Hardly the shattered bones Snowden would have us believe. But ok, point to Snowden on at least the technicality.
-
-
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
2. GED fact is an odd oversight. HPSCI was either seriously sloppy or there is something between careful wording of "passing score" + degree
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
3. Performance eval story is just
@bartongellman word/sourcing. Any reasonable observer needs more to make judgment. Wait on book, I guess.1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
4. On exaggerating resume, "take down claim" is accusation is vague. Ok sure. But the real problem is cheating allegation.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
Basically dismisses HPSCI cheating claim w/ "why would he need to cheat?" Offers no counter evidence. The record, however...
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
FOIA record demonstrates Snowden failed open book, untimed 702 training mere weeks before fleeing for Hong Kong. That is.. not a hard test.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
actually no it doesn't. It shows someone claimed that a year after the fact with no written record
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Your allegation is this person lied in emails (where facts are easily verified) in anticipation of FOIA release years later?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
But again. SV head was sure Snowden did pass the test. He was NOT clear details on attempts.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Do we at least agree the "why would he need to cheat" point is non-responsive at best?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
that pertains to different test entirely.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.