A former top CIA official warned of dire consequences from the Justice Department's review of the origins of the Russia investigation.

Michael Morell (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

As part of the "investigation into the investigators," U.S. Attorney John Durham's team reportedly wants to talk to at least one senior CIA counterintelligence official and a senior CIA analyst who examined Russia's role in meddling in the 2016 election.

The review is not a criminal inquiry, but should Durham find criminal activity he can take prosecutorial action. Top CIA officials are said to be anxious over the federal prosecutor's efforts.

Michael Morell, who was deputy director of the CIA during the Obama administration, said Durham's interest in speaking to a CIA analyst concerns him.

"I see no problem with a DOJ review of whether the CIA and other intelligence community agencies lived up to their legal and regulatory responsibilities related to how they handled any information related to U.S. persons — U.S. citizens and U.S. nationals," Morell told CBS News, where he is now a senior national security contributor.

"Having said that, I see a DOJ review of whether or not the intelligence analysts made the right call as wholly inappropriate. I cannot ever remember a DOJ review of analysis," Morrell added.

"[Durham] and his team have no experience with, or knowledge of, the process of intelligence analysis," Morell said. "He and his team could well impose a law enforcement standard in coming to a conclusion — a much higher bar than exists in the intelligence community for analytic judgments."

American officials say Attorney General William Barr, who is overseeing Durham's efforts and earlier this year riled Democrats when he said "spying did occur" against the Trump 2016 campaign, wants to understand how the CIA coordinated with the FBI and how the agency came to its conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin gave the order to sow discord in the election to help Trump and undermine his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

That effort culminated in the January 2017 release of a intelligence community assessment, commissioned by former President Barack Obama. In that report, the CIA and FBI expressed "high confidence" that Russia sought to boost Trump while the National Security Agency had "moderate confidence."

The Senate and House intelligence committees both reviewed the assessment, revealing a partisan divide. While the Senate panel, known for being largely bipartisan, called it a "sound intelligence product," the House Intelligence Committee was more critical. In 2018, the then-GOP led House panel said most of the assessment's analysis "held up to scrutiny," but noted the judgment about Putin "failed to meet most of the analytic standards set forth in the primary guiding document for [intelligence community] analysis." Democrats on the committee disagreed with that assessment.

Democrats argue Barr's effort is part of a plan to stonewall the public from learning about President Trump potentially committing obstruction of justice. Upon the conclusion of his Russia investigation, special counsel Robert Mueller laid out 10 instances of possible obstruction but declined to make a determination about whether he should be accused of a crime.

"Trump and Barr conspire to weaponize law enforcement and classified information against their political enemies. The coverup has entered a new and dangerous phase," House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said in a tweet after the president gave Barr sweeping powers to declassify documents in the investigation.

Siding with Democrats, Morrell said he feels "strongly" the Justice Department has "NO business" doing a follow-up review of the intelligence community analysis. "It does not have the knowledge & expertise necessary to get the right answers and it could well have a chilling effect across the analytic community," he said in a tweet.