• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donald Trump Plans Revamp of Top U.S. Spy Agency

mbig

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It just keeps getting Creepier, Crazier... Traitorous.
He's in denial about everything all Our intelligence agencies are telling him.
So he's going to 'reorganize' them, perhaps cut "Bloated" Intelligence.
('Intelligence' and Trump are pretty contradictory in IAC)

So it's?
1. He feels that the Russian Hacks delegitimize his victory and he wants the the truth stopped.
But his Man-Crush on Putin even pre-dates the Wikileaks affair, so other possibilities are..
2. 70 year old Donald Trump doesn't doesn't seem what Russia is, or who Putin is.
3. He has some Financial Conflict of Interest/Business dealings... (let's have the Tax Returns or financial disclosure please.)
4. Vlady has something on him. Kremlin Hotel 'Trysts' on Tape?
5. Trumpov is just plain crazy.


Donald Trump Plans Revamp of Top U.S. Spy Agency
President-elect works on restructuring Office of the Director of National Intelligence, tweets again his doubts that Russia hacked Democrats
By DAMIAN PALETTA and JULIAN E. BARNES
Updated Jan. 4, 2017 9:48 p.m. ET
Donald Trump Plans Revamp of Top U.S. Spy Agency - WSJ
WASHINGTON—President-elect Donald Trump, a harsh critic of U.S. intelligence agencies, is working with top advisers on a plan that would restructure and pare back the nation’s top spy agency, people familiar with the planning said.

The move is prompted by his belief that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has become bloated and politicized, these people said.

The planning comes as Mr. Trump has leveled a series of social-media attacks in recent months and the past few days against U.S. intelligence agencies, dismissing and mocking their assessment that Russia stole emails from Democratic groups and individuals and then provided them to WikiLeaks for publication in an effort to help Mr. Trump win the White House.

One of the people familiar with Mr. Trump’s planning said advisers also are working on a plan to restructure the Central Intelligence Agency, cutting back on staffing at its Virginia headquarters and pushing more people out into field posts around the world. The CIA declined to comment.

[GRAPHIC https://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/NA-CN085_TRUMPI_16U_20170104182414.jpg]

“The view from the Trump team is the intelligence world has become completely politicized,” said the individual, who is close to the Trump transition. “They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring the agencies and how they interact.”

Mr. Trump has drawn criticism from Democratic and Republican lawmakers and from intelligence and law-enforcement officials for praising Russian President Vladimir Putin, for criticizing U.S. spy agencies, and now for embracing Mr. Assange, long viewed with disdain by government officials and lawmakers. “We have two choices: some guy living in an embassy on the run from the law…who has a history of undermining American democracy and releasing classified information to put our troops at risk, or the 17 intelligence agencies sworn to defend us,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.). “I’m going with them".."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I agree with him. Agencies in this country, not just the CIA, but most of the alphabet soup agencies have been politicized. Even the IRS was politicized when they started targeting groups that didn't toe the "right" political line.
 
mbig said:
It just keeps getting Creepier, Crazier... Traitorous.
Click to expand...
iLOL
No, what you said is strange.
Why wouldn't he want to undo the damage done by Obama and make it a better agency?



Mr. Trump has drawn criticism from Democratic and Republican lawmakers and from intelligence and law-enforcement officials for praising Russian President Vladimir Putin, for criticizing U.S. spy agencies, and now for embracing Mr. Assange, long viewed with disdain by government officials and lawmakers. “We have two choices: some guy living in an embassy on the run from the law…who has a history of undermining American democracy and releasing classified information to put our troops at risk, or the 17 intelligence agencies sworn to defend us,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.). “I’m going with them".."
Click to expand...
This is a stupid assessment that amounts to nothing but deflection.

The fact is that Assange is part of an organization that releases secrets. He is responsible for his activities in doing so.
That does not make him less credible.
And his organization releasing Government secrets has nothing to do with releasing private party secrets.
Doing one does not damage his credibility in regards to another.

Had he knowingly released false information then he would have a credibility problem, but as it is, he does not.
 
Thankfully they are Testifying THIS morning as Congress is in session, but Comrade Trumpov is not yet sworn in.

