Thread by @themarketswork

1) From the New York Times rebuttal of @jimsciutto CNN article:

The Moscow informant was instrumental to the C.I.A.’s most explosive conclusion about Russia’s interference campaign: that President Vladimir V. Putin ordered and orchestrated it himself.
nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/…

2) "C.I.A. officials worried about safety made the arduous decision in late 2016 to offer to extract the source from Russia. The situation grew more tense when the informant at first refused."

3) "The C.I.A. pressed again months later after more media inquiries. This time, the informant agreed."

4) "The source’s rejection of the C.I.A.’s initial offer of exfiltration prompted doubts among some counterintelligence officials. They wondered whether the informant had been turned and had become a double agent, secretly betraying his American handlers."

5) The Big Reveal...

"That would almost certainly mean that some of the information the informant provided about the Russian interference campaign or Mr. Putin’s intentions would have been inaccurate."

6) Big Reveal #2:

"Some operatives had other reasons to suspect the source could be a double agent, according to two former officials, but they declined to explain further."

7) "Former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Mr. Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction."