The Intelligence Director Who Is Undermining Trust and Truth
By: John Sipher - The New York Times
John Ratcliffe is breaking norms, which could weaken our defenses
Biden 2020
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
It's quite an accomplishment , but in only five months, the director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, has already put himself in the running to be considered among the most destructive intelligence n U.S. history.
During his confirmation hearing in May, Mr. Ratcliffe testified that he would not allow outside influence to affect his work, claiming that he would be "entirely apolitical" in the position.
Instead, he seems to have jumped into the partisan fray. On Monday, Mr. Ratcliffe seemed to bolster an unconfirmed news report by The New York Post related to the business dealings of Joe Biden's son in the Ukraine. Mr. Ratcliffe suggested on Fox Business that the Obama-Biden administration had committed (unnamed) criminal abuses of power and that voters should take these supposed actions into account in the upcoming election.
Such personal political commentary for a sitting intelligence leader is virtually unprecedented. Michael Hayden, a former director of the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency, tweeted that Mr. Ratcliffe's actions were "reprehensible" and worthy of a "tin-pot dictatorship."
Mr. Ratcliffe had already broken norms by mining and declassifying material that might help President Trump get re-elected. He has controlled how information is shared with congressional Democrats, while supplying select, out-of-context material to those Republicans trying to grasp any shred of evidence that might fit their theory of a deep-state conspiracy to investigate President Trump's connections to the Kremlin.
While a traitor or mole inside our spy agencies can do tremendous damage, only a deeply partisan intelligence leader can undermine the very system of trust that underpins our intelligence establishment.
During World War II and the Korean War, Gen. Douglas MacArthur's intelligence chief, Maj. Gen. Charles Willoughby, falsified reports; limited and controlled sources; dismissed reporting by allies, the O.S.S., the C.I.A. and U.S. code breakers; and actively tried to suppress anything that challenged MacArthur's preconceived views.
As David Halberstam wrote in "The Coldest Winter," his history of the Korean War, General MacArthur believed it was crucial that "his intelligence reports blend seamlessly with what he had intended to do in the first place. What that meant was that the intelligence that Willoughby was turning over to MacArthur was deliberately prefabricated."
General MacArthur's unwillingness to listen to others left the United States and its allies blindsided when the North Korean Army invaded South Korea in June 1950, and again when the Chinese stormed into Korea later that year, leading to one of the worst military defeats of U.S. forces and the longest retreat in U.S. history. General MacArthur even advocated using nuclear weapons to stem the retreat. It wasn't the failure to collect or analyze intelligence that led to the catastrophe, but the failure of leadership. Maj. Gen. Willoughby shaped intelligence to fit what his master wanted to hear.
Mr. Ratcliffe, like Maj. Gen. Willoughby before him, seems to think his job is to serve only his boss, who requires that everyone agree with him at all times. As General MacArthur is often quoted: if you control intelligence, you control decision-making. Intelligence professionals call this politicization and see it as a poison that can harm national-security decision-making.
We can see today, through Mr. Ratcliffe, just what can happen when the office is politicized.
Rather than operating as an honest steward of the large and important intelligence community, Mr. Ratcliffe appears to regard the nation's secrets as a place to hunt for nuggets that can be used as political weapons — sources and methods be damned. Even if the particular material he declassifies is not especially sensitive, the failure to provide proper context, sourcing or background only serves to confuse the public and distract voters.
That may be the point. Creating a fictional narrative for political purposes requires corrupting a system that relies on in-depth, contextual and all-source analysis. However, if you are sending damaging signals to allies, potential sources or even your own officers, it is child's play to concoct any story you wish by plucking selective details from the millions and millions of pages held by the intelligence agencies.
But exploiting the intelligence community in this manner fundamentally debases it — in ways the American public cannot always see. Hastily considered declassification of selective secret material runs the risk of exposing sources and methods, assisting foreign adversaries and undercutting the trust of our allies. And why would allies or potential sources be willing to share their secrets with intelligence officials who won't hesitate to publicize their information if they see short-term political benefit? In the end, our defenses are weakened.
