Media Report That ISIS Intelligence Was Allegedly Manipulated By CENTCOM Officials

Daily Beast: “More Than 50 Intelligence Analysts” Say ISIS Intelligence Was “Inappropriately Altered By Senior Officials.” The Daily Beast first reported on September 9 that intelligence reports on ISIS and al Qaeda were allegedly “being inappropriately altered by senior officials ... to adhere to the administration's public line” on ISIS, leading to an investigation by the Pentagon's inspector general:

More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military's Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda's branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned.

The complaints spurred the Pentagon's inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.

“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official said.

Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration's public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda's branch in Syria, the analysts claim.

That complaint was supported by 50 other analysts, some of whom have complained about politicizing of intelligence reports for months. That's according to 11 individuals who are knowledgeable about the details of the report and who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity.

The accusations suggest that a large number of people tracking the inner workings of the terror groups think that their reports are being manipulated to fit a public narrative. The allegations echoed charges that political appointees and senior officials cherry-picked intelligence about Iraq's supposed weapons program in 2002 and 2003. [The Daily Beast, 9/9/15]

NY Times: “It Is Not Clear” If Altered CENTCOM Reports “Significantly Changed The Obama Administration's Views About ISIS.” On November 21, The New York Times reported that the Pentagon inspector general's investigation was expanding after finding that “emails and documents” regarding the rise of ISIS “may have been deleted before they had to be turned over to investigators.” The Times also explained that "[i]t is not clear" whether the altered CENTCOM intelligence reports “significantly changed the Obama administration's views about ISIS,” because the White House “has generally been measured in its assessments” of the terror group:

When Islamic State fighters overran a string of Iraqi cities last year, analysts at United States Central Command wrote classified assessments for military intelligence officials and policy makers that documented the humiliating retreat of the Iraqi Army. But before the assessments were final, former intelligence officials said, the analysts' superiors made significant changes. 

In the revised documents, the Iraqi Army had not retreated at all. The soldiers had simply “redeployed.”

Such changes are at the heart of an expanding internal Pentagon investigation of Centcom, as Central Command is known, where analysts say that supervisors revised conclusions to mask some of the American military's failures in training Iraqi troops and beating back the Islamic State. The analysts say supervisors were particularly eager to paint a more optimistic picture of America's role in the conflict than was warranted.

In recent weeks, the Pentagon inspector general seized a large trove of emails and documents from military servers as it examines the claims, and has added more investigators to the inquiry.

[...]

The exact content of those documents is unclear and may not become public because so much of the information is classified. But military officials have told Congress that some of those emails and documents may have been deleted before they had to be turned over to investigators, according to a senior congressional official, who requested anonymity to speak about the ongoing inquiry. Current and former officials have separately made similar claims, on condition of anonymity, to The New York Times. Although lawmakers are demanding answers about those claims, it is not clear that the inspector general has been able to verify them. A spokeswoman for the inspector general declined to comment.

[...]

It is not clear whether the Centcom assessments significantly changed the Obama administration's views about ISIS. While Centcom was largely positive about American gains, other agencies have been more pessimistic. The White House has generally been measured in its assessments. [The New York Times, 11/21/15]

President Obama Directed Defense Officials To Investigate Reports Of Intelligence Manipulation. The New York Times reported on November 22 that President Obama “ordered his senior defense officials to find out whether intelligence reports had been altered” following reporting from the day earlier that the investigation had expanded, noting that Obama said “I don't want intelligence shaded by politics. I don't want it shaded by a desire to tell a feel-good story”:

President Obama said on Sunday that he had ordered his senior defense officials to find out whether intelligence reports had been altered to reflect a more optimistic assessment of the American military campaign against the Islamic State.

Speaking at a news conference in Malaysia at the end of a 10-day overseas trip, Mr. Obama said he expected the Pentagon's inspector general to investigate allegations that significant changes were made to reports from analysts at the United States Central Command, known as Centcom.

“I don't know what we'll discover with respect to what was going on in Centcom,” Mr. Obama said. “What I do know is my expectation -- which is the highest fidelity to facts, data, the truth.”

Mr. Obama was responding to a report in The New York Times on Sunday that described the internal Pentagon investigation. Some analysts in the Defense Department say their supervisors revised their conclusions about some of the military's failures before finalizing the reports.

