Trump chooses another novice to be his Director of National Intelligence

[kyzr]

DNI Dan Coats was fired on July 28. His firing was likely connected to the intelligence community's response to Trump's telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on July 25, 2019. That response earned Trump two Articles of Impeachment. Since Coats' dismissal seven months ago, the U.S. has been without a permanent DNI.

CNN reports, "President Donald Trump said on Friday that he intends to nominate Rep. John Ratcliffe, a Republican from Texas, as his permanent director of national intelligence, the second time the President has attempted to make the loyalist lawmaker his spy chief."

CNN continued, "Ratcliffe had been nominated as Trump's DNI pick after Dan Coats stepped down from the post in July 2019, but the Texas congressman withdrew his name from consideration after lawmakers from both parties raised concerns about his qualifications."

Trump withdrew Ratcliffe to serve as his intelligence chief in August because he padded his résumé. Also, there was bipartisan concerns about his experience, meaning lacking thereof. Also, Ratcliffe misrepresented his role in prosecuting terrorism and immigration cases.

Ratcliffe's résumé is just as bereft of intelligence experience now as he was in July. Trump nominated him anyway. One possible reason: Qualified intelligence supervisors want nothing to do with Trump's concept of intelligence.

Ratcliffe, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee is a consumer of intelligence products. So, to say Ratcliffe is experienced in intelligence is akin to saying that a person who drives a car has an intimate knowledge of how a car is made.

Ratcliffe's two main qualifications for the job are, 1)He is extremely loyal to Trump. 2)He provided a stalwart defense of Trump in the House impeachment inquiries.

For these reasons, Ratcliffe is less likely to provide intelligence Trump doesn't like. Failure to provide pleasant intelligence to the President cost former DNI's their jobs, Dan Coats and Joseph Maguire. A loyal political hack with zero intelligence experience, Richard Grenell, is the current acting DNI. He won't give Trump unpleasant intelligence, either.

I agree. No one with any experience wants to ruin his or her career working for tRump, and Ratliff is a rabid tRumpling. That's what tRump wants. Not loyalty to the country or the Constitution. Loyalty to him personally.

Ratcliff is a prosecutor by trade.
His talents should enable him to clean up the intel agencies of deep state hacks.

He's a bought and paid for tRumpling zombie.

The Intel agencies don't need cleaning up, the tRump *administration* does.

I disagree. When asked for the supporting evidence that Russia wants Trump re-elected, they had none.
So they do need cleaning up to remove the partisan bullshitters. Lots of links like this one if you use google:
Lawmakers, During Classified Briefing, Are Told Russia Wants Trump Reelected

So what evidence do you have to support your claim that Trump's admin needs cleaning up?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The upper echelons of the intelligence agencies are terminally corrupt. They should all be fired, not promoted. Many of them need to go to prison.

You douchebags keep pretending that these intelligence executives are honest patriotic Americans who we can trust. They have been proving that theory dead wrong for the last 4 years.

You have your tinfoil hat too tight, it is cutting off the oxygen to your brain and making you sound even most paranoid than normal

 

[bripat9643]

The upper echelons of the intelligence agencies are terminally corrupt. They should all be fired, not promoted. Many of them need to go to prison.

You douchebags keep pretending that these intelligence executives are honest patriotic Americans who we can trust. They have been proving that theory dead wrong for the last 4 years.

You have your tinfoil hat too tight, it is cutting off the oxygen to your brain and making you sound even most paranoid than normal

You failed to prove that we can trust the intelligence agencies.

Case closed.

 

[Oddball]

The real intelligence community is hunkering down and hoping to wait out Trump. The spy guys are quite resilient!

A political hack for a political post..stop the presses!

"The real intelligence community" missed 9/11™, gave us shit intel on Iraq, missed the fall of the Soviet Union, missed the Tsarnaev brothers, missed the "Arab Spring", missed Nikolas Cruz, lied to the FISA court on numerous occasions.....Yeah, we really need those assholes.