In the world of intelligence, credibility is paramount. Our allies and sources must trust us. And policymakers need to trust that intelligence professionals are providing the very best, unbiased analysis. If that bond of trust is breached, and motives and honesty are questioned, the intelligence is worthless. Mr. Ratcliffe and his enablers need to understand that once the credibility of our intelligence community is surrendered, it will be extremely hard to recapture.
Tags
Who is online
44 visitors
It looks like Biden is going to win. Do people like Ratcliffe think there are enough cushy jobs for all of them, as Fox News "advisors"?
Here's a horrible thought: maybe they're right...
He's a RAT like the rest of the tRump criminal enterprise administration.
Great headline for an opinion piece....
This 'nugget' after three paragraphs about General MacArthur's failures ..?
Perhaps it is just my interpretation of what I just read, but is not this biased opinion piece doing exactly what it is accusing Ratcliffe of?
.......this after the former president knew that Russia was 'meddling' in the 2016 presidential election but did nothing ...? Oooo wait the 'intelligence community' surveilled Trump Towers .. def gained a great deal of information on Paul Manafort .. set up Papadopoulos .. obtained a FISA warrant on Carter Page months after he left the Trump campaign
Perhaps want is needed is for the FBI to get involved? start a counterintelligence investigation (?), that way 'we' will know if the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia .. Oooo wait that has already been done ..? so perhaps now a counterintelligence investigation needs to be conducted in regards to the Biden's (father and son) to make sure that there was no improprieties regarding loans, jobs etc.. connected with Russia .. Ukraine .. China ... Oooo wait what..? Clapper is not the Director of National intelligence and Comey is not the head of the FBI .. what no need to obtain a FISA warrant .. no bogus Steele Dossier information to submit to the court as fact ... ? Damn'dit never mind, it is not the Trump campaign ..... soooo .... technically unsubstantiated 'intelligence' no longer needs the FBI to open a counterintelligence investigation to surveil a presidential campaign ... no need to get ahold of Professor Halper .. then bring Robert Mueller on board as Special Counsel to open yet another counterintelligence investigation ...?
No need to be a FOX news advisor .. Ratcliffe can just write a book .. go on The View as part of the book tour - Oooo wait that has been done to death .. well perhaps Ratcliffe can become a New York Times political opinion piece writer?
The intelligence community has been politicized for a considerable length of time .. 'we' learned this in 2016 ...!
Oooo but wait, this whole post is simply the ramblings of an opinion! [not intended to confuse the public and distract voters.]
Peace .. it is definitely needed!
Paul Manafort gave private polling information from the US presidential election to a Russian spy and you think there was no cause to investigate the Trump campaign. LOL Who was Paul Manafort at the time he was giving information on our election to a Russian spy? HE WAS TRUMP'S FREAKING CAMPAIGN MANAGER !
Of course the Trump campaign was investigated.
Please, I'm begging you. Indict Comey or Clapper or Brennan. We all need a good laugh after this election.
Once again JohnRussell you babble ..
I said that there was a great deal of information gained regarding Paul Manafort .. perhaps if you read the article it is a opinion piece on the politicization of the office of National Intelligence ... Indict Clapper Comey.. huh? I get it that most accept the reasoning behind the politicization of National Intelligence during the Obama administration ... it was against Trump .. so of course it was needed .... where did I say anything about Brennan? Why are you bringing Brennan into my opinion piece?
They already looked into this as they've had the laptop for almost a year. Ratcliffe is nothing but a partisan stooge claiming that Russia isn't involved. How exactly can he preclude Russia? Even if the FBI has no direct evidence tying it to Russia that doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. His claim that Russia isn't involved is reminiscent of Trumps blind acceptance of Putin's word in Helsinki.
The intelligence community had more than enough reason to investigate Trump campaign ties to Russia as there were many proved and dozens of people indicted, arrested, plead guilty or were tried and convicted. Claiming it was all a hoax is like claiming Trump is still a virgin, the evidence betrays the claim on the face of it.
