The story of CENTCOM analysts accusing commanders of manipulating intelligence reports on ISIS to appease the White House is a story that has some interest in the mainstream media – but what if it is actually connected to a larger issue?
Washington DC -Allegations are mounting that senior intelligence officials at Central Command not only skewed findings on the ISIS war to please D.C., but tried to hide what they did.
In July, a group of intelligence analysts at the U.S. military’s Central Command accused their bosses of distorting and selectively editing intelligence reports about the fight against ISIS in order to portray that campaign as more successful than it really was. As a result of those complaints, the Pentagon’s inspector general opened an investigation.
Now, the allegations of misconduct have extended to a possible cover-up, with some analysts accusing the senior intelligence officials at CENTCOM, Maj. Gen. Steven Grove and his civilian deputy, Gregory Ryckman, of deleting emails and files from computer systems before the inspector general could examine them, three individuals familiar with the investigation told The Daily Beast.
One U.S. official said the alleged activity could amount to obstruction and interference with the inspector general’s investigation, which began last summer. (read more)
The presumption within the controversy (as it is generally discussed by the media) is that CENTCOM bosses changed the intel to give the impression of success to please the White House. But what if that wasn’t the reason?
