Mr. Burr, a longtime intelligence committee member who would much prefer that Congress talk about spying behind closed doors, said it was essential that the usually secretive committee publicly lay out its findings.
“The conclusion of this investigation has to have a public disclosure for the American people to look at what we found and to make their own assessment, not necessarily for there to be groupthink within Congress and us to have a kumbaya moment,” he said. “It is to present the facts to the American people.”
Mr. Burr said that the emergence of new information pushed the inquiry in new directions and that he would not shy away from scrutinizing any business dealings of those tied to the Trump campaign if evidence emerged of collusion or whether anyone was compromised by Russia.
But he quickly added, “I have not seen anything that would suggest that we needed to do that,” he said.
Democrats initially pressed for the creation of a special committee to handle the inquiry. Many of them expressed deep reservations about relying too heavily on Mr. Burr to conduct an aggressive investigation into any effort by Russia to boost Mr. Trump’s campaign, given his strong support for the president and his role as an adviser to Mr. Trump. Their skepticism was heightened in January when Mr. Burr suggested that the committee was not equipped to delve into the possibility of any links between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence.
Under pressure from Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the panel, Mr. Burr quickly reversed course and promised a broad inquiry into Russian election activities. Mr. Warner has worked closely with Mr. Burr and Democrats have generally held their fire while giving Mr. Burr credit for holding public hearings such as the one in early June that featured testimony from James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director.
Mr. Burr said his decision to plunge ahead in concert with…