I'm not sure how to place the authors' names in the proper slot, ut the article was written by Alex Emmons and Ryan Grim. The article is a good bit shorter than it could be, but it's factual, and gives us an insight to both the workings of the Intelligence community and the congress. The two top embers of the Senate Intelligence Committee are concerned that changes to the law via the federal budget passage will leave the various parts of the intelligence community free to disburse taxpayer funds outside the parameters which have been law for decades. The article points to the prospect that private military projects could be funded without the knowledge of Congress. This has happened in the past, with the CIA having been accused of drug running to fund off-the-books projects, and convictions which prove that he intelligence community was involved in selling weapons to foreign powers to provide funding for off-the-books projects. While the article does provide good links, it doesn't go into the historic details as much as I'd like. But the content is accurate as far as I am aware and I consider it to be trustworthy logical, not biased and credible.

An accurate account of the situation involving the intelligence community and top republicans, as it concerns the spending bill.

This is a very interesting piece that begins by discussing new powers for the Executive branch, but spins off into discussing Senator Cochran's mental deterioration. I think these should be two separate articles which would allow for greater details on both subjects. The information provided appears accurate, but the way the piece was thrown together could be improved upon.

The first half of the article worked quickly to get you up to speed on the situation mentioned in the title. Supporting the claims with quotes from the intelligence committee and links to other articles covering the topic. I agree that the article is a bit short and could've expanded more upon the context and history of this issue. The second half of the article went a completely different direction, focusing more on what might stop revised language in the bill. Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Cochran, and his mental health became the focus of the second half, carefully dodging a speculative ending.