1101
Comments (25)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
Apache_Hmoob_Vaj 1 point ago +1 / -0

Can I get the source to the DNI.gov website of this Doc?

It's hard to convince those whom fallen to the DS narrative as they'll just say "That's not a .Gov Doc! It can be manufactured!"

I'm not saying I don't believe this Doc, in fact I do believe it.

2
LudwigVBeethoven1976 [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

I don't think any one in the public sphere actually has the report yet. I think some have only seen it. I think the .pdf linked in the article is all we have so far. This outlet isn't the only one referencing the letter, Epoch Times is and I believe at Bloomberg (left wing, of course) may be. Here's link again. https://www.scribd.com/document/491038048/Ratcliffe-Views-on-Intelligence-Community-Election-Security-Analysis#from_embed

2
Apache_Hmoob_Vaj 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, I saw that in the original link you posted.

Thanks for the time in sharing this to make sure I got it tho. Appreciate it!

2
LudwigVBeethoven1976 [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

It was already known and widely reported that Ratcliffe had refused to sign off on the report unless they included the foreign interference in the election. The doc just confirms that there was pressure from the top trying to keep that from happening.

2
Apache_Hmoob_Vaj 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh, that make sense. Thanks for clarifying that up.

1
LudwigVBeethoven1976 [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

No problem. That's a large part of the reason Ratcliffe's report was delayed.