Fund the fight now with 25% off an annual Contrarian membership. Contrarians in court are bringing hundreds of cases and legal matters against Trump’s regime. Join our community — YOU help STOP the chaos.
After nominations of thoroughly unqualified, incompetent, and ethically unfit characters such as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., one might have thought it impossible to come up with any appointment for a senior executive post who is even less fit to serve. But last week, Donald Trump rose to the challenge to tap someone so manifestly unsuited for a spot that even Republicans were taken aback.
Trump picked for acting director of national intelligence current Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte, the mastermind behind Trump’s vindictive, spurious inquests into Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) for alleged mortgage fraud. His sole qualification appears to be his eagerness to weaponize the legal system against Trump’s enemies. And if that were not disqualifying for the head of the intelligence community — whose credibility and objectivity are essential to protecting our national security — then his absence of statutorily required national security experience surely should be enough to make him an entirely illegitimate choice.
Very few jobs have statutorily mandated job experience. However, in creating the DNI post, Congress declared, “There is a Director of National Intelligence who shall be appointed by the President.... Any individual nominated for appointment as Director of National Intelligence shall have extensive national security expertise.” No one argues that Pulte has any such expertise (“a high level of specialized skill, knowledge, or judgment in a particular field, acquired through extensive training, study, and hands-on experience”) in national security, let alone “extensive” (“having wide or considerable extent”) expertise.
For once, Republicans reacted with outrage to a horrendous Trump pick. “Very few Senate-confirmable positions come with statutory eligibility requirements. There are good reasons why the Director of National Intelligence is one of them,” Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) observed. “Anyone performing this role of such immense public trust must have the extensive national security experience required by statute, and no nominee who falls short of this requirement will earn my vote.” Likewise, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who serves on the Intelligence Committee and was a victim of Trump’s Ken Paxton endorsement, remarked, “The Senate doesn’t have any role to play in terms of confirming acting officials but I see no evidence of any qualifications for that job.”
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) said simply that all he knew about him was his lack of qualifications. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said, “I don’t know whether he has any intelligence or military background,” adding, “I don’t even know whether he has a security clearance.”
The most damning indictment probably came unintentionally from Trump, who explained his enthusiasm for the pick: “He’s a very smart guy. And he may find out some things about the rigged elections.” Someone committed to finding evidence for debunked conspiracy theories is exactly the last person suited for the role. Trump, however, kept digging when he insisted a “less shackled” DNI should start firing career professionals to shrink the intelligence agency. (Is he trying to sink his pick?)
At least realizing Pulte would never win Senate confirmation, Trump announced Pulte would only serve in the “acting” role, which unfortunately can continue for 210 days. Though the Senate cannot technically block an acting appointment, the Senate has a strong card to play should these Republican national security hawks actually want a DNI with “extensive expertise” (in national security, as opposed to Trump vengeance).
The New York Times reported on Friday:
With just one week left until a key government surveillance authority was set to expire, a deal to renew it faltered in the Senate early Friday morning after Democrats refused to back it because of concerns over President Trump’s recent appointment of Bill Pulte to oversee the nation’s intelligence agencies.
A bloc of Republicans who have long harbored concerns about the spy program joined Democrats to block consideration of a bill that would extend for three years a warrantless wiretapping law known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The vote was 52 to 47, well short of the 60 that would have been needed to move ahead.
Well, that seems to be the solution: No extension of Section 702 authority with Pulte as acting director. (For those with legitimate qualms about the Trump regime’s snooping on Americans in conducting ostensible international security investigations, stalling Section 702 renewal is welcome, regardless of its impact on Pulte.)
The Pulte faceplant underscores two related political developments. First, given Trump’s plunging approval and the emergence of a block of minimally conscientious Republicans (thanks to Trump’s primary vendettas), Trump cannot count on blind obedience. Second, Democrats therefore have opportunities to halt some of Trump’s most destructive nominees and proposals if they keep their focus on potential Republican allies, the only audience that truly matters right now in these fights in Congress.
In sum, “extensive experience” has no meaning for Trump, who cares only about blind loyalty and moral vapidity. However, if Democrats can convince a handful of Republicans to hold Section 702 at bay if Pulte takes over, they would take a significant step in the direction of insisting that the Senate fulfill its constitutional obligation to provide advice and consent. Reestablishing the notion that people in high government posts should be qualified for them would be welcome. It might even be the beginning of the end of Trump’s brand of DEI that puts dim-witted, morally deficient, and inexperienced white men in jobs for which they are unfit.
Reestablishing the notion that people in high government posts should be qualified for them would be welcome.
Not only welcome, but also novel, at least over the past circa 18 months!
So Collins doesn’t know if Pulte has any intelligence expertise. Isn’t it her job to do research and be informed about nominees? Or is this just part of her being concerned but little else?