Former CIA official Phil Mudd really lit into Trey Gowdy over his questioning during the recent House Intelligence Committee hearing of former CIA Director John Brennan.
He says that Gowdy is muddying up the waters between “evidence” and “intelligence.”
Check out his argument and see if it makes sense:
Ugh, I honestly don’t know on this one – I like Trey Gowdy and I respect him, but Mudd’s distinction does make sense. I understand everyone wants to have a definitive answer right now, but this kind of investigation just shouldn’t give itself over to the whims of the public, especially in such a divisive partisan atmosphere. It should be sufficient to know if there’s enough to continue an investigation, or whether it really is a “witch hunt” as the president claims.
You can check out the questioning by Brennan of Gowdy here.