Undermines credibility of formal intelligence processes when they contradict the narrative of external attack
The article describes the assessments as having 'selectively excluded evidence,' 'mischaracterized sources,' and 'relied on an 'ethically flawed medical study,' suggesting systemic bias and misconduct. This delegitimizes formal intelligence conclusions that contradict the preferred narrative.
“The retracted Intelligence Community Assessments selectively excluded evidence and intelligence, mischaracterized sources “to suppress alternative analyses,” omitted key information related to source quality and relied on an “ethically flawed medical study,” Gabbard’s office said in a memo to congressional leaders.”
