.

“I will say that the idea that we can stop worrying about cybersecurity in our elections because we didn’t see a successful crippling attack against our election infrastructure strikes me as absurd,” said Larry Norden, director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s election reform program. “To paraphrase Ruth Bader Ginsburg, you don’t throw away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet. We don’t have the luxury of fatigue on this issue.”

Neil Jenkins, who led the Homeland Security Department’s election security work in 2016, said election officials at all levels, plus social media platforms and nonprofits, “all did a great job of collaborating and preparing for the range of threats in 2020. Just because we believe something didn’t happen this time doesn’t mean we get to relax" now.

“We have time for a quick sigh of relief,” said Jenkins, now chief analytic officer at the Cyber Threat Alliance. "But then you review what worked and what didn’t, continue to build trust through collaboration, and maximize the time after this election to prepare for the next one."

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who until earlier this year chaired the Intelligence committee and steered the panel’s years-long investigation into the Kremlin’s 2016 meddling, said national security officials and lawmakers are “always concerned” that their warnings will be tuned out by the American public. But he added, “The more specificity that we provide them the better off we are.”

He noted that the federal government, specifically intelligence and national security leaders, released much more information about election threats this year compared with the past.

“That’s not necessarily always good, but in this particular case it was probably helpful,” Burr said. "Every election cycle we get a little stronger in our election security.”

Read also

Fabricio Werdum vows to enhance his legacy by ousting Russian champion Ali Isaev and capturing the PFL heavyweight championship

32 best book gifts for everyone on your list in 2020

Dr Barbara Sturm has 15% off this Cyber Monday: I'm obsessed with this serum

News, articles, comments, with a minute-by-minute update, now on — latest news 24/7. You can add your news instantly now — here