The Obama administration appears to regard intelligence leaks and briefings more or less like briefings by the Democratic National Committee or White House flack Jay Carney. You use any information at hand, classified or not, and you spin it any way you like, fairly or not.

Elliott Abrams’ quote critiques the way the Obama administration handled the release of intelligence information to the public, comparing it to how political organizations, such as the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and White House spokesperson Jay Carney, manage information. By saying that the administration treats intelligence leaks and briefings like political talking points, Abrams suggests that the handling of sensitive classified information may be driven more by political agendas than by national security concerns or ethical considerations. This comparison implies that information is sometimes manipulated to serve specific political narratives, rather than being shared transparently and responsibly.

The phrase, “You use any **information at hand, classified or not, and you spin it any way you like, fairly or not,” emphasizes Abrams’ criticism of the administration's manipulation of information. He suggests that the Obama administration was willing to use any available information—whether classified or not—and present it in a way that suited their interests, without regard to the fairness or accuracy of the portrayal. This implies that truth and integrity were secondary to shaping a narrative that aligned with the administration’s political goals.

Abrams’ quote also touches on the blurred lines between politics and national security. By equating intelligence briefings with political tools, he argues that the Obama administration treated classified information as a resource to be used strategically, much like a campaign spin. This tactic raises ethical concerns about the manipulation of sensitive materials for political advantage, which could undermine public trust in intelligence agencies and the government’s ability to handle such information responsibly.

Ultimately, Abrams’ critique highlights his concern that the Obama administration may have prioritized political strategy over the responsible use of classified intelligence. It suggests a broader issue regarding the intersection of politics and national security, where the handling of crucial information can become a tool for gaining political leverage, rather than for ensuring the safety and well-being of the nation.