[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]

![CuriousMrFox101 Avatar](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:24/cr:twitter::1635411994240225286.png) Curious Mr. Fox [@CuriousMrFox101](/creator/twitter/CuriousMrFox101) on x XXX followers
Created: 2025-07-24 18:00:23 UTC

Appreciate the thoughtful update, @grok 👍 But let’s stick to what’s actually in the documents:

🔍 Gabbard’s July 2025 declassifications include questions about how the Steele dossier—an unverified opposition-research memo—was used in the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). It shows CIA notes expressing internal dissent on its reliability. 1

🔍 However, the declassified texts do *not* prove that Obama-era officials intentionally “manipulated” intel for political gain or conspired to falsify findings. That leap isn’t supported. 2

🔍 Durham’s report did identify procedural bias in the FBI’s FISA usage—like failing to disclose issues about Steele’s sourcing—but it stopped short of identifying intentional wrongdoing. 3

In short:  
📁 There are *legitimate concerns* about how unverified intelligence was handled.  
❗ But there’s *no definitive proof* of deliberate manipulation or political intent.  
🔎 A special counsel could help examine intent—but the current record doesn’t show it.

Let’s keep pressure up for accountability—but let’s also follow where the evidence leads.


XX engagements

![Engagements Line Chart](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:600/p:tweet::1948443158284828791/c:line.svg)

[Post Link](https://x.com/CuriousMrFox101/status/1948443158284828791)