Are you now, or have you ever been, a card-carrying member of the State Department?

[SteveMetz]

I personally have documentation found in a pumpkin patch that clearly shows selil wearing an ascot and eating finger sandwiches. If that is not proof of association with the State Department, what is?

I'm with Rex, though--when members of this administration start whining about the politicization of intelligence or using it for partisan purposes, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Or both. One of the themes of the administration has been the deprecation of expertise, whether in the military, the State Department, or the intelligence community. Expertise is an impediment to ideology.

[Ken White]

any previous administration within our lifetimes how?

[SteveMetz]

any previous administration within our lifetimes how?

Point taken, but in my opinion, this administration has done it to a greater extent and to more disastrous results that their forebears.

There were signs of the deprecation of expertise early on--this administration transformed many positions that had previously been reserved for experts into political appointments. Their mentality was that experts were a firebreak on their vision. Such a mentality does open the way for bold innovation. But it also increases the chances of major mistakes.

[Ken White]

Every Admin walks in determined to do nothing its predecessor did and to be 'bold and innovative...' Then they all reinvent wheels and fall into the same trap; this one was just more determined to reinvent than most. Unfortunately.

Sigh.

Egos...

[ProfessorB]

I suppose a logical follow-on question would look at whether or not this pattern -- intel report, partisan trumpeting, partisan undermining -- is going to be the rule rather than the exception. One can easily imagine "Hillary's" intelligence community or "Huckabee's" CIA or "Obama's" NIE getting the same treatment, so I wonder what the long-term implications are for public confidence in the Intelligence Community; the willingness of decision-makers to stand by professional analysis; etc. Or has the "Office of Special Plans" effectively doomed us to a recurring cycle of point-counterpoint?