>>9823588
Her tweet underscored the biggest lie these people are pushing - that intelligence collection and analysis is like digging for buried treasure. Once you find it, you dust it off, and put it to use. Not how it works.
Intel gathering is like scooping up all the dirt at the bottom of a stream. You have stand over it, and sift through it, discard the clumps of dirt, and pour over what's left until you find a tiny piece of gold.
In analytical terms, it takes teams of people to do this. It also - and this is big - requires additional (classified) intelligence to make sense of what you find. Of course, that additional information cannot be publicly disclosed, which makes leaks all the more damaging. There could be clear-cut intelligence that debunks the subject in question but the leaker either chooses to ignore in his leak, or is not privy to altogether. Not to mention the possibility that the intel was planted by the very enemy it implicates as a misdirection/counter-intelligence operation.
This is why there is a verification process for raw intelligence that requires clearances, chain-of-command, and a multiple eyes.
Raw intelligence by itself is rarely ever going to give you the full story.