Trump pick for CIA chief pledges to remain apolitical amid past controversies
John Ratcliffe was questioned over whether he’d remain an impartial national security official after past incidents as Trump’s former director of national intelligence.
Donald Trump’s pick to head the Central Intelligence Agency vowed to be an apolitical intelligence chief as some Democratic lawmakers raised concerns about past incidents when he served as director of national intelligence during the president-elect’s first term.
John Ratcliffe testified Wednesday before the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., with previous committee leader Mark Warner, D-Va., now serving as vice chairman.
As director, Ratcliffe would oversee one of America’s most powerful intelligence institutions. The CIA governs America’s human-centered foreign intelligence collection, as well as covert action operations — like influence campaigns — to advance U.S. security interests.
“We will collect intelligence — especially human intelligence — in every corner of the globe, no matter how dark or difficult. We will produce insightful, objective, all-source analysis, never allowing political or personal biases to cloud our judgement or infect our products,” Ratcliffe said in his opening statement. “We will conduct covert action at the direction of the president, going places no one else can go and doing things no one else can do.”
Former Attorney General John Ashcroft introduced Ratcliffe, touting his background in various congressional committees and as a prosecutor from Texas. He said Ratcliffe brings a “relevant reservoir” of experience to the role.
“He understands the intelligence community exists to secure the liberties and freedoms” of Americans, Ashcroft said.
Top of mind was whether Ratcliffe would be able to remain apolitical. As the leading U.S. spy chief in Trump’s first term, he drew controversy over perceived politicization of intelligence assessments.
Shortly before the 2020 election, he declassified a CIA memo alleging Russian intelligence suggested Hillary Clinton devised a plan during the 2016 campaign to link Trump to Russia’s DNC hack as a distraction from her email server controversy. The decision was opposed by then-CIA Director Gina Haspel and other top intelligence officials.
“It was my decision, but it wasn’t my process,” he told Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., when asked about the declassification that occurred Sept. 29, 2020 — the same day as the first presidential debate between Trump and Joe Biden.
Ratcliffe, who was nominated to his previous post in February of 2020, said the Senate’s intel panel requested during his confirmation hearing as national intelligence director that he go back and examine the intelligence community’s assessment of the 2016 election. He also said he received separate, similar requests from the Justice Department and other Senate committees.
“The process, just so you’re clear, was an iterative, collaborative process that included the attorney general, the CIA director, the director of the [National Security Agency], myself as DNI, and again, [was] an iterative process that resulted in a highly redacted product to protect sources and methods, but yet to respond to these requests or demands to put that information out,” he argued.
Ratcliffe was also accused of distorting intelligence to overemphasize China’s role in a 2020 presidential election influence assessment to downplay election meddling activities from other nations, including Russia. Analysts, backed by an ODNI investigative mediator, said his interjections resulted in an “outrageous misrepresentation” of their findings.
“As DNI, I dramatically increased the intelligence community’s resources devoted to China,” Ratcliffe also said in his opening statement. “I openly warned the American people that from my unique vantage point as the official who saw more U.S. intelligence than anyone else, I assessed that China was far and away our top national security threat.”
In a question and answer docket submitted to the committee, he wrote “I did not believe it was appropriate to alter the career analysts’ work product, but I chose to attach my disagreement as a distinct addendum based on my view of the entirety of the IC’s reporting on China.”
In testimony to Warner, Ratcliffe contended he was “speaking truth to power” and cited a recent interview with outgoing FBI Director Chris Wray, where the FBI chief said that China was now a top threat the United States had to address.
“I need your commitment that you will not fire or force out CIA employees because of their perceived political views, and that you will not ask these employees to place loyalty to a political figure above loyalty to the country,” Warner said.
In 2019, Trump announced his intention to nominate Ratcliffe as DNI to replace Dan Coats. Trump, a historically staunch critic of the intelligence community, praised Ratcliffe as someone capable of controlling and restraining intelligence agencies. But Ratcliffe’s limited experience in national security and intelligence, along with allegations that he inflated his role in prosecuting terrorism cases, sparked controversy in Congress.
Ratcliffe was also a staunch critic of the FBI and a special counsel investigation that probed Russian interference in the 2016 election, which he accused of being biased against Trump. Democrats criticized his nomination as DNI, calling him unqualified and too partisan for the role. Trump pulled the nomination in August 2019, but later renominated him in February 2020, where he was later confirmed.
As CIA chief, Ratcliffe would have to deal with the fallout from any forthcoming findings tied to Havana Syndrome, an unexplained medical condition comprising symptoms like dizziness, nausea, fatigue and cognitive problems that, since 2016, has affected hundreds of CIA, military and diplomatic personnel abroad.
The intelligence community isn’t aligned on the origins of Havana Syndrome. According to an assessment released last week, two unnamed agencies said there is a “roughly even chance” a foreign adversary developed a device designed to induce the symptoms in personnel, though just one of them says such a device was actually used. But five agencies also said it’s “very unlikely” that a foreign rival is tied to the symptoms.
He told Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, that he would “drill down” and look carefully into the health incidents, including classified assessments of them, contending the mystery illness has affected intelligence community workforce morale.
Ratcliffe’s support of a frequently contested spying power may also become a flash point with civil liberties groups and privacy-focused lawmakers when the authority goes up for renewal next year. The ordinance, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, allows the intelligence community to collect the communications of foreigners abroad without a court order.
But 702 permits two-sided collection of communications, including when a U.S. person is speaking with a foreign target. Privacy advocates have argued the law allows end-runs around the Fourth Amendment — which bars unreasonable searches and seizures — and have often cited past cases where the authority was abused by law enforcement analysts.
Section 702 was renewed in Congress this past April, with the Biden administration arguing that a number of meaningful reforms were introduced to compel compliance with collection procedures.
The statute is an “indispensable national security tool” and should not be reformed with a warrant requirement, Ratcliffe said, arguing that a warrant could slow down timely national security investigations. But he added the law must be maintained to protect Americans’ civil liberties.
Ratcliffe also promised Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., that he would adhere to interrogation reforms established by Congress in 2015. Those reforms followed the revelation of the CIA’s extreme post-9/11 torture programs. The exposure of those “enhanced interrogation techniques” tarnished the agency’s reputation for years.
A former member who chaired the House Homeland panel’s cybersecurity subcommittee, Ratcliffe also vowed to develop a cyber deterrence strategy with other national security officials. Amid recent Chinese infiltrations into telecommunications infrastructure, lawmakers and Trump allies have been pushing the U.S. to take a more offensive strategy in cyberspace.
“As you well know, it’s invasion through our digital borders from half a world away … that can cause so much damage, and the deterrent effect has to be that there are consequences to our adversaries when they do that,” he told Sen. Angus King, I-Maine.
Over the past year, the CIA has been a central player in hostage-ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas over the war in Gaza. It has also played a covert role in training Ukrainian intelligence operatives amid that nation’s ongoing conflict with Russia.
Traditionally, foreign policy and national security nominees are vetted prior to Inauguration Day so that the incoming president can have them ready to work as the new administration starts. Presidential nominees must be first vetted and advanced by a relevant Senate committee before they are voted on by the entire high chamber. Ratcliffe is expected to be advanced out of the committee by Monday.
“In these dangerous times, our intelligence agencies haven’t anticipated major events or detected impending attacks,” Cotton said in his opening remarks, citing events like the New Orleans terrorist attack on New Year’s Day and the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. “Mr. Ratcliffe, you have a big job ahead of you. The nation needs a strong, capable and aggressive CIA.”