The letter alleges that different standards are applied in reference to the distinction between definitions of influence/interference, specifically in regards to whether the subject of scrutiny is Russia or China. So basically any determination is invalid, because intelligence standards were not consistent.
"Influenced" "Interfered"
WTF does that mean?
How many votes? How many people?
Without specifics it's lame. Stop with the weak sauce, Ratcliffe!
If you don't have outcome-determinative data better than Matt Braynard, STFU.
The letter alleges that different standards are applied in reference to the distinction between definitions of influence/interference, specifically in regards to whether the subject of scrutiny is Russia or China. So basically any determination is invalid, because intelligence standards were not consistent.