Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jkcerda, Sep 11, 2015.
what a mess.
Tonkin Gulf, NVA body counts, Iraqi WMDs, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan...
There is a long history of administrations manipulating intelligence to support what they want to believe.
Hope and Change? Can we beat that dead horse some more?
Clapper is accused to consulting with a senior intelligence official, in charge of coordinating intelligence on ISIS, nearly every day. That is most probably because the White House, and top policymakers, see ISIS as one of the most pressing problems out there. If Clapper ignored the people getting information on ISIS - only talking to them every few weeks - people would (rightly) complain he was ignoring the problem.
The issue is one of potential influence. Similar to the scientific observer effect, it has the potential of subtly influencing the intelligence community to change their analysis. There is no direct charge that Clapper - or anyone in the Administration actually did pressure anyone. Only that the potential exists. And that is why there is an investigation.
Lastly, JK, you really can't be on both sides of this issue. Because if Clapper (or the White House) really were pressuring the intel people to give a rosy report on ISIS - then it would make it less likely for them to push for a military response.
And I would guess that if there was actually anything to find then whoever leaked this would be labeled a traitor similar to Snowden and Bradley Manning. So I'm sure the investigation will find nothing.