Thread by @MiekeEoyang

See Katrina's thread of why Ratcliffe is unqualified to be DNI.

I'm a former HPSCI budget monitor of the ODNI, and let me explain to you what his lack of qualifications mean for the job itself. (a different thread)

https://twitter.com/NatSecMulligan/status/1156998762092486656

The DNI has two main jobs: 1) serving as the chief intelligence officer/briefer to the President and 2) coordinating the activities of the 17 different intelligence agencies in the US government. Trump picked Ratcliffe based on his preference for #1. But #2 matters.

For #1, as the chief intelligence briefer, the DNI's job is to give the President unbiased, objective information on which to make policy decisions. To do that, they rely on information provided by those 17 agencies, and resolve disputes when they disagree.

Providing objective information to the President from many competing sources requires an understanding of how information is gathered to decide how to protect it, and strong critical thinking skills to mediate the differences. Ratcliffe hasn't much experience with either.

A good DNI tells the President what we know, and where we have doubts about what we know. A good DNI tells the President when policies aren't resulting in their intended effects so adjustments can be made. Ratcliffe hasn't shown he can do that.

But the second part of the job is much harder, coordinating intelligence agency activities. This is why Congress insisted on people with such strong intelligence backgrounds for the job. So far, only Clapper, a career professional, really succeeded in the job.

The DNI has little budget authority, but must resolve disputes between multiple agencies. It's really bureaucratic. For an information sharing program, who's IT standards win? How do you ensure security clearances transfer? How do you eliminate stovepipes & prevent redundancy?

Ratcliffe has little to no experience in setting budgets, running a personnel system, much less an inter-agency process. He doesn't know how to develop and acquire complicated system. And he certainly doesn't know how to do it with the classified info requirements.

In running intelligence agencies, experience matters. Porter Goss, a former CIA officer who served on HPSCI for years, flamed out as director of the CIA. Ratcliffe has even less experience & will be running roughshod over people who are professionals at manipulation.

Also, Ratcliffe will be coming into agencies that value the truth. At the CIA engraved on the wall is "And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." Yet, he comes in having inflated his resume in ways that show he doesn't appreciate the truth.

Ratcliffe will be coming in to agencies that handle biased sources all the time and discern truth from them, after questioning their handling of sources in the Russia investigation. See this from @jeremyherb: cnn.com/2019/07/31/pol…

Ratcliffe also doesn't understand the distinct agency cultures and past battles that he will have to mediate as DNI. If he gets the job he'll be walking blind into the middle of an ongoing knife fight between ninjas, and he's already accused them of dishonor.

I don't know which will be worse for him, getting the job or not getting the job.

-30-