And it will be titled "Life as a Treasonous Trump Toady". This whole administration is going down and the Rat'cliffes who don't jump ship are going down with it.
Haha! Hoax? where did I say the unsubstantiated intelligence against the Trump campaign was a hoax? My opinion is that there is enough evidence regarding Hunter Biden as well ...
Who gives a flying fuck about Hunter Biden? He is not a government official. Let law enforcement do its job.
We have graft on a monumental scale, running through the offices of most of the current Administration.
Who gives a flying fuck about a two-bit player like Hunter Biden?
Is that actually your criteria ..? neither was anyone in the Trump campaign a government official. The former president of the United States of America knew that the Russians were meddling in the 2016 campaign but did nothing .. yet the intelligence community surveilled the Trump campaign in regards to said meddling .......
Former Vice President Biden was in office when these events went down with Hunter Biden .. there is a question as to whether the former VP's office was a party to said events .. is it not a legitimate pursuit for information to put everything to rest once and for all? .... or would you prefer to once again have a potential president with a cloud hanging .. something that was consciously [incase anyone is wondering that means done with intent] not resolved? [deleted]
Alleged events. . .
https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A2KIbNBMfJBfQ8wAD3ZXNyoA;_ylu=Y29sbwNiZjEEcG9zAzEEdnRpZANDMDY3Ml8xBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1603333324/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.theguardian.com%2fus-news%2f2016%2fdec%2f29%2fbarack-obama-sanctions-russia-election-hack/RK=2/RS=RytP8XJoSK4gcn65CskaUm90OCc-
Obama expels 35 Russian diplomats in retaliation for US election hacking
The Obama administration on Thursday announced its retaliation for Russian efforts to interfere with the US presidential election, ordering sweeping new sanctions that included the expulsion of 35 Russians.
In a statement issued two weeks after the president said he would respond to cyber-attacks by Moscow “at a time and place of our choosing”, Obama said Americans should “be alarmed by Russia’s actions” and pledged further action.
“I have issued an executive order that provides additional authority for responding to certain cyber activity that seeks to interfere with or undermine our election processes and institutions, or those of our allies or partners,” Obama said in the statement, released while he was vacationing with his family in Hawaii.
“Using this new authority, I have sanctioned nine entities and individuals: the GRU and the FSB, two Russian intelligence services; four individual officers of the GRU; and three companies that provided material support to the GRU’s cyber operations.
Of course.
At worst, Hunter Biden did a little petty larceny. That's not good, but it is nothing at all compared to the grand theft committed by every single member of the Trump Administration.
Your (collective) hysteria about Hunter while ignoring the criminality of the Trump Administration is ludicrous.
Oooo no Bob ... not ignoring anything .. no hysteria - but equality under the law is a double edged sword .. Trump will get his as soon as he leaves office .. it is a given. If not, then corruption in the United States government is so far over the cliff ...........!
[deleted...] I did not vote for Trump .. he should never have become president .. I sent Biden every subliminal message possible to get him to run in 2016 .. but it was H.'s turn.... ? Now ... I should give him / his family a pass .. but but wait there is speculation of wrong doing regarding the office of the VP of the United States .. nothing to hide .. ya da ya da ... personally I would like to have a president in the Oval Office that is above the fray .. 'we' know Biden is most likely not that man .. but is far closer to being above the fray than Trump ...
My [main'ish] issue with Biden is Harris .. Buttigieg was a far better choice .. but Biden pulled the trigger on his running mate being a woman way early ... but still had far better choices in women than Harris ..
I did not cast a vote for president [I voted early by mail] .. local and state was my focus .. Montana will go to Trump .. 3 electoral votes .. do I agree with the state going to Trump .. that does not matter .. I support the electoral college... one must take the good with the bad!
The United States of America's ''democracy" is not in jeopardy because Trump became president ... 'we' will survive Trump ... second term or not!
[Deleted]
Bla bla bla
Help get rid of Trump or get out of the way.
That's just your uninformed and erroneous opinion
Yes!