Posted on 05/14/2017 6:11:13 AM PDT by onyx
SNIPS
On January 6, 2017, the U.S. Intelligence Community issued an “Intelligence Community Assessment” (ICA) that found Russia deliberately interfered in the 2016 presidential election to benefit Trump’s candidacy. The news media and Trump critics have claimed this assessment ended the debate on this issue because it was the unanimous and objective conclusion of “all 17” U.S. Intelligence Agencies.
I also contended in my January article that the January 6 ICA was suspicious because it reached unusually clear judgments on a politically explosive issue with no dissenting views.
I previously thought the ICA’s unambiguous, dissent-free judgments were the result of limiting the number of intelligence agencies which could participate. But based on Clapper’s testimony, it appears that politicization of this assessment was much more serious.
Clapper explained in his testimony that two dozen or so “seasoned experts” were “handpicked” from the contributing agencies” and drafted the ICA “under the aegis of his former office” (the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.)
While Clapper claimed these analysts were given “complete independence” to reach their findings, he added that their conclusions “were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me.”
This process drastically differed from the Intelligence Community’s normal procedures.
Hand-picking a handful of analysts from just three intelligence agencies to write such a controversial assessment went against standing rules to vet such analyses throughout the Intelligence Community within its existing structure. The idea of using hand-picked intelligence analysts selected through some unknown process to write an assessment on such a politically sensitive topic carries a strong stench of politicization.
I also note that FBI Director Comey said in testimony
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I saw this guy on Fox 'n Friends this morning.
Case exposed and closed.
President Trump has been correct all along.
SICK, SCHEMING HOAX.
John Brennan needs to be put on a polygraph, indicted, tried and imprisoned right along with Hillary and I dare say, accompanied by several elected-office-holding democrats too.
One of the most poorly written headlines in history.
But good read if you get beyond the headline...
Fred Fleitz is senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for Security Policy, a national security think tank. Follow him on Twitter@FredFleitz.
Thanks!
The whole Russia, Russia, Russia thing was a complete projection of what a Russian wet dream might look like on a perfect day. It never happened. There is no evidence that it happened. Any investigation is a total futile effort by underlings to attempt to find something to make their boss happy, but it is not to be found. A complete waste of taxpayer resources in an attempt to attack the one that defeated Her Thighness.
As I used to comment on minor cases - This investigation is complete as evidence does not support a presentation to the U.S. Attorney, and it is also the known attitude of the U.S. Attorney to decline prosecution on a case without sufficient evidence to support a charge.
Whether the panel was biased is only a part of the problem. The other part is a presumption that we always have to trust anyone who is an establishment-credentialed intelligence expert without demanding to see their facts and data. This issue is too important to be left to the experts.
Second biggest hoax in history (next to Global Warming)
It’s a perfect `rat scam: it salves Hillary!’s butthurt and defames President Trump.
Of course the only problem is—not a bit of it is true.
Democrats decide what result they want, then assign `experts’ to support that conclusion: it’s pure Lysenkoism.
If we had a halfway credible press they would be laughed out of town. Or run out of town on a rail.
“John Brennan needs to be put on a polygraph,”
Waterboard, maybe.
Polygraph, unreliable.
And close a few of his bank accounts.
“A major problem with this process is that it gave John Brennan, CIA’s hyper-partisan former director, enormous influence over the drafting of the ICA. Given Brennan’s scathing criticism of Mr. Trump before and after the election, he should have had no role whatsoever in the drafting of this assessment. Instead, Brennan probably selected the CIA analysts who worked on the ICA and reviewed and approved their conclusions. “
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I’d personally like to see this blankety-blank-blank waterboarded .... polygraphing is too civilized for the traitorous Brennan.
But the total lack of evidence is proof of how well Trump hid it.
I learned this from Tom Foley, when he accused George H W Bush of flying in the back seat of an SR-71.
Not exactly true.
It did happen, just not with or about Trump.
The investigation was done by Obama to use against Hillary in the battle to see who would be the Democrat Party Choice for President back for the 2012 election. She backed down, he won the nomination. The report was shelved.
When Trump won, the report was rewritten using Trump's name instead of Hillary's. The report was sent to Britain to 'launder' it's source. McCain presented it as if it were original and done by the British Intelligence Services.
Who in the world trusts Muslim converts in our intelligence services??? Are we crazy?
Third, if you count the Piltdown Man.
Saw the interview also and he also mentioned that the report was based on logic NOT evidence, or intuition, along with the “hand-picked” explanation he gave.
Look for the video to appear on this channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/securefreedom/feed
Here he is 2 days ago.
2:49 Minutes
The Center’s Fred Fleitz discussing the firing of FBI director James Comey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpMHbOXNtW4
Muh Russia! Trump is guilty!
Still every day, like Geraldo Rivera, these “reporters” open the vault to show us their proof, and their vault of facts is ...EMPTY
Thanks to: Steven Tyler for the above!
There, fixed it!
So much for the "all 17 agencies" talking point that we heard incessantly for months.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.