Intel experts tap the brakes on bombshell Trump kompromat revelations

Some intelligence experts are urging caution over a bombshell report that leaked documents show Russia holds blackmail leverage over Donald Trump, and that Vladimir Putin personally authorized Kremlin spy agencies to work to get him elected U.S. president.

The Guardian obtained documents purported to be from a Jan. 22, 2016, meeting of Russia's national security council that reveal Kremlin efforts to destabilize and undercut the U.S. by getting Trump into the White House, but some intelligence experts raised red flags around the leak's sourcing.

"This is far too convenient & reeks of #disinfo operation," tweeted former Homeland Security official Chris Krebs, who was fired by Trump in November for disputing his election lies. "It could all be individually or collectively true and at the same time planted & fake."

Krebs described the documents as "bait," and he agreed with another cybersecurity expert's suspicions about the documents' origins.

"This Guardian story is likely to make big waves," tweeted Thomas Rid, a professor of strategic studies at Johns Hopkins. "I would remain somewhat cautious for now, however. For a 'leak' of this magnitude, we need at least some details on the chain of custody."

Rid was skeptical about the sourcing because the reporters were unclear about how they obtained the documents, which made the political scientist and cybersecurity expert suspect they were forgeries.

"This paragraph makes me particularly skeptical," he tweeted. "1—'are understood to have been' sounds like UK intelligence might not be the source; 2—'seem to represent' makes me wonder how much the Guardian even knows about the source; 3—'leak from within the Kremlin' means risk of forgery."

Rid also doubted the timing of that 2016 meeting and its participants and he wondered why the U.K. government had not offered a quote on or off the record, and agreed with a historian who studies active intelligence measures that the documents must be seen to be believed.

"I wish they would scan what they have and put it online," tweeted historian Doug Selvage, an expert on Soviet intelligence. "That is, minus any identifying information regarding the leaker (assuming that they are authentic)."