Nancy Pelosi knows better, but on Monday, she chose partisan politics over national security.
I note this in light of the House speaker’s letter to Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe and CIA Director Gina Haspel. Responding to New York Times reporting on a Russian GRU intelligence service plot to pay the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, Pelosi is demanding an intelligence briefing for all 435 House members. As Pelosi puts it, “Congress needs to know what the intelligence community knows about this significant threat to American troops.”
That demand might sound fine or even necessary. But it is nothing of the sort.
Pelosi inadvertently hints at why with her opening line that “since the origin of the intelligence community, one of its primary purposes has always been force protection.” The California Democrat is absolutely correct here. But what she willfully ignores (willfully because Pelosi absolutely knows better) is that intelligence community force protection extends beyond protecting U.S. soldiers. It necessarily requires an absolute dedication to the protection of what the community refers to as “sources and methods.” That is to say the means by which critical intelligence material is collected and then developed into a finished intelligence product. This is particularly pertinent with regards to Russia-related intelligence.
The principle always applies with the GRU crew, and especially with this Taliban situation. After all, as I noted on Monday morning, the credible intelligence basis for this GRU-Taliban issue relies in part on very sensitive CIA intelligence.
Certainly, Pelosi is entitled to a briefing on that intelligence. As the speaker of the House, she most certainly is deserving of a briefing. But Pelosi also knows there is a far better way to access this intelligence than gathering up 435 politicians, all of whom will shortly face reelection in a hyperpartisan environment.
The alternative is a gathering of the “Gang of Eight.”
Comprising the chairmen and chairwomen and vice chairmen and vice chairwomen of the congressional intelligence committees and the majority and minority leaders in the House and Senate, the Gang of Eight is briefed on the most sensitive U.S. intelligence operations. The statutory intent of this capacity is to protect sources and methods, whereas a briefing to the full House and Senate intelligence committees might result in a catastrophic leak.
But again, absurdly, Pelosi isn’t simply calling for intelligence committee briefings, she’s calling for all 435 members of the House of Representatives to get a briefing! She’s basically calling for critical intelligence to be leaked. Coming from any intelligence committee member, this would be embarrassing enough. But coming from such an experienced politician and presumed patriot as Pelosi, it is quite astonishing.
So, what’s really going on?
It’s the summoning of our increasingly familiar friend: the partisan furies. Pelosi senses Trump is vulnerable on this issue, and she wants to twist the knife, national security be damned. The speaker proves as much with her concluding assertion that “the President’s refusal to stand up to the Russians also jeopardizes lives in the region.”
There’s an arrogant tediousness beyond the flippancy here. Whatever one thinks of President Trump’s apparent affection for Russian President Vladimir Putin (and I personally believe it is idiotic), the facts indicate that Trump is significantly tougher in various areas on Putin than was President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats at large.
That is not to say questions shouldn’t be asked by Congress. Ratcliffe should provide answers as to why Trump wasn’t briefed on the specifics of the intelligence, even as the intelligence community worked this issue up the confidence-credibility assessment scale.
Still, Pelosi’s action here isn’t simply ridiculous. It’s dangerous.
