This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/us/politics/john-ratcliffe-intelligence-director-confirmation-hearing.html

The article has changed 31 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 19 Version 20
Republican Senate Panel Signals Support for John Ratcliffe as Intelligence Chief Republican Senate Panel Signals Support for John Ratcliffe as Intelligence Chief
(7 days later)
WASHINGTON — Representative John Ratcliffe, President Trump’s pick to lead the nation’s intelligence agencies, sought at his confirmation hearing on Tuesday to push past questions about his qualifications and fierce partisanship, promising senators he would deliver unvarnished facts to a skeptical White House.WASHINGTON — Representative John Ratcliffe, President Trump’s pick to lead the nation’s intelligence agencies, sought at his confirmation hearing on Tuesday to push past questions about his qualifications and fierce partisanship, promising senators he would deliver unvarnished facts to a skeptical White House.
But when pressed by members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mr. Ratcliffe, Republican of Texas, resisted taking sides on many of the most contentious intelligence matters that have divided Trump-era Washington and could offend the president, including whether Russia specifically sought to aid Mr. Trump’s campaign in 2016 and whether the president should have fired the inspector general for the intelligence agencies.But when pressed by members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mr. Ratcliffe, Republican of Texas, resisted taking sides on many of the most contentious intelligence matters that have divided Trump-era Washington and could offend the president, including whether Russia specifically sought to aid Mr. Trump’s campaign in 2016 and whether the president should have fired the inspector general for the intelligence agencies.
Pressed repeatedly by Democrats, Mr. Ratcliffe conceded that he disagreed with Mr. Trump that the intelligence agencies had “run amok,” but he declined to further quibble with the president in favor of more general assertions of independence.Pressed repeatedly by Democrats, Mr. Ratcliffe conceded that he disagreed with Mr. Trump that the intelligence agencies had “run amok,” but he declined to further quibble with the president in favor of more general assertions of independence.
“If confirmed as D.N.I., one of the things that I’ve made clear to everyone is that I will deliver the unvarnished truth,” Mr. Ratcliffe said in one exchange with Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and the panel’s key swing vote. “It won’t be shaded for anyone. What anyone wants the intelligence to reflect won’t impact the intelligence that I deliver.”“If confirmed as D.N.I., one of the things that I’ve made clear to everyone is that I will deliver the unvarnished truth,” Mr. Ratcliffe said in one exchange with Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and the panel’s key swing vote. “It won’t be shaded for anyone. What anyone wants the intelligence to reflect won’t impact the intelligence that I deliver.”
But Republicans, including Ms. Collins, greeted Mr. Ratcliffe’s responses more amicably and appeared poised to push his nomination forward in the interest of installing a permanent intelligence chief at a time when the coronavirus pandemic is threatening social, economic and political systems around the world. They were also warmer to Mr. Ratcliffe than they were last summer, when Mr. Trump first put him forward for the job but then backtracked amid bipartisan criticism of his record.But Republicans, including Ms. Collins, greeted Mr. Ratcliffe’s responses more amicably and appeared poised to push his nomination forward in the interest of installing a permanent intelligence chief at a time when the coronavirus pandemic is threatening social, economic and political systems around the world. They were also warmer to Mr. Ratcliffe than they were last summer, when Mr. Trump first put him forward for the job but then backtracked amid bipartisan criticism of his record.
Senator Richard M. Burr, Republican of North Carolina and the committee’s chairman, said after the hearing that he would hold a committee vote next week to advance Mr. Ratcliffe and work with Senate leaders to schedule a final confirmation vote shortly thereafter.Senator Richard M. Burr, Republican of North Carolina and the committee’s chairman, said after the hearing that he would hold a committee vote next week to advance Mr. Ratcliffe and work with Senate leaders to schedule a final confirmation vote shortly thereafter.
“There were no questions that he sidestepped today,” Mr. Burr said. “He answered everything and I think he did a very successful job at verifying that he is more than capable of this job and serve in an independent capacity.”“There were no questions that he sidestepped today,” Mr. Burr said. “He answered everything and I think he did a very successful job at verifying that he is more than capable of this job and serve in an independent capacity.”
The public vetting played out in almost surreal fashion, as senators back in session for their first hearing in a month took precautions to limit the spread of Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. In a mostly empty room, Mr. Ratcliffe sat on nearly the opposite end from the senators, much farther back than hearing witnesses typically sit. Of those present, many wore masks, including Mr. Burr and Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the panel’s top Democrat, who pulled them down around their necks as they spoke. The public was not allowed inside.The public vetting played out in almost surreal fashion, as senators back in session for their first hearing in a month took precautions to limit the spread of Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. In a mostly empty room, Mr. Ratcliffe sat on nearly the opposite end from the senators, much farther back than hearing witnesses typically sit. Of those present, many wore masks, including Mr. Burr and Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the panel’s top Democrat, who pulled them down around their necks as they spoke. The public was not allowed inside.