You are wrong on nearly all counts. The intelligence community warned Bush that Osama Bin Laden was a threat and Bush/Cheney ignored it; the intelligence in Iraq was manipulated by Bush to justify the Iraqi Invasion.

It is the politicalization of intelligence that is the problem not the intelligence.

The politicalization of intelligence is what Trump wants and that is the danger to our security.

Wake the fuck up.

The politicization of intel started long before the Cheeto Jesus came down the escalator, you bootlicking stooge.

Wake the fuck up.

 

[Nostra]

DNI Dan Coats was fired on July 28. His firing was likely connected to the intelligence community's response to Trump's telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on July 25, 2019. That response earned Trump two Articles of Impeachment. Since Coats' dismissal seven months ago, the U.S. has been without a permanent DNI.

CNN reports, "President Donald Trump said on Friday that he intends to nominate Rep. John Ratcliffe, a Republican from Texas, as his permanent director of national intelligence, the second time the President has attempted to make the loyalist lawmaker his spy chief."

CNN continued, "Ratcliffe had been nominated as Trump's DNI pick after Dan Coats stepped down from the post in July 2019, but the Texas congressman withdrew his name from consideration after lawmakers from both parties raised concerns about his qualifications."

Trump withdrew Ratcliffe to serve as his intelligence chief in August because he padded his résumé. Also, there was bipartisan concerns about his experience, meaning lacking thereof. Also, Ratcliffe misrepresented his role in prosecuting terrorism and immigration cases.

Ratcliffe's résumé is just as bereft of intelligence experience now as he was in July. Trump nominated him anyway. One possible reason: Qualified intelligence supervisors want nothing to do with Trump's concept of intelligence.

Ratcliffe, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee is a consumer of intelligence products. So, to say Ratcliffe is experienced in intelligence is akin to saying that a person who drives a car has an intimate knowledge of how a car is made.

Ratcliffe's two main qualifications for the job are, 1)He is extremely loyal to Trump. 2)He provided a stalwart defense of Trump in the House impeachment inquiries.

For these reasons, Ratcliffe is less likely to provide intelligence Trump doesn't like. Failure to provide pleasant intelligence to the President cost former DNI's their jobs, Dan Coats and Joseph Maguire. A loyal political hack with zero intelligence experience, Richard Grenell, is the current acting DNI. He won't give Trump unpleasant intelligence, either.

Trump should follow Barry Hussein’s lead and appoint a Communist traitor like James Clapper.

 

[imawhosure]

Call Trump a liar, Orange man, or anything you want; but one thing Trump is not is DUMB! He is basically promising his people something is coming. Now you say he breaks all of his promises. All I can say is------>your take better be correct as you spin it, otherwise a big ball of poop is coming, and it is heading your way!

He promised his people a tax cut before the midterms, he lied and is still worshiped.

He promised to repeal and replace ObamaCare...he lied and is still worshiped.

When Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th ave and they would still vote for him, he knew what he was talking about

Ok, we are counting you as putting your eggs in that basket. If you are correct, feel free to bring back synopsis, because if I am correct, I am surely going to bring back yours.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The upper echelons of the intelligence agencies are terminally corrupt. They should all be fired, not promoted. Many of them need to go to prison.

You douchebags keep pretending that these intelligence executives are honest patriotic Americans who we can trust. They have been proving that theory dead wrong for the last 4 years.

You have your tinfoil hat too tight, it is cutting off the oxygen to your brain and making you sound even most paranoid than normal

You failed to prove that we can trust the intelligence agencies.

Case closed.

You trust them all the time you fraud. When they told you that Assad gassed his own people and Trump lobbed a bunch of missiles at Syria you did not question them at all. When they told you the Iranian dude was planning an "imminent" attack and had to be killed you never questioned them.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Ok, we are counting you as putting your eggs in that basket. If you are correct, feel free to bring back synopsis, because if I am correct, I am surely going to bring back yours.

