I’ve long complained the definition of “politicizing” intelligence is too narrow—“whether any analysts had been pressured to change their analysis or assessments” in the phrase of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee and “make or change any analytic judgments in response to political pressure” in the phrase of Robb-Silberman report.
Those definitions cleary exclude “cherry picking”— “how the White House promoted intelligence it liked and ignored intelligence it didn’t” as CBS described the phenomenon outlined by Tyler Drumheller in his interview with 60 Minutes.
No one has to change their mind if you just select the judgements of and then reward sycophants, while sh*tcanning anyone who disagrees.
So, imagine my surprise when a former SSCI staffer basically confirmed said modus operandi to Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough:
CIA and State
We asked Dan Gallington, who once was chief counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, to discuss whether the CIA’s bureaucracy is working against President Bush’s policies in the war on al Qaeda.
“I wouldn’t say they are anti-Bush as much as to say they generally support the more conciliatory policy positions of the State Department bureaucracy,” Mr. Gallington said. “Even though CIA is not a policy organization, they actively participate in influencing national security policy.
“I would say it seems clear that the leaks out of the CIA in recent years are both substantively, and in timing, seem intended to embarrass the president.”
He said a “purge” is the answer for a leak-weary Bush administration. “It’s already under way,” he said.
I guess that purge won’t include those who leak to Bill Gertz.