A disputed leak from President-elect Trump’s transition team signals potential changes for the nation’s intelligence community, but lawmakers are split on what reform might look like, and whether there should be any changes at all.
Reports last week said Trump’s team might be looking to reduce the director of national intelligence’s power. Trump’s incoming spokesman Sean Spicer denied the plan is in the works, but it’s not the first time Trump has proposed neutering the DNI, who some on the Trump team believe leaked information to the media linking pre-election hacks to the Russians.
And even after Spicer’s response, congressional Republicans aren’t dismissing the idea of reform.
Citing past “disastrous errors” and “terrible mistakes” by intelligence agencies during the past two presidential administrations, Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, said he welcomed reform.
“Members of Congress have been lied to, lied to and manipulated by members of the intelligence community, ” Gohmert told the Washington Examiner. “There is absolutely room for improvement.”
On Thursday, Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., told reporters U.S. intelligence officials “don’t always get everything right,” and pointed to the post-9/11 overhaul as an example of how the system can be changed for the better.
“Look, we overhauled this about a decade ago after 9/11, when we realized the intelligence community wasn’t getting things right,” Ryan said. “Clearly there is room for improving these things.”
Those remarks have some thinking a reform plan could evolve, even after Spicer’s comment that reports of a plan were “100 percent false.”
“I think we ought to look at our entire intelligence gathering capability and make sure it is not only the best in the world but is the most well-funded, because it makes for better decisions and saves lives,” Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, told the Washington Examiner.
But Senate Republicans seemed less eager to take on the DNI. After all, Trump just announced he plans to appoint former Republican Indiana Sen. Dan Coats to the position.
“I look forward to what his thoughts are on this,” Rep. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told the Washington Examiner.
Critics warned Trump’s threat to dismantle the DNI could be disastrous. The office was established as a way to improve coordination between agencies that failed to communicate with each other ahead of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
“The one big thing we learned from Sept. 11 was having the agencies in silos without communicating through a central point was one of the reasons we missed the warnings,” said Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, who sits on the Senate intelligence committee. Still, King and other lawmakers had no objections to Trump cleaning up waste in the agencies.
“Nobody objects to making things work better,” King said. “I’m never opposed to greater efficiency.”
Trump met Friday with top intelligence officials to discuss pre-election hacking that led to leaks of politically embarrassing Democratic emails. In a statement that took a conciliatory tone, he made no mention of a reorganization. Instead, Trump promised to appoint a team to examine foreign hacking within 90 days of taking office, suggesting he is backing intelligence findings that foreigners were indeed taking aim at the U.S. election process.
“I had a constructive meeting with leaders of the Intelligence Community this afternoon,” Trump said in a statement. “I have tremendous respect for the work and service done by the men and women of this community to our great nation.”
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said that whatever his plans for reform, Trump should end his public dispute with the intelligence agencies.
“It’s legitimate for a president to seek and reform any agency and seek to increase its efficiency,” Nadler said. “Congress would probably have to approve a reorganization but he would have a right to recommend it. What he doesn’t have a right to do, without evidence, is disparage their honesty. These are very dedicated people and we depend on them. He is going to depend on them.'”