Well, so far I am 100% correct.

Remember "lock her up"...well she is not locked up and he is still worshiped.

Trump said he could get the GDP growth to 4% or higher...has not happened and he is still worshiped.

Trump promised to get rid of the debt in 8 years and to balance the budget...instead the deficit has doubled...and yet he is still worshiped.

 

[bripat9643]

The upper echelons of the intelligence agencies are terminally corrupt. They should all be fired, not promoted. Many of them need to go to prison.

You douchebags keep pretending that these intelligence executives are honest patriotic Americans who we can trust. They have been proving that theory dead wrong for the last 4 years.

You have your tinfoil hat too tight, it is cutting off the oxygen to your brain and making you sound even most paranoid than normal

You failed to prove that we can trust the intelligence agencies.

Case closed.

You trust them all the time you fraud. When they told you that Assad gassed his own people and Trump lobbed a bunch of missiles at Syria you did not question them at all. When they told you the Iranian dude was planning an "imminent" attack and had to be killed you never questioned them.

Actually, I didn't believe that. It was obvious to me that they were trying to get people to hate Assad. Bush did the same thing when Saddam invaded Kuwait.

The Iranian dude deserved to die. He's responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans.

 

[imawhosure]

Ok, we are counting you as putting your eggs in that basket. If you are correct, feel free to bring back synopsis, because if I am correct, I am surely going to bring back yours.

Well, so far I am 100% correct.

Remember "lock her up"...well she is not locked up and he is still worshiped.

Trump said he could get the GDP growth to 4% or higher...has not happened and he is still worshiped.

Trump promised to get rid of the debt in 8 years and to balance the budget...instead the deficit has doubled...and yet he is still worshiped.

LOL, good point!

But remember---------->

Did he ever say he was going to lock her up? (I dunno, really. I know his people at the rallys do, but him personally, I can not verify that)

And then--------->your other examples need Democratic support, and they don't give him any.

On the other hand, for this to come about; that which I am speaking of, he needs no support from the other side. In fact, the way it appears, the other side can't do a damn thing to stop him, even though they tried with the collusion/delusion, and faux impeachment.

From what I see, on this issue at least, it is full speed ahead.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Actually, I didn't believe that. It was obvious to me that they were trying to get people to hate Assad. Bush did the same thing when Saddam invaded Kuwait.

Ahh, yes I remember well all those post from you bashing Trump for wasting all those missiles.

The Iranian dude deserved to die. He's responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans.

According to our intelligence people.... But they are not to be trusted...except for when they are

 

[22lcidw]

The real intelligence community is hunkering down and hoping to wait out Trump. The spy guys are quite resilient!

A political hack for a political post..stop the presses!

"The real intelligence community" missed 9/11™, gave us shit intel on Iraq, missed the fall of the Soviet Union, missed the Tsarnaev brothers, missed the "Arab Spring", missed Nikolas Cruz, lied to the FISA court on numerous occasions.....Yeah, we really need those assholes.

You are wrong on nearly all counts. The intelligence community warned Bush that Osama Bin Laden was a threat and Bush/Cheney ignored it; the intelligence in Iraq was manipulated by Bush to justify the Iraqi Invasion.

It is the politicalization of intelligence that is the problem not the intelligence.

The politicalization of intelligence is what Trump wants and that is the danger to our security.

Wake the fuck up.

The politicization of intel started long before the Cheeto Jesus came down the escalator, you bootlicking stooge.

Wake the fuck up.

Progs and their agendas and their propaganda shills got Trump elected. You have nobody but yourselves to blame. And you have not learned a thing from 4 years ago. Win or lose. Trump gave us a 4 year break from our self imposed imprisonment to the abyss.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The real intelligence community is hunkering down and hoping to wait out Trump. The spy guys are quite resilient!

A political hack for a political post..stop the presses!

