A leaked intelligence report from the Department of Homeland Security concludes that citizens from the 7 countries President Trump wants to place a temporary travel ban on are no more likely to commit terrorist acts against the US than any other country.

The administration rejects the report because it lacks certain information about terrorism and is not yet complete.

Fox News:

Senior White House Policy Adviser Stephen Miller told Fox News' "First 100 Days" Tuesday that a revised version of the travel ban would "have the same basic policy outcome."

A senior administration official told The Wall Street Journal that the DHS report’s assessment overlooked key information and the finished product that the White House requested has not been completed. The White House called the report politically motivated. Officials said it overlooked some information that supported the ban.

“The president asked for an intelligence assessment,” the official said. “This is not the intelligence assessment the president asked for.”

VIDEO: DEMOCRAT FINDS ELEMENTS TO SUPPORT IN TRUMP'S TRAVEL BAN

The draft report determined that few people from the countries Trump listed in his travel ban have carried out attacks or been involved in terrorism-related activities in the U.S. since Syria's civil war started in 2011.

Gillian Christensen, a DHS spokeswoman, does not dispute the report's authenticity, but says it was not a final comprehensive review of the government's intelligence.

“It is clear on its face that it is an incomplete product that fails to find evidence of terrorism by simply refusing to look at all the available evidence,” she said, according to The Journal. “Any suggestion by opponents of the president’s policies that senior (homeland security) intelligence officials would politicize this process or a report’s final conclusions is absurd and not factually accurate. The dispute with this product was over sources and quality, not politics.”

Both the DHS authors and the administration are playing politics with the issue, but the report has one, huge qualifier: "The report states that foreign-born individuals who were 'inspired' to strike in the U.S. came from 26 different countries."

To "strike the US"? The report apparently doesn't take into account that some citizens from those seven countries may have been "inspired" to strike somewhere else in the Middle East or western Europe, not the US. Are we to ignore jihadists just because they haven't hit the US yet?

The Washington Examiner reports 72 people were convicted of terrorism or terror-related crimes in the 7 countries that the president wants a temporary travel ban. Besides being counterintuitive, the notion that the 7 countries where terrorism flourishes doesn't produce terrorists who want to strike the United States is silly. If we're not going to apply a vetting standard to travelers from these countries that's no different from how we vet travelers from England or Scotland, what's the point of vetting anyone?