In recent weeks, the Pentagon has expanded its investigation into the allegations and has seized a large trove of emails and documents as it examines the claims. The president said altering reports to make them more optimistic would be contrary to his wishes.

“One of the things I insisted on the day I walked into the Oval Office was that I don't want intelligence shaded by politics. I don't want it shaded by a desire to tell a feel-good story,” he said.

He added: “I have made it repeatedly clear to all my top national security advisers that I never want them to hold back, even if the intelligence, or their opinions about the intelligence, their analysis or interpretations of the data, contradict current policy.”

[...]

Mr. Obama was careful to say that he did not know “the details about this.” He said there were many times when legitimate disputes existed among different agencies about an intelligence conclusion.

He said such disagreements had to be shared with him in a transparent way.

But he also said he had not felt that the reports he had received about the campaign to fight the Islamic State had been overly optimistic.

“It's not as if I've been receiving wonderfully rosy, glowing portraits of what's been going on in Iraq and Syria over the last year and a half,” Mr. Obama said, adding: "At my level, at least, we've had a pretty clear eyed, sober assessment of where we've made real progress and where we have not. 

In Washington on Sunday, former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said he had not seen any evidence of altered intelligence reports during his tenure at the Pentagon, from early 2013 to February of this year.

“Now, that doesn't mean something couldn't happen below the secretary of defense's office,” Mr. Hagel said in an interview on “State of the Union,” on CNN. “You can't monitor everything.”

Mr. Hagel noted that “conflict between our military on the ground versus different intelligence groups” was nothing new. [The New York Times, 11/22/15]

Fox Baselessly Accuses Obama Of Ordering Military To “Cook The Books” On ISIS Intelligence

Fox's Kimberly Guilfoyle: “It's Criminal” That Obama Is “Asking [CENTCOM] To Basically Cook The Books.” On the November 23 edition of Fox News' The Five, co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle said that “If you have information like that and then you're telling the public something completely different and asking somebody to basically cook the books,” it's “criminal,” while co-host Eric Bolling added “this could be the worst thing of [Obama's] whole presidency”:

ERIC BOLLING: It's a long list starting with ISIS being the JV team, the setback, et cetera. Here are the important facts about this. This isn't some one analyst who feels like his information was ignored during this compilation of data, it's dozens, number one. Number two, it's The New York Times who found this out and is bringing it to the forefront. Number three, there's an inspector general who is going to find out exactly what happened. Dozens of analysts thinkthat their information was changed to specifically fill in Obama's narrative on ISIS not being as big a threat as they are. In the meantime, we're making decisions based on these analysts' analysis. People could be dying. For me, if this is exposed the way The New York Times is kind of alluding to, this could be the worst thing of his whole presidency. 

DANA PERINO: Kimberly, the article says that the analysts are saying that their supervisors were, “particularly eager,” to paint a better picture. So if you're an investigator, you find that you start to just follow the trail and see where it leads? 

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE: Yeah, but also you look and see, what's the motivation here? I mean, how sickening is this? He has the utmost respect and fidelity for truth and blah, blah - uh-uh, no you don't. No you don't, because the report, the real information and the facts would make the administration look very bad. I mean, this is, to me it's criminal. If you have information like that and then you're telling the public something completely different and askings omebody to basically cook the books to make it look favorable, all of this would look very bad for him if the truth came out. And he then, knowing that, acted on this and didn't do the right thing, and didn't follow through with the concerns that we have for national security. I mean, wow. I think that could be one of the worst things that he's done. It's like top of the list, Obama's greatest hits of blunders. [Fox News, The Five, 11/23/15]

Fox's Stephen Hayes: “I Think That The Manipulation” Happened “At The Behest Of The White House.” On the November 23 edition of Fox News' Special Report, Fox News contributor Stephen Hayes said that the investigation President Obama ordered into the alleged intelligence manipulation “won't be a very serious investigation” because the “manipulation of intelligence has been happening at the behest of the White House, and potentially at the direction of the White House”:

STEPHEN HAYES: We've been sort of all over this for a long time. Look, there are three different investigations or discussions of investigation. There is the ongoing Pentagon inspector general investigation which is looking, as far as we can tell, at manipulation of intelligence related to ISIS, based at CENTCOM. There is some discussion - I talked to some people today who believe that that Pentagon inspector general investigation is expanding to include the manipulation of intelligence on Afghanistan as well. What the president was talking about was, is a second investigation, another investigation that he wants, to look at the manipulation of intelligence or potential manipulation of intelligence. I would submit that that won't be a very serious investigation because I think that the manipulation of intelligence has been happening at the behest of the White House, and potentially at the direction of the White House. [Fox News, Special Report with Bret Baier, 11/23/15]

