Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sportello" data-source="post: 3348871" data-attributes="member: 55299">No, that was not a conclusion, that was a footnote. Similar to the ones Nunes didn&#039;t read.This is the conclusion:The Nunes memo does none of these things. With its substantial omissions, it clouds the public’s understanding, not enhances it. It is selective declassification at its worst, and politicization of intelligence at its core. The effect of its release—particularly in the <a href="https://lawfareblog.com/radio-silence-intelligence-community-where-does-it-stand-memo" target="_blank">notable absence</a> of vocal support for the FBI from other leaders in the intelligence community—will decrease public confidence in the FBI and Justice Department. It damages the House Intelligence Committee as an institution from the perspective of those in the intelligence community, who can no longer trust that the committee will comport itself according to the regular processes of intelligence oversight. And it damages transparency efforts, because it uses “transparency” as cover for a political act. The memo’s release, with the shoddy process that it followed, is transparency at its worst.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sportello, post: 3348871, member: 55299"] No, that was not a conclusion, that was a footnote. Similar to the ones Nunes didn't read. This is the conclusion: [I]The Nunes memo does none of these things. With its substantial omissions, it clouds the public’s understanding, not enhances it. It is selective declassification at its worst, and politicization of intelligence at its core. The effect of its release—particularly in the [URL='https://lawfareblog.com/radio-silence-intelligence-community-where-does-it-stand-memo']notable absence[/URL] of vocal support for the FBI from other leaders in the intelligence community—will decrease public confidence in the FBI and Justice Department. It damages the House Intelligence Committee as an institution from the perspective of those in the intelligence community, who can no longer trust that the committee will comport itself according to the regular processes of intelligence oversight. And it damages transparency efforts, because it uses “transparency” as cover for a political act. [B]The memo’s release, with the shoddy process that it followed, is transparency at its worst.[/B][/I] [/QUOTE]

Verification