Particularly the analyst Auten quote in the clipped portion “just one data point”.
This article by Brian Auten was interesting
9/23/2016
Quinlan argues that clandestine intelligence collection may be done after an evaluation of, and an attempt to use, some of the more overt methods (i.e., it is to be undertaken as a type of last resort), and may be done only if the attendant harms or damages from clandestine operations would still allow “[a government] to forestall, counter or alleviate actions that would be seriously damaging” to the political community and its citizenry (i.e., macro-proportionality and probability of success).
It’s a complex story still, imo. I still have a lot of questions. In particular, why the decision making in 2016 was incomprehensive, almost deliberately so.
I appreciate your ability to report and not go past the evidence or story. It’s an important journalistic skill imo. So people can be free to think, observe and ask questions.
Think they’ll hide the memo?
Definitely noticed that reporting in the last couple days, especially the clipped portion underneath.
“For Special Counsel Durham’s part, he found no evidence of any attempt by the FBI to vet the intelligence:”
Particularly the analyst Auten quote in the clipped portion “just one data point”.
This article by Brian Auten was interesting
9/23/2016
Quinlan argues that clandestine intelligence collection may be done after an evaluation of, and an attempt to use, some of the more overt methods (i.e., it is to be undertaken as a type of last resort), and may be done only if the attendant harms or damages from clandestine operations would still allow “[a government] to forestall, counter or alleviate actions that would be seriously damaging” to the political community and its citizenry (i.e., macro-proportionality and probability of success).
https://providencemag.com/2016/09/just-intelligence-just-surveillance-least-intrusive-standard/
Article referenced in this paper
https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1144&context=jolti
It’s a complex story still, imo. I still have a lot of questions. In particular, why the decision making in 2016 was incomprehensive, almost deliberately so.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/17/us/politics/white-house-confirms-pre-election-warning-to-russia-over-hacking.html
I appreciate your ability to report and not go past the evidence or story. It’s an important journalistic skill imo. So people can be free to think, observe and ask questions.
Awesome reporting!