That's why The intelligence community is no longer trusted.

 

[Markle]

You are wrong on nearly all counts. The intelligence community warned Bush that Osama Bin Laden was a threat and Bush/Cheney ignored it; the intelligence in Iraq was manipulated by Bush to justify the Iraqi Invasion.

Yeppers, there was a threat, and we knew about the threat. Not where it would be, how it would come, not when. No one ignored any intelligence.

As for the intelligence surrounding Iraq.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
- President Clinton in 1998 “

[…], when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”
- President Clinton , Jan. 27, 1998 – State of the Union

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 .

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqis nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”

“Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.”

“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”

- President Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998


"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."
- Madeline Albright, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "

Update: September 8, 2005 - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them..

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 .

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 .


Former Vice President Joe Biden urged the U.S. government in 1998 to pursue a strategy to ‘dethrone’ Saddam Hussein over allegations the Iraqi strongman was hiding weapons of mass destruction.

Biden, the-then ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was one of President Bill Clinton’s most vocal allies in the battle to pressure Hussein to abide by terms established after the Gulf War requiring Iraq to destroy its stockpile of chemical weapons. - Former Vice President Joe Biden 1998 1998: Joe Biden Urged U.S. to 'Dethrone' Saddam Hussein Over WMDs

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 .


"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 .

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 .

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 .

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 .

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003" (Currently President Barack Hussein Obama’s Secretary of State)

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Saddam is gone and good riddance," former President Bill Clinton said yesterday, but he urged President Bush to resist trying to get even with nations that opposed the war.
"There are German and French soldiers in Afghanistan today. Does the President want them to come home?" Clinton said at a Manhattan forum on corporate integrity.
Democrats on Iraq + WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction)



He [President Clinton] praised Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for their handling of the war, but said Bush should have waited longer before attacking for the "chance that either [Saddam Hussein] would have disarmed or . . . we would have had far more members of the Security Council with us."

Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.

"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.

- Former President Clinton Wednesday, April 16, 2003

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."

- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010

How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going? How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President? Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities. Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.



And then the Obama administration wanted to TAKE CREDIT for the Iraq war…whew….

 

[Markle]

Bullshit. They aren't "key people". Barr is there to keep tRump and his cohorts outta prison and Durham is just a distraction for the low intelligence base.

Neither on has the best interests of the nation or the law at heart.

Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman'
By JOSH GERSTEIN
04/04/2013 12:31 PM EDT
Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman'

 

[eagle1462010]

According to our intelligence people.... But they are not to be trusted...except for when they are

Advanced IED's are no myth.............they came from Iran.........and that asshat helped them do it.............

I hope he is enjoying his time with his 72 virgins that all look like Rosan Barr...................

It was these IED's that permanently disabled my nephew and killed everyone else in the Humvee............We should have killed his ass a long time ago.

 

[Crepitus]

Bullshit. They aren't "key people". Barr is there to keep tRump and his cohorts outta prison and Durham is just a distraction for the low intelligence base.

Neither on has the best interests of the nation or the law at heart.

Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman'
By JOSH GERSTEIN
04/04/2013 12:31 PM EDT
Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman'

And?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

The comedy routine continues.

Trump said the Texas congressman was "an outstanding man of great talent!"

He was first nominated days after his high-profile questioning of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller - the ex-FBI director who led an inquiry into allegations of collusion between Russia and Mr Trump's 2016 election campaign.

But his nomination was later withdrawn after objections from both main parties. The president told reporters Mr Ratcliffe had been "treated very badly, very harshly by the press".

Mr Ratcliffe has yet to comment publicly on this latest nomination.

Trump re-nominates Ratcliffe for US spy chief

The Trump White House is a joke.

 

[Osiris-ODS]

DNI Dan Coats was fired on July 28. His firing was likely connected to the intelligence community's response to Trump's telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on July 25, 2019. That response earned Trump two Articles of Impeachment. Since Coats' dismissal seven months ago, the U.S. has been without a permanent DNI.

