Over the course of two hours, the senior intelligence officials sought to rebut comments by Senator Roberts and others claiming that the intelligence agencies' conclusions in an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate had been based on incomplete and circumstantial evidence.
But there has been no indication that policy makers sought in any way to influence the agencies' conclusions on Iran, which like all intelligence assessments are supposed to be immune from political pressure.
A rebuttal report issued by advocacy organization Food & Water Watch argues that the energy agencies' conclusions "are based on inflated estimates of the demand for electric power, underestimates of the capacity of other SoCalGas gas storage facilities, and other unsubstantiated or flawed data".
But the findings buttress U.S. intelligence agency conclusions that Russia was actively involved in shaping the election.
Both believe that special-interest lobbyists had their way with Congress and the regulatory agencies, a conclusion tailored to fit their overall anti-Washington, pro-change campaign themes.
It contained the agencies' unanimous conclusion that, during the Presidential campaign, Putin had directed a cyber campaign aimed at getting Trump elected.
The ruling by Mr. Daniels said that the agency's conclusion that only Lockheed Martin "could provide best value to the agency in modernizing the system is also based on nothing more than the repeated vision of F.A.A. officials".
The agency's conclusion was based on a report dated Saturday relaying the results of agency tests on two species, shrimp and inland silverside, he said.
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the C.I.A. director, discussed the agency's conclusion in an interview with The Washington Post published Friday.
The agency's conclusion was based on evidence from a wide number of studies of both humans and animals.
