re: #272 Daniel Ballard

Well I am not going to moderate my opinions based on a calculus of others in DC being unreasonable. I call it as I see it based on the info I have. Issa going over the top is not good reason for anyone else to completely ignore the actual incident and concurrent data.

There wasn’t any concurrent data, though. There was one self-proclaimed whistleblower. Nothing else actually supported the idea this was a scandal.

And yes, Issa and others going over the top is normally a reason to suspect that there isn’t actually a real scandal or a problem. It’s like Bill Kristol; the opposite is normally true.