On Tuesday, President Donald Trump announced that Bill Pulte, a “home-building heir” who currently oversees the Federal Housing Finance Agency, would step in as acting Director of National Intelligence to replace Tulsi Gabbard. The decision has drawn swift bipartisan criticism over Pulte’s total lack of experience and what is viewed as an effort to “weaponize” the U.S. intelligence apparatus. "We don't need a weaponized DNI, we need professionals there," declared Senator Majority Leader John Thune (R-SC). “If he's somebody we want in that position permanently, he's got a lengthy road ahead of him.”Fears over weaponization stem from Pulte’s previous efforts to target Trump’s enemies. As the head of the FHFA, he used his position to suggest criminal charges for mortgage fraud against the likes of New York Attorney General Letitia James, Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook — all of whom drew the president’s ire over various incidents.With all this in mind, Senator Mark Warner, a top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, shared Thune’s sentiments, blasting at length: “This appointment speaks volumes about what this president expects from the nation's top intelligence official. Rather than selecting a respected national security professional capable of delivering independent judgments, the president has chosen an official who has demonstrated not just willingness but eagerness to use the authorities of government to pursue political retribution.”“Americans have already seen Mr. Pulte use the powers of his office at the Federal Housing Finance Agency to pursue the president's grievances and lend credibility to dubious prosecutions of President Trump's perceived political opponents,” Warner continued. “Elevating him to oversee the Intelligence Community makes clear that this president is not looking for an intelligence leader who will follow the facts or speak truth to power, but rather someone who will be willing to shape intelligence around the president's wishes, regardless of the cost to the American people.”What’s more, Warner took issue with Pulte’s bona fides, or lack thereof, arguing, "The concern is not only that Mr. Pulte lacks the ‘extensive national security experience' required by statute for the job, which was created after intelligence failures led to the deaths of thousands of Americans on 9/11. It is that he appears to have been selected precisely because the White House believes he will provide the narrative it wants, not the intelligence we need. Americans have every reason to worry about what happens when the official charged with overseeing everything from counterterrorism to foreign election threats is chosen for his willingness to advance the president's political agenda rather than his experience. That is how intelligence becomes politicized, how inconvenient facts disappear, how agencies charged with protecting our democracy instead become tools to manipulate it, and how Americans are left more vulnerable to a terrorist attack."Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) put it more simply: “I see no evidence of any qualifications for that job.” And Senator Angus King (Independent-ME), who serves on the Senate Intelligence Committee, rounded things out, “By any objective assessment — in terms of experience, expertise, background — this appointment makes no sense.”Journalist Chris Hayes summed up the collective assessment well, posting, “This is so utterly insane I’m at a loss. But it makes sense if you want to turn the entire U.S. intelligence apparatus into a tool for domestic persecution and domination.”
