Saturday, March 11, 2017

Trump Vs. The Deep State: Herbert Meyer's Perspective

Source: PowerLine

March 11, 2017

by Steven Hayward in Intelligence

Shortly after the election, and after Trump had made some of his public remarks critical of the intelligence community, I happened to lunch with Herbert Meyer, who many readers will know was assistant to CIA director William Casey in the Reagan Administration, and vice chair of the National Intelligence Council. He remarked that Trump was running a large risk with the intelligence community, as they have ways of making a president's life miserable.

Herb has returned to this subject with a recent lecture for Hillsdale College, just published in their Imprimus series under the title "How Intelligence Works (When It Does)." Worth reading the whole thing —it is not long, and Herb's writing is always vivid and clear—but here are a few relevant highlights:
The performance of our country's intelligence service is the latest example of an issue exploding into the headlines and becoming a shouting match, while failing to clarify anything about the issue itself. This explosion was ignited last fall by allegations that the Russians hacked into Hillary Clinton's campaign to help Donald Trump win the election. The blast radius expanded after the election, when rumors surfaced that the Russians had deployed their nasty tactic of kompromat to undermine President Trump's credibility by spreading rumors about his private behavior while in Moscow years ago. All this, on top of failures that had already wreaked havoc at the CIA and our other intelligence agencies—the 9/11 attacks themselves, the mess over weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the weird 2007 National Intelligence Estimate whose key judgment was that Iran had abandoned its nuclear bomb program, Edward Snowden's NSA espionage activities—has kept the issue of our intelligence service in the headlines. . .

Back in January, when U.S. intelligence chiefs released an unclassified version of the briefing they gave to President-Elect Trump about Russian efforts to influence the November election, Americans learned a phrase that's unique to the world of intelligence: key judgment. It was a key judgment that Russia had hacked into John Podesta's email server, and a key judgment that Vladimir Putin preferred Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton. Since these key judgments understandably erupted into a nasty political brawl, let's take a moment to understand what a key judgment really is. Simply put, it’s the conclusion reached by our most senior intelligence officials, based not only on the evidence they were able to collect, but also on the insights it enabled them to reach based on their knowledge and experience.

A key judgment isn't the same as a jury verdict. A jury verdict is based solely on the evidence presented to it. In a murder trial, unless the prosecutors can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, you must vote for acquittal. But in a National Intelligence Estimate, you reach a key judgment by starting with the evidence, then combining it with your own knowledge and experience to reach a conclusion. . .
Please go to PowerLine to read the entire article.



3 comments:

  1. The CIA was going to "produce" evidence that Russia colluded with Trump, before Wikileaks shot their treason all to hell. They fully intended to start WW3 with such bogus accusations against Russia, which they themselves are behind. This is beyond treason. These are acts that require the perpetrators be EXECUTED, not fired or laid off. Their necks need to SNAP at the end of a rope, or there will be others that dare to do the same things. America can never again risk these kind of people attempting to start such wars.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Key Judgement? Sounds like expert witness, same thing, knowledge and experience applied to something they have no first hand knowledge of. Using an inference to create a "might" be fact. I recall my supervisor saying what does assume do? Makes and ass out of ume ( makes an ass out of you and me) If one could hack could not more have hacked? With no hard evidence bullshit is evident and political meddling seeking something other than what is called for by the job. Obviously this entire bad play of pointing the fingers at who is alleged to have said something rather then focusing on the issue of importance has simply created this mess. If a pretty girl says 1 and 1 is 5 just cause she is pretty is that the issue or wether or not what she said is right?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I DONT THINK ITS POSSIBLE TO CLEAN THIS CORRUPTION OUT , YRS AGO IN AUSTRALIA THEY TRIED IT AND FAILED , NO ONE WENT TO PRISON AND THERE ARE FILES LIKE THIS IN EVERY STATE IN THAT COUNTRY , NOTICE THEY ARE ALL CROWN AGENTS . HOSER FILES https://www.smuggled.com/HFNames.htm ITS A LOT WORSE NOW .

    ReplyDelete

Who's visiting Abel Danger
view a larger version of the map below at whos.amung.us

You Too can be a CAPTAIN SHERLOCK