Susan Hennessey

The report serves a few limited purposes, namely setting forth the areas of factual agreement between the agencies.

It'll also force Trump to specifically disagree with or dispute facts, as opposed to cast general doubts. May serve to limit him somewhat.

But this is not a courageous document. It is evidence that the typical " oh but sources and methods" types won out.

Sources and methods concerns are, of course, legitimate. But unwavering commitment to being risk averse has been Obama's folly from day one.

Here are the questions it could have answered but didn't, which the American people need to know:

1. The big one. Did any US Person, connected or unconnected with Trump campaign, have knowledge of, procure or participate in the operation?

2. If the answer to the question above is anything other than "We have found no evidence of that" is there an ongoing investigation?

@Susan_Hennessey Actually one new piece of info is that they assess the state election hacks were RU state. Prior assessments had not.

@emptywheel That's true. Though previous assessment tip-toed to the line. So not exactly ground shaking to say "yeah, it was them."

@Susan_Hennessey I'm curious which pieces were toughest to declassify