I worry this was an operation not to hasten the end to the war, but to extend it for Netanyahu’s narrow interests. Even the White House has been critical of the strike, & it’s no wonder; they reportedly had just put a new ceasefire proposal on the table. politico.com/news/2025/09/0…
For such proposals, mediators rely on two Hamas nodes: the leadership inside Gaza & the external cohort in Qatar & Turkey. It’s no secret the external leadership has consistently been more pragmatic (a relative term) than the military cadre in Gaza. Israel just tried to kill them.
After today, it’s hard to see any hostage deal coming into effect, and it’s much likelier that Israel moves ahead with the fuller reoccupation Bibi has been threatening. This doesn’t serve the interests of the hostages, the IDF, Israeli society — and, of course, nothing could be more devastating for Gaza’s civilians.
On the other hand, Bibi will remain in power and out of legal jeopardy, as he again sends his military to fight another day.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Ratcliffe is proving himself to be a slightly more polished version of former Acting DNI Grenell. No Twitter trolling (yet), but he's up to the same shenanigans to attempt to validate Trump's baseless conspiracy theories -- even if they are similarly failing.
First -- and least importantly -- he appears to get the date wrong in his cover letter to the Hill. The ICA was dated January 6, 2017, not December 30. (The ICA notes that information used in it was current as of December 29, 2016.) A seemingly careless error.
First -- and least importantly -- he appears to get the date wrong in his cover letter to the Hill. The ICA was dated January 6, 2017, not December 30, 2016. (The ICA notes that information used in it was current as of December 29, 2016.) A seemingly careless error.
Why is the administration unwilling to release the Flynn-Kislyak transcripts? The fact of the conversations is well known, their contents have been widely reported, and the admin has been happy to declassify other docs.
There’s clearly something they wish to keep hidden here.
Could it be that the transcripts show that Flynn was acting at Trump’s direction when he asked Moscow not to retaliate? That’s the cleanest explanation for why Flynn felt the need to lie to the FBI — to protect his boss. And it’d also explain Trump’s undying loyalty to him.
Or does it have something to do with the fact that the former Acting AG, @SallyQYates, testified that Flynn’s “underlying conduct” on those calls was “problematic in and of itself?” We still don’t know what exactly she meant, but the transcripts would surely shed light.
Now we know why Grenell declassified the doc — so it could leak. The upshot is that Americans now know the identities of the public servants whose alarm at Flynn’s actions compelled them to request his identity, a practice that’s available to intel / policymakers for good reason.
Grenell also provided the document to Senators Grassley & Johnson, who are leading the "Hunter Biden probe." This isn't a coincidence. This is nothing less than the Acting DNI providing national security records as chum in order to help Rs muddy the waters.politico.com/news/2020/03/0…
And kudos to @NSAGov's Gen Nakasone, who included a preamble making clear that all of these were REQUESTS that were APPROVED by NSA's process, which took into account the justification. In other words, NSA concurred that Flynn's identity was important to understanding the report.
Why does it matter that Trump doesn't actually read his PDB?
First, it's THE vehicle to convey what intelligence professionals think the President NEEDS to know. It's what our entire system of analysis is built around. All 17 intel agencies can--and do--write for the President.
There's an extraordinarily high threshold for the PDB; only the most important issues will make it and usually only after all relevant intelligence agencies have coordinated on the draft. If it's in "the book," it's necessary and usually urgent for the President to see.
If Trump were to actually read and digest the PDB, the Oval sessions with his national security team could focus less on the basics (what, where, who), and more on the fundamental policy question: "What do we do about it?"
That clearly wasn't asked/answered re COVID early on.
Thank you for your kind offer to submit relevant information regarding corruption. You'll find my submission below along with more examples here: nationalsecurityaction.org/newsroom/trump…
Sincerely,
Ned Price
PS: None of it is from Ukrainian sources, so all good!
According to Rudy Giuliani, Trump discussed building a Trump Tower in Moscow during his 2016 campaign (which he later falsely denied), while advancing pro-Russia positions. nytimes.com/2019/01/20/us/…
Trump bragged about saving Chinese telecommunications firm ZTE, citing “too many jobs lost in China.” Soon after, a state-owned Chinese company inked a Trump project in Indonesia, while another Chinese company launched a Trump project in Dubai.
This '18 tweet is getting renewed attention, and while I know the 1st rule of Twitter is ‘don’t feed the trolls,’ I can’t resist. It's an issue I care deeply about -- the broader theme is at the center of a class I teach -- and the IG report underscores a conversation is overdue.
First, I hope I'll be forgiven if I have trouble taking seriously the current pearl-clutching from those who have over the course of years — if not decades — defended and even advocated for expansive surveillance and other national security programs.
Many of these voices found religion about FISA only after Devin Nunes in 2017 found his way to the White House in the dead of night. And they’re on the anti-FISA bandwagon now despite knowing just how important the program is -- and, in many cases, after having said so publicly.