Spies Like Us, Con't

With no sign that Rep. John Ratcliffe will be denied Senate confirmation by Mitch McConnell for Trump's new Director of National Intelligence, the nation's intelligence agencies brace for their new boss, and to see how they will be gutted to "drain the swamp", leaving our already badly damaged post-Snowden intelligence apparatus reeling and turning them into useless shells full of cronies loyal only to Trump and the nation vulnerable to outside meddling.

If confirmed, Ratcliffe will not only have to allay public concerns about the politicization of intelligence during an election year, he’ll also have to strike a delicate balance inside the administration between a demanding president seeking to rein in the so-called “deep state” and intelligence agencies that have long resented and resisted any perceived overreach from ODNI.
“When ODNI was first created, some of its proponents harbored grand ambitions, believing that the DNI could forcefully herd the 17 cats that make up the modern Intelligence Community,” said David Kris, the former assistant attorney general for DOJ’s national security division and a founder of Culper Partners.

But Kris said the role had since evolved, with subsequent DNIs focusing more on day-to-day bureaucratic issues, inter-agency coordination, and, sometimes, providing support in political battles.

John McLaughlin, who was serving as acting CIA director when the ODNI was established, initially opposed the concept when it was being debated in 2003-2004.

But, he said in an interview, the office “went through an evolution from 2004 through four directors,” reaching maximum effectiveness under James Clapper, who served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and the director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency before taking over as DNI in 2010.

“Clapper figured out the secret,” McLaughlin said. “Let the agencies do their jobs and do only the things that the DNI alone is empowered (and authorized by the president) to do — mainly shaping the budget, coordinating tasking, briefing the president and Congress.”

How a Ratcliffe-led ODNI will view its responsibilities, however—and how Trump will empower the office as he seeks to tighten his grip on the intelligence community—is anyone’s guess.

The issue is particularly fraught given Russia’s continued interference in the presidential election, Trump’s reluctance to engage with his advisers on Russia’s malign activities, and his reported anger over Maguire’s willingness to brief congressional Democrats on the ongoing meddling.
What vexes intelligence veterans most, Priess said, is the prospect that a partisan director like Ratcliffe might take an active role in managing the President’s Daily Brief instead of letting analysts do their job -- substituting his personal opinions for the consensus view of the $70-plus billion intelligence community.

“That's the kind of thing that could prompt resignations of senior officials within the agencies,” Priess said, noting that Ratcliffe’s status as an outsider will make it more difficult to establish trust with the career officials.

Another concern “that’s not discussed nearly enough” is the role of ODNI’s legislative affairs office, said a former senior intelligence official.

“All of the legislative affairs offices in the intelligence community coordinate with, and often work through, ODNI legislative affairs,” the former official said. “So with a very partisan DNI, there could be some risk that you end up with a partisan shaping of what information goes to Congress.”

The risk is there even without a partisan leader. Maguire, the former acting DNI, pushed to cancel a public worldwide threats briefing to Congress last month because he did not want senior intelligence officials to be seen on-camera as disagreeing with the president on big issues such as Iran, Russia or North Korea, sources told POLITICO.

There's a very good chance that as ODNI, Ratcliffe will simply leave House Intelligence Committee Democrats out of the loop completely and only deal with Senate Republicans.  The Results would be disastrous to say the least, especially if Ratcliffe feeds Trump what he wants to hear and not what he needs to.

If you thought Trump was vulnerable to Russian manipulation before, wait until Ratcliffe throws out intelligence and substitutes his own opinions, analysis, and judgment on what intelligence agencies have to say.  Mass resignations of career intel professionals is exactly what Trump...and Putin...want.