Fox's Doocy: White House Asked CENTCOM “What Can [They] Come Up With” To Avoid Needing “Boots On The Ground.” During the November 24 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy speculated the White House ordered CENTCOM to manipulate intelligence, saying, “I think the White House said, 'hey, we need a good story out of there because we're not going to put boots on the ground so what can you come up with?'” Similarly, co-host Brian Kilmeade questioned if there was “a message from the White House saying 'sanitize this'”:

BRIAN KILMEADE: Analysts spoke out. They acquired the information that ISIS was growing a full year before the Syrian revolution took over, and we saw the insurgency happen, and they saw an opportunity to move up. So the analysts came out and said, 'listen, the stuff we're telling to our superiors is not getting out accurately to the White House.' The question is, was there pushback at the White House to make sure that the information getting to the president was with rose-colored glasses, was better than you thought? Because Fox News is told by a source close to CENTCOM analysts that the pressure on them included at least two emails that said, that needed to put -- in those emails said cut it out and toe the line. So was there a message from the White House saying 'sanitize this,' or is it just a bunch of officers at CENTCOM who said 'I don't want to give bad news to the White House because I don't like giving bad news?'

STEVE DOOCY: I think Brian you're right on the part about the narrative. I think the White House said, 'hey, we need a good story out of there because we're not going to put boots on the ground so what can you come up with?' What's interesting is this investigation has now gotten much bigger. It started with the whistle blowers and now the IG at the Pentagon, the inspector general has expanded things, there are congressional investigations. The Pentagon IG seized email and documents from government servers, but according to The New York Times -- does this sound familiar -- some email and documents may have been deleted and are no longer available for perusal by the investigators. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 11/24/15]

But There's No Evidence Of A Conspiracy Between White House And CENTCOM Officials

Daily Beast: Senior CENTCOM Officials Are Accused Of Intelligence Manipulation. The Daily Beast reported on November 23 that “two senior intelligence officials at CENTCOM, Maj. Gen. Steven Grove and his civilian deputy, Gregory Ryckman” are being investigated for potentially deleting documents and manipulating intelligence. The article noted that “Grove, Ryckman, and other CENTCOM higher-ups are named in the complaint to the inspector general”:

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. He noted that files relevant to the investigation began to disappear from CENTCOM computers after the Pentagon watchdog's staff began their work.

Two sources said that investigators are piecing together a trail of emails and reports to find out what may have been deleted, as well as what officials outside CENTCOM knew about potential manipulation of intelligence. 

[...] 

But the allegations of a cover-up underscored the degree to which intelligence analysts have essentially mounted an insurrection aimed at correcting what they see as unprofessional behavior by their own leaders. 

Grove, Ryckman, and other CENTCOM higher-ups are named in the complaint to the inspector general, which is said to be extensive and written in a harsh, critical tone, according to those familiar with its contents. [The Daily Beast, 11/23/14]

NBC: “Senior Military Or Civilian Officials At CENTCOM” Are Accused Of Intel Manipulation. A November 23 NBC News report noted that “officials at United States Central Command” are at the center of the probe investigating the “possible manipulation or outright dismissal of some intelligence,” not the White House:

Senior military and defense officials who refuse to provide details because the information is classified tell NBC News that officials at United States Central Command possibly “manipulated” intelligence regarding ISIS in Iraq.

While the officials have personally seen no evidence of intelligence manipulation, one senior official predicts an investigation by the Pentagon Inspector General could still lead to a “shakeup” of Central Command (CENTCOM) intelligence personnel.

The allegations, which were first reported by the New York Times, involve possible manipulation or outright dismissal of some intelligence analysis that determined ISIS posed a more serious threat in Iraq than had been previously reported. The accusation is that senior military or civilians officials at CENTCOM in Florida altered or ignored the analysis and downplayed the threat from ISIS to paint a more positive picture of Iraqi and U.S. military progress against ISIS.

The U.S. military receives intelligence from a large number of analysts from a variety of agencies, both military and civilian, on any given subject or target -- much of it contradictory -- which leaves the information open to subjective interpretation and possible manipulation at more senior levels, both civilian and military. [NBC News, 11/23/15]