CNN reports, "President Donald Trump said on Friday that he intends to nominate Rep. John Ratcliffe, a Republican from Texas, as his permanent director of national intelligence, the second time the President has attempted to make the loyalist lawmaker his spy chief."

CNN continued, "Ratcliffe had been nominated as Trump's DNI pick after Dan Coats stepped down from the post in July 2019, but the Texas congressman withdrew his name from consideration after lawmakers from both parties raised concerns about his qualifications."

Trump withdrew Ratcliffe to serve as his intelligence chief in August because he padded his résumé. Also, there was bipartisan concerns about his experience, meaning lacking thereof. Also, Ratcliffe misrepresented his role in prosecuting terrorism and immigration cases.

Ratcliffe's résumé is just as bereft of intelligence experience now as he was in July. Trump nominated him anyway. One possible reason: Qualified intelligence supervisors want nothing to do with Trump's concept of intelligence.

Ratcliffe, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee is a consumer of intelligence products. So, to say Ratcliffe is experienced in intelligence is akin to saying that a person who drives a car has an intimate knowledge of how a car is made.

Ratcliffe's two main qualifications for the job are, 1)He is extremely loyal to Trump. 2)He provided a stalwart defense of Trump in the House impeachment inquiries.

For these reasons, Ratcliffe is less likely to provide intelligence Trump doesn't like. Failure to provide pleasant intelligence to the President cost former DNI's their jobs, Dan Coats and Joseph Maguire. A loyal political hack with zero intelligence experience, Richard Grenell, is the current acting DNI. He won't give Trump unpleasant intelligence, either.

He's going to be the Director of National Intelligence, in which his role is oversight and setting overall directive. He's not an intelligence analyst, NOC or field-supervisor. To put it in terms you people can understand, field-experience as an intelligence analyst is no more required to be Director of National Intelligence than field-experience in the natural gas industry is required to be a Director of the Burisma Company

 

[busybee01]

DNI Dan Coats was fired on July 28. His firing was likely connected to the intelligence community's response to Trump's telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on July 25, 2019. That response earned Trump two Articles of Impeachment. Since Coats' dismissal seven months ago, the U.S. has been without a permanent DNI.

CNN reports, "President Donald Trump said on Friday that he intends to nominate Rep. John Ratcliffe, a Republican from Texas, as his permanent director of national intelligence, the second time the President has attempted to make the loyalist lawmaker his spy chief."

CNN continued, "Ratcliffe had been nominated as Trump's DNI pick after Dan Coats stepped down from the post in July 2019, but the Texas congressman withdrew his name from consideration after lawmakers from both parties raised concerns about his qualifications."

Trump withdrew Ratcliffe to serve as his intelligence chief in August because he padded his résumé. Also, there was bipartisan concerns about his experience, meaning lacking thereof. Also, Ratcliffe misrepresented his role in prosecuting terrorism and immigration cases.

Ratcliffe's résumé is just as bereft of intelligence experience now as he was in July. Trump nominated him anyway. One possible reason: Qualified intelligence supervisors want nothing to do with Trump's concept of intelligence.

Ratcliffe, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee is a consumer of intelligence products. So, to say Ratcliffe is experienced in intelligence is akin to saying that a person who drives a car has an intimate knowledge of how a car is made.

Ratcliffe's two main qualifications for the job are, 1)He is extremely loyal to Trump. 2)He provided a stalwart defense of Trump in the House impeachment inquiries.

For these reasons, Ratcliffe is less likely to provide intelligence Trump doesn't like. Failure to provide pleasant intelligence to the President cost former DNI's their jobs, Dan Coats and Joseph Maguire. A loyal political hack with zero intelligence experience, Richard Grenell, is the current acting DNI. He won't give Trump unpleasant intelligence, either.

This is Trump putting his personal interest ahead of the country. Ratcliffe will only provide information that Trump wants to hear.