If confirmed, Mr. Ratcliffe will take charge of the intelligence community at a tense time, with the White House pushing for information about the origin of the coronavirus pandemic and a president who has openly disparaged the agencies since they publicly concluded at the start of 2017 that Russia developed a preference for Mr. Trump’s candidacy as it conducted a widespread operation to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.If confirmed, Mr. Ratcliffe will take charge of the intelligence community at a tense time, with the White House pushing for information about the origin of the coronavirus pandemic and a president who has openly disparaged the agencies since they publicly concluded at the start of 2017 that Russia developed a preference for Mr. Trump’s candidacy as it conducted a widespread operation to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.
Mr. Ratcliffe won the White House’s attention through his fierce defense of Mr. Trump and his questioning of elements of the intelligence community, and he later served as a member of the president’s impeachment defense team. But Mr. Ratcliffe insisted on Tuesday that he relished a chance to shift from partisan warrior to neutral fact collector at the head of the intelligence agencies — a transition that would most likely be necessary to win over the agencies themselves.Mr. Ratcliffe won the White House’s attention through his fierce defense of Mr. Trump and his questioning of elements of the intelligence community, and he later served as a member of the president’s impeachment defense team. But Mr. Ratcliffe insisted on Tuesday that he relished a chance to shift from partisan warrior to neutral fact collector at the head of the intelligence agencies — a transition that would most likely be necessary to win over the agencies themselves.
“I wanted this job because it is apolitical and I have held apolitical positions before,” he said, citing his time as a U.S. attorney for eastern Texas.“I wanted this job because it is apolitical and I have held apolitical positions before,” he said, citing his time as a U.S. attorney for eastern Texas.
Mr. Trump first proposed installing Mr. Ratcliffe in the job last summer, only to abruptly rescind the plan after lawmakers questioned Mr. Ratcliffe’s lack of experience and partisan record in the House, and after news media reports highlighted several instances in which Mr. Ratcliffe appeared to inflate or distort aspects of his résumé.Mr. Trump first proposed installing Mr. Ratcliffe in the job last summer, only to abruptly rescind the plan after lawmakers questioned Mr. Ratcliffe’s lack of experience and partisan record in the House, and after news media reports highlighted several instances in which Mr. Ratcliffe appeared to inflate or distort aspects of his résumé.
If confirmed, Mr. Ratcliffe would replace the acting intelligence director, Richard Grenell, an aggressive Trump defender who has moved to remake the office during his interim assignment while he also continues to serve as ambassador to Germany. He has prompted unease among key Senate Republicans, including Mr. Burr, according to officials involved in the confirmation process.If confirmed, Mr. Ratcliffe would replace the acting intelligence director, Richard Grenell, an aggressive Trump defender who has moved to remake the office during his interim assignment while he also continues to serve as ambassador to Germany. He has prompted unease among key Senate Republicans, including Mr. Burr, according to officials involved in the confirmation process.
But making clear that Democrats were displeased with Mr. Ratcliffe’s nomination, Mr. Warner said that he needed more sufficient reason to vote to confirm him, no matter how uncomfortable lawmakers are with Mr. Grenell. “Some have suggested that your main qualification for confirmation to this post is that you are not Ambassador Grenell,” Mr. Warner said. “But frankly, that is not enough.”But making clear that Democrats were displeased with Mr. Ratcliffe’s nomination, Mr. Warner said that he needed more sufficient reason to vote to confirm him, no matter how uncomfortable lawmakers are with Mr. Grenell. “Some have suggested that your main qualification for confirmation to this post is that you are not Ambassador Grenell,” Mr. Warner said. “But frankly, that is not enough.”
Mr. Warner is among the influential Democrats who have signaled that they see Mr. Ratcliffe as summarily unprepared for a position that has been filled by military veterans and seasoned national security officials. Mr. Ratcliffe spent part of four years as a federal prosecutor in Texas under President George W. Bush and has served in the House since 2015, including one term on its Intelligence Committee.Mr. Warner is among the influential Democrats who have signaled that they see Mr. Ratcliffe as summarily unprepared for a position that has been filled by military veterans and seasoned national security officials. Mr. Ratcliffe spent part of four years as a federal prosecutor in Texas under President George W. Bush and has served in the House since 2015, including one term on its Intelligence Committee.
Mr. Ratcliffe treaded carefully when discussing his views of Russia’s continuing election interference campaign.Mr. Ratcliffe treaded carefully when discussing his views of Russia’s continuing election interference campaign.
Updated July 16, 2020 Updated July 22, 2020
“They have a goal of sowing discord, and they have been successful of sowing discord,” he said of Russian government officials, but he insisted that their 2016 interference had not altered the outcome of the presidential election. Though his assertion dovetails with Mr. Trump’s insistence that he won the election on his own, it is impossible to say whether Russia’s sabotage campaign changed any votes.“They have a goal of sowing discord, and they have been successful of sowing discord,” he said of Russian government officials, but he insisted that their 2016 interference had not altered the outcome of the presidential election. Though his assertion dovetails with Mr. Trump’s insistence that he won the election on his own, it is impossible to say whether Russia’s sabotage campaign changed any votes.
