Charlie Savage’s avatarCharlie Savage’s Twitter Archive—№ 13,812

    1. Good explanation by @TomRtweets on CIA-NSA dispute over how much the lack of sigint in the pool of available evidence should discount confidence in the CIA's assessment that Russia offered bounties in Afghanistan. Dovetails w/ NYT reporting since 2020. washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/inside-the-cia-and-nsa-disagreement-over-russian-bounties-story
  1. …in reply to @charlie_savage
    The facts - CIA analysts reached this assessment based on other types of evidence we have detailed, the Trump WH handled it strangely and then lied about whether he was briefed, and the NSA had lower confidence its based on concerns about sigint gap - are unchanged since 2020. /2
    1. …in reply to @charlie_savage
      That the CIA (& NCTC) has moderate confidence in its assessment, meaning they think it is credibly sourced and plausible, and NSA (& DIA) has low confidence, w/ greater concerns over lack of sigint, is not new. It is the intelligence community status quo reported last summer. /3
      1. …in reply to @charlie_savage
        Thus, the Biden NSC saying the IC has low to moderate confidence in the assessment, explaining its decision to do a diplomatic action but to stop short of sanctions, was not a walk back. It was a restatement of the same disagreement over the imperfect available evidence./4
        1. …in reply to @charlie_savage
          These facts, in all their complexity, will not be of interest to partisans who are pushing the narrative that the Biden NSC statement means that this was an evidence-free "hoax" as Trump claimed. They are pursuing their own agendas. /end