Trump’s cutting off needed intelligence info to Congress
WASHINGTON — The political strangulation of the intelligence community by the Trump administration hasn’t been a sudden snap of the rope, but a slow, suffocating squeeze — choking off the normal flow of unbiased information the country needs.
The latest chapter in this sad story is unfolding this week, as President Donald Trump’s new director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, tries to limit briefings of Congress about election interference by Russia and other nations in the final two months before Election Day. Congress is fighting back, struggling to breathe, you could say, but it’s unlikely the chokehold will be eased significantly.
What’s driving this latest assault on intelligence is the same obsession that has haunted Trump for nearly four years — namely, that Russia interfered to try to help him win the presidency in 2016. The intelligence community’s reporting to Congress that this pro-Trump meddling is continuing in 2020 so infuriated Trump that he fired acting DNI Joseph Maguire in February and now appears to be muzzling reporting by Ratcliffe and his staff.
Ratcliffe wrote the House and Senate intelligence committees Saturday rather than continue with oral classified briefings, his office “will primarily meet its obligation ... through written finished intelligence products.” Ratcliffe, himself a former member of the House intelligence panel, argued this approach would help ensure information “is not misunderstood or politicized” and would avoid “additional unauthorized disclosure or misuse.”
These bland phrases implied Congress previously mishandled information — an allegation for which there’s little evidence. Indeed, according to congressional officials, an unfazed Ratcliffe had indicated his office planned oral briefings about election security, until that pledge was suddenly reversed in phone calls Friday and Saturday’s letter.
“I suspect the president found out more briefings were planned for Congress and had a fit,” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., chair of the House Intelligence Committee, speculated Monday. Dismissing the claim written reports would be sufficient, Schiff argued: “If they can rely on carefully worded documents instead of briefings, they can write things that are literally accurate but deeply misleading.”
Trump’s effort to gain political control over the intelligence community — and suppress reporting about Russian interference — goes back over a year.
The process began when Daniel Coats was fired as DNI last summer after repeated public disagreements with Trump about the scope of Russian interference in the 2016 race. Intelligence professionals hoped Coats would be replaced by his deputy, Sue Gordon, a CIA career officer. But she resigned after it became clear she wouldn’t get the job.
Trump then appointed Maguire, another intelligence professional. He lasted until February, when he, too, was canned, after allowing a Feb. 13 briefing of the House Intelligence Committee by Shelby Pierson, his election security chief. Trump was irate Pierson described continuing Russian influence operations, (said) an official who heard his tirade.
Trump said he would appoint Ratcliffe as Maguire’s successor, but the DNI post was initially held on an acting basis by Richard Grenell, a political loyalist serving as ambassador to Germany. During Grenell’s tenure, there was another dust-up over Russian election interference, this time involving William Evanina, a career officer who heads the National Counterintelligence and Security Center.
Evanina issued an anodyne statement July 24 that described current meddling by the Kremlin: “Russia continues to spread disinformation in the U.S. that is designed to undermine confidence in our democratic process and denigrate what it sees as an anti-Russia ‘establishment’ in America.”
After he was questioned by members of Congress what that ... meant, Evanina issued a second statement Aug. 7: “We assess that Russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President Biden and what it sees as an anti-Russia ‘establishment.’ ... Some Kremlin-linked actors are also seeking to boost President Trump’s candidacy on social media and Russian television.”
Evanina said China and Iran were meddling, too, and opposed Trump. That attempt at equivalency troubled some intelligence professionals, who said the Chinese and Iranian efforts were far less aggressive and effective . ... The damage was done: Trump was embarrassed, his aversion to Congress on election security heightened.
Hoping to preserve some amount of congressional briefing, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., floated the idea Monday the Senate Intelligence Committee might be briefed orally, even if Trump spurned Schiff and the House panel. Rubio shared that proposal with Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., senior Democrat on the Senate committee . ... “I don’t think you can cherrypick oversight based on who you like and which party is in control,” said Warner. He argued this approach would vitiate the idea of checks and balances at the heart of congressional oversight.
The most troubling result of Trump’s assault on intelligence and its oversight is the debilitating effect on career professionals. When they see top officials ... departing after public disagreements with Trump, they become careful. They begin to trim their judgments, avoid controversial fights, play it safe. That’s what the politicization of intelligence does — it makes it dangerous for career officers to tell the truth. For an intelligence service, that is the road to corruption.