Intelligence Officials Testify as Senate Examines Russian Hacking
First public hearing about suspected Moscow interference in the 2016 election
By SHANE HARRIS and PAUL SONNE
Updated Jan. 5, 2017 10:20 a.m. ET
Intelligence Officials Testify as Senate Examines Russian Hacking - WSJ
WASHINGTON—Top U.S. intelligence officials appeared before Congress Thursday morning in the first public hearing about suspected Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The officials were summoned to testify about the Russian government’s purported role in directing a cyber campaign that divulged emails from the Democratic National Committee, Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and other political organizations, and set off an unprecedented postelection feud between President-elect Donald Trump and the intelligence community he is about to lead.

The hearing also may shed light on plans under consideration by Mr. Trump and his aides to reorganize some of the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies, reported Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal.

Trump transition officials disclosed the plans earlier this week, but James Clapper, the U.S. director of National Intelligence, testified at the hearing that top intelligence officials Hadn’t been consulted about them.

The intelligence officials downplayed prospects of major revelations in their testimony at the outset of their remarks, saying they are awaiting results of an investigation.

Last year, All the agencies issued a joint statement pinning blame for the unprecedented cyberhacking operation on Russia’s senior-most officials. The statement itself was a rare public allegation by the spy agencies. Thursday’s hearing marked the first time so many intelligence heads have spoken in public about the purported operation.
[......]
Click to expand...
Interesting.
Trump/They know how to Re-org withOut consulting anyone in Intelligence.
NOT "how do "we" cut costs?.. But "Screw you guys for tarnishing my election victory."
 
Last edited:
mbig said:
It just keeps getting Creepier, Crazier... Traitorous.
He's in denial about everything all Our intelligence agencies are telling him.
So he's going to 'reorganize' them, perhaps cut "Bloated" Intelligence.
('Intelligence' and Trump are pretty contradictory in IAC)

So it's?
1. He feels that the Russian Hacks delegitimize his victory and he wants the the truth stopped.
But his Man-Crush on Putin even pre-dates the Wikileaks affair, so other possibilities are..
2. 70 year old Donald Trump doesn't doesn't seem what Russia is, or who Putin is.
3. He has some Financial Conflict of Interest/Business dealings... (let's have the Tax Returns or financial disclosure please.)
4. Vlady has something on him. Kremlin Hotel 'Trysts' on Tape?
5. Trumpov is just plain crazy.


Donald Trump Plans Revamp of Top U.S. Spy Agency
President-elect works on restructuring Office of the Director of National Intelligence, tweets again his doubts that Russia hacked Democrats
By DAMIAN PALETTA and JULIAN E. BARNES
Updated Jan. 4, 2017 9:48 p.m. ET
Donald Trump Plans Revamp of Top U.S. Spy Agency - WSJ
Click to expand...

Great example of delegitimizing an opinion. Thank you for the lesson plan.
 
If the plan is to form a closer relationship with Russia the last thing you want to do is scale back on U.S. intelligence. I think most people can agree on that.
 
MrPeanut said:
If the plan is to form a closer relationship with Russia the last thing you want to do is scale back on U.S. intelligence. I think most people can agree on that.
Click to expand...

Show me where we are scaling back.
 
Excon said:
iLOL
No, what you said is strange.
Why wouldn't he want to undo the damage done by Obama and make it a better agency?
Click to expand...
iLOL.
Specifically what "damage" did Obama do?

Excon said:
This is a stupid assessment that amounts to nothing but deflection.
The fact is that Assange is part of an organization that releases secrets. He is responsible for his activities in doing so.
That does not make him less credible.
And his organization releasing Government secrets has nothing to do with releasing private party secrets.
Doing one does not damage his credibility in regards to another.
Had he knowingly released false information then he would have a credibility problem, but as it is, he does not.
Click to expand...
It's NOT a deflection that Trumpov, who Already had a Man (and Manafort) Crush on Putin, is astonishingly Dismissing All 17 Intelligence Agencies, AS IF he has some other intelligence!
It's downright dangerous/Traitorous to put his goofy Ego in front of National Interest.
iLOL indeed.
 
Last edited:
MrPeanut said:
If the plan is to form a closer relationship with Russia the last thing you want to do is scale back on U.S. intelligence. I think most people can agree on that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we should be investing in cyber security BEFORE the fact. Call me crazy...

Like you know...make sure our important stuff is passworded with something other than PASSWORD.
 
