Episode Summary: “The Right-Wing Plan for Trump-Friendly Spies”

Podcast: In the Room with Peter Bergen
Featured On: Click Here by Recorded Future News
Release Date: December 3, 2024

In this special episode of In the Room with Peter Bergen, host Peter Bergen delves into the potential transformations of the United States Intelligence Community (USIC) under a hypothetical second term of President Donald Trump. Drawing from the comprehensive Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, the discussion features insights from esteemed former intelligence officials, including Susan Gordon, John Negroponte, and Gina Bennett. The episode explores the implications of politically motivated restructuring plans and the vital importance of maintaining intelligence independence.

Trump’s Relationship with the Intelligence Community

The episode opens with Peter Bergen reflecting on President Trump's unconventional interactions with the media and intelligence agencies. A pivotal moment highlighted is the 2018 Helsinki summit where President Trump faced criticism from the US Intelligence Community.

Peter Bergen [01:48]: "This was a joint news conference held by Trump and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin... Trump’s performance in Helsinki didn’t play well with the US Intelligence community back home."

Susan Gordon, former Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, recalls the chilling impact of Trump's alignment with Putin during this press conference.

Susan Gordon [04:18]: "For a President of the United States in front of a foreign leader who had done things that we understood him to have done and to say, yeah, I'm with him, that was chilling."

Dan Coats, Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, attempted a rare public rebuke in response to Trump’s stance, emphasizing the objective stance of the intelligence community.

John Negroponte [07:43]: "It’s Project 25. I don’t know anything about it. I don’t want to know anything about it."

Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025

Peter Bergen introduces Project 2025, a nearly 900-page policy document by the Heritage Foundation outlining a radical far-right overhaul of the US government, including the Intelligence Community. The plan aims to infuse political loyalty into key intelligence roles, raising alarms among intelligence veterans.

Peter Bergen [06:47]: "Project 2025 is a blueprint for a radical far right takeover of everything in the US government."

John Negroponte evaluates the proposals, noting a mixed reception but emphasizing certain structural changes.

John Negroponte [14:49]: "They seem to want to strengthen the office of the Director of National Intelligence... which I think is a welcome news."

However, he criticizes the approach towards the State Department, accusing Project 2025 of unwarranted political bias.

John Negroponte [15:56]: "They start out the chapter on the State Department by saying that it’s well known that the State Department is largely populated by leftists. I mean, it’s just incredible."

Concerns from Former Intelligence Officials

Susan Gordon expresses deep concerns about the politicization inherent in Project 2025’s recommendations. She underscores the risk of replacing seasoned professionals with politically aligned appointees, potentially undermining the efficacy of national security efforts.

Susan Gordon [09:09]: "There are new things that need to be done. Can we really afford to be just saying because you don’t vote in a particular way, you can’t do this necessary job?"

Gina Bennett, a former CIA analyst and the first to warn about Osama bin Laden, provides a scathing critique of Project 2025. She argues that the plan threatens the very foundation of American democracy by promoting homogeneity and stifling diversity within the intelligence ranks.

Gina Bennett [24:39]: "My analysis... is the end of a representative democracy as we’ve understood it to be."

Bennett highlights specific problematic recommendations, such as banning intelligence agencies from monitoring domestic disinformation and eliminating activities labeled as unnecessary "social engineering."

Gina Bennett [25:55]: "If the conservative president tells the intelligence community it can’t track disinformation... then we’re going to set ourselves up for surprise again and attacks."

Impact on Intelligence Community’s Integrity

The episode emphasizes the essential tension between the intelligence community and presidential leadership, necessary for unbiased national security decisions. Former officials warn that Project 2025’s approach to entwining political loyalty with intelligence roles could erode this balance.

Susan Gordon [12:59]: "The dynamic tension between political opponents, appointees and careerists, especially in intelligence, is a strength. If you strip that balance, you run the risk of getting what you want but not having what you need."

John Negroponte further elaborates on the dangers of politicization, particularly through mechanisms like Schedule F, which would allow the replacement of up to 50,000 federal employees with party loyalists.

John Negroponte [22:20]: "I think it'd be a huge mistake and I think they need to be very careful before trying to introduce more of a political coloration or element to the intelligence community."

Bennett underscores that intelligence should serve as an objective advisory tool, free from confirmation bias and political pressures.

Gina Bennett [36:21]: "You have to look at the information as it is, not as you want it to be."

Personal Experiences and Professional Integrity

Susan Gordon shares her firsthand experiences working under President Trump, detailing the growing mistrust and eventual ousting of intelligence leadership when assessments conflicted with Trump’s preferred narratives.

Susan Gordon [39:13]: "Trump's hostility to the intelligence community has been pretty relentless."

She reflects on the profound personal and professional toll of these dynamics, highlighting the loss of trusted leadership and the potential drain on the intelligence community’s talent pool.

Susan Gordon [42:44]: "If you drive these people out, it will be less good. And in the craft that I so love of intelligence, I think you risk breaking its magic."

Conclusion: Preserving Intelligence Independence

The episode concludes with a consensus among the interviewed former intelligence officials: the integrity and independence of the US Intelligence Community are paramount for effective national security. Project 2025’s proposals to infuse political loyalty into intelligence roles are viewed as threats that could diminish the quality and objectivity of intelligence assessments, ultimately endangering democratic governance.

Peter Bergen [36:38]: "The people you've heard from are saying there's a totally necessary built-in tension between the intelligence community and the US President that they serve..."

Maintaining a non-partisan intelligence apparatus ensures that national security decisions are based on unbiased, comprehensive analyses rather than political convenience.

Key Takeaways

• Project 2025 poses significant concerns regarding the politicization of the US Intelligence Community.
• Former intelligence officials emphasize the necessity of maintaining professional and non-partisan intelligence operations to safeguard national security.
• Personal accounts from Susan Gordon and Gina Bennett highlight the potential erosion of institutional integrity and the loss of valuable expertise under politically driven restructuring.
• The essential tension between the intelligence community and presidential leadership is crucial for informed and objective national security decision-making.

Notable Quotes:

• Susan Gordon [09:18]: "And when you say all this, a smile is playing on your lips throughout the whole expression of your career."

• Gina Bennett [27:27]: "That is shorthand for the Heritage foundation would like every part of the US Government to be white, male, Protestant, straight, heterosexual, whatever. That’s code for me."

• John Negroponte [17:37]: "Intelligence can be maddening, and you can become impatient with it because you so want it to support what you want to do."

This episode serves as a critical examination of proposed political reforms within the US Intelligence Community, presenting a compelling argument for the preservation of intelligence independence as a cornerstone of effective governance and national security.