John Sipher, a former C.I.A. officer, took issue with Mr. Ratcliffe’s assertion that the Russian interference campaign changed no votes. “This is false,” Mr. Sipher wrote on Twitter. “The IC made clear that it does not look into or opine on this issue.”John Sipher, a former C.I.A. officer, took issue with Mr. Ratcliffe’s assertion that the Russian interference campaign changed no votes. “This is false,” Mr. Sipher wrote on Twitter. “The IC made clear that it does not look into or opine on this issue.”
Lawmakers pressed Mr. Ratcliffe to allow election security officials to stay in their jobs and continue to brief Congress. A report about one such update to the House Intelligence Committee by the administration’s election security czar helped prompt Mr. Trump to replace Joseph Maguire as the acting intelligence chief and eventually nominate Mr. Ratcliffe. Lawmakers have said they are worried the controversy over that briefing will cause the intelligence agencies to limit what they tell Congress.Lawmakers pressed Mr. Ratcliffe to allow election security officials to stay in their jobs and continue to brief Congress. A report about one such update to the House Intelligence Committee by the administration’s election security czar helped prompt Mr. Trump to replace Joseph Maguire as the acting intelligence chief and eventually nominate Mr. Ratcliffe. Lawmakers have said they are worried the controversy over that briefing will cause the intelligence agencies to limit what they tell Congress.
When Mr. Warner pressed Mr. Ratcliffe for his views of the intelligence community’s assessment that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia developed a preference for Mr. Trump, the nominee demurred, saying he had not seen the underlying intelligence and could not make a determination on his own. Mr. Trump has consistently questioned the finding, but the Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously endorsed it in a report last month.When Mr. Warner pressed Mr. Ratcliffe for his views of the intelligence community’s assessment that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia developed a preference for Mr. Trump, the nominee demurred, saying he had not seen the underlying intelligence and could not make a determination on his own. Mr. Trump has consistently questioned the finding, but the Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously endorsed it in a report last month.
“You want to have it both ways: You want to try to portray yourself as a defender of the Constitution, and then you water it down with specifics,” Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, said in exasperation after pushing Mr. Ratcliffe for his views on whistle-blower laws.“You want to have it both ways: You want to try to portray yourself as a defender of the Constitution, and then you water it down with specifics,” Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, said in exasperation after pushing Mr. Ratcliffe for his views on whistle-blower laws.
Mr. Ratcliffe pledged to make gathering information on the origin of the coronavirus a top priority. Senior Trump administration officials have pushed the spy agencies for evidence to support an unproven theory that the virus was accidentally leaked from a lab in China, prompting concern among analysts that the officials will distort assessments about the virus as they escalate a campaign to blame China for the pandemic.Mr. Ratcliffe pledged to make gathering information on the origin of the coronavirus a top priority. Senior Trump administration officials have pushed the spy agencies for evidence to support an unproven theory that the virus was accidentally leaked from a lab in China, prompting concern among analysts that the officials will distort assessments about the virus as they escalate a campaign to blame China for the pandemic.
The intelligence agencies have found no conclusive evidence about the virus’s origin.The intelligence agencies have found no conclusive evidence about the virus’s origin.
Mr. Ratcliffe, apparently anxious to please all of the senators, bounced back and forth between appearing to back the Republican or Democratic view of the intelligence around the origin of the outbreak.Mr. Ratcliffe, apparently anxious to please all of the senators, bounced back and forth between appearing to back the Republican or Democratic view of the intelligence around the origin of the outbreak.
Senator Angus King of Maine, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, asked Mr. Ratcliffe whether he had seen evidence pointing to the lab as the source of the virus. Mr. Ratcliffe said he had not. But then Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, took up questioning, arguing the virus could not have originated in a public market, a conclusion Mr. Ratcliffe also agreed with.Senator Angus King of Maine, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, asked Mr. Ratcliffe whether he had seen evidence pointing to the lab as the source of the virus. Mr. Ratcliffe said he had not. But then Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, took up questioning, arguing the virus could not have originated in a public market, a conclusion Mr. Ratcliffe also agreed with.
Mr. Cotton pressed Mr. Ratcliffe to agree that the president is allowed to set intelligence priorities, which he did. A moment later, Mr. King said that presidents often want intelligence to support their policy goals, which he labeled conclusion shopping.Mr. Cotton pressed Mr. Ratcliffe to agree that the president is allowed to set intelligence priorities, which he did. A moment later, Mr. King said that presidents often want intelligence to support their policy goals, which he labeled conclusion shopping.
Mr. Ratcliffe, once more, agreed.Mr. Ratcliffe, once more, agreed.
Emily Cochrane contributed reporting.Emily Cochrane contributed reporting.