CIA agents say Trump administration pushed them to lie

The Trump administration fired senior career intelligence officers for refusing