MaggieD said:
Great example of delegitimizing an opinion. Thank you for the lesson plan.
Click to expand...
What "opinion"?
LOFL.
As if Trump knows anything about the complex Intelligence agencies or has his own.
He's just Punishing them for Tarnishing his victory.
THIS IS the danger of having Mr Grudge-Tweet as president.

The 'Temperament' issue Blossoms even before he gets Sworn in.
He doesn't like what they said, so he denies it, and 'fires' them.
Incredible, and dangerous.
He's already been Refusing most of their daily briefings. Denial.
 
Last edited:
American said:
Show me where we are scaling back.
Click to expand...

"They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring the agencies and how they interact.”

In my opinion there are two separate things to work on. The first is forming a closer relationship with Russia and the second is restructuring U.S. intelligence. To attempt both at the same time will almost certainly result in some loss of potential intelligence or other inefficiencies during a time when it is most necessary for U.S. intelligence to be able to operate. Even if you support forming a closer relationship with Russia it is important to be highly skeptical, and not fiddle around with your own intelligence agencies at the same time.
 
mbig said:
iLOL.
Specifically what "damage did Obama do?

It's NOT a deflection that Trumpov, who Already had a Man (and Manafort) Crush on Putin, is astonishingly Dismissing All 17 Intelligence Agencies, AS IF he has some other intelligence!
It's downright dangerous/Traitorous to put his goofy Ego in front of National Interest.
iLOL indeed.
Click to expand...
iLOL
More strange opinion.


And yes it is a deflection. There exists no reason to disbelieve Assange.
Matter of fact the opposite actually exists. He has a tract record of releasing true information.


17 Agencies? :lamo No. Simply no.
1. The Directors Office is not an intelligence agency.
2. Just because 16 Agencies fall under the purview of the Director's Office does not mean all 16 were involved.​
Let me guess, you actually thought the Coast Gard was involved, right?
 
MaggieD said:
Perhaps we should be investing in cyber security BEFORE the fact. Call me crazy...

Like you know...make sure our important stuff is passworded with something other than PASSWORD.
Click to expand...

I'm not really arguing with restructuring U.S. intelligence. If they believe it has become too political than I understand their desire to try and fix it. I just don't think that messing with our intelligence and forming a new relationship with Russia should coincide. That seems very dangerous to me.
 
The CIA told Trump something he didn't want to believe.
Therefore, the CIA must be "restructured."
NASA keeps telling Trump that AGW is real. Trump doesn't want to believe that, either, so it's time to restructure NASA.
Time to get rid of any entity that tells Trump things he doesn't want to believe.
 
MrPeanut said:
"They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring the agencies and how they interact.”

In my opinion there are two separate things to work on. The first is forming a closer relationship with Russia and the second is restructuring U.S. intelligence. To attempt both at the same time will almost certainly result in some loss of potential intelligence or other inefficiencies during a time when it is most necessary for U.S. intelligence to be able to operate. Even if you support forming a closer relationship with Russia it is important to be highly skeptical, and not fiddle around with your own intelligence agencies at the same time.
Click to expand...
I'm all for restructuring, as long as we maintain a trust-but-verify strategy.
 
The USA's spy agencies did a terrible job before 9/11 and G.W. Bush's un-necessary war in Iraq.

The people responsible for those failures should have paid a heavy price years ago.
 
I actually like this. It is true that the CIA has become too politicized and ungainly- all you have to do is remember the run up to the Iraq invasion to see that our intel agencies have become tools for whoever is running the show. Good move by Trump.
 
American said:
I'm all for restructuring, as long as we maintain a trust-but-verify strategy.
Click to expand...

I'm not automatically opposed to some form of restructuring either. I am opposed to doing it while forming a new relationship with a nation as dangerous as Russia.
 
MrPeanut said:
I'm not automatically opposed to some form of restructuring either. I am opposed to doing it while forming a new relationship with a nation as dangerous as Russia.
Click to expand...

It's not a new relationship; it the same one we've always had.
 
Dittohead not! said:
The CIA told Trump something he didn't want to believe.
Therefore, the CIA must be "restructured."
NASA keeps telling Trump that AGW is real. Trump doesn't want to believe that, either, so it's time to restructure NASA.
Time to get rid of any entity that tells Trump things he doesn't want to believe.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Ignoring problems doesn't make them go away.

A good example of this is the USA's attitude towards Japan in WWII before Pearl Harbor.

The USA could have avoided Pearl Harbor and 9/11 with better intelligence on our enemies.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
iLOL
More strange opinion.
And yes it is a deflection. There exists no reason to disbelieve Assange.
Matter of fact the opposite actually exists. He has a tract record of releasing true information.
17 Agencies? :lamo No. Simply no.
1. The Directors Office is not an intelligence agency.
2. Just because 16 Agencies fall under the purview of the Director's Office does not mean all 16 were involved. [ /INDENT]
Let me guess, you actually thought the Coast Gard was involved, right?​
Click to expand...
Incoherent and Deflecting reply.. as was your last.
(nor did you even try to justify your claim of 'Obamas damage to the Intelligence agencies')

The issue here is Comrade Trump's Denialism and Grudge "reorganization" of the Intelligence agencies, as Revenge for tarnishing his victory.
The 'Temperament' issue already Endangering National security as Comrade Grudge-Tweet shoots the messenger.
(after petulantly Refusing all but one Daily briefing a week)

That's right, Trumpov treats all 17 intelligence agencies as if they were Rosie O'Donnell.
You're either for him, or against him: there's no discussion. No one else counts but his ego and PR dept.


PS Excon: You and other Conservatives will be bashing this RINO/Wild-card soon enough..
as the more sober among GOP leadership already are.
And other posters on that side, already getting creepy feelings about Mr Tweet and are Not knee-jerk defending him.
As a reader and poster on my Conservative WSJ home page, I already see this trend in Editorials and in responses to artucles like the two I posted in this string.​
 
Last edited:
American said:
It's not a new relationship; it the same one we've always had.
Click to expand...

So the U.S./Russia relationship will remain the same in the Trump administration?
 
mbig said:
Incoherent and Deflecting reply.. as was your last.
Click to expand...
iLOL
Stop being dishonest.


mbig said:
(nor did you even try to justify your claim of 'Obamas damage to the Intelligence agencies')
Click to expand...
iLOL
This is absurd.
Obama selected who he wanted. Of course it is damaged, and as we can see, politicized.


mbig said:
The issue here is Comrade Trump's Denialism and Grudge "reorganization" of the Intelligence agencies, as Revenge for tarnishing his victory.
Click to expand...
That you think this just speaks to how far gone your opinion is.



mbig said:
That's right, Trumpov treats all 17 intelligence agencies ...
Click to expand...

And again.
Excon said:
17 Agencies? :lamo No. Simply no.
1. The Directors Office is not an intelligence agency.
2. Just because 16 Agencies fall under the purview of the Director's Office does not mean all 16 were involved.​
Let me guess, you actually thought the Coast Gard was involved, right?
Click to expand...




mbig said:
PS Excon: You and other Conservatives will be bashing this RINO/Wild-card soon enough..
as the more sober among GOP leadership already are.
And other posters on that side, already getting creepy feelings about Mr Tweet and are Not knee-jerk defending him.
As a reader and poster on my Conservative WSJ home page, I already see this trend in Editorials and in responses to artucles like the two I posted in this string.
Click to expand...
:lamo
Your opinion is noted and dismissed as coming from convoluted thoughts.
If a time comes for me to complain, I will, this isn't one of them though.
 
Kal'Stang said:
I agree with him. Agencies in this country, not just the CIA, but most of the alphabet soup agencies have been politicized. Even the IRS was politicized when they started targeting groups that didn't toe the "right" political line.
Click to expand...

Agreed. While I'm sure they were politicized before the present administration came to office, the level of politicization appears to have escalated far more than ever before, now that Obama has weaponized the government departments against the common folk.

Specific to this case, seems the FBI hadn't even examined the servers or their system logs before claiming they knew it was Russia hacking them.

Report: FBI Didn't Review Hacked Servers

Hmmm: FBI, CIA never examined DNC servers?

The FBI Reportedly Never Personally Examined the DNC’s Hacked Servers

The that is revealed about this case, the more it looks, sounds, and smells like a political setup.

Have those 17 agencies presented their finding to the appropriate congressional oversight committees yet?
Might it be that the professionals in these agencies, the ones that actually know their craft rather, than a political appointee, don't share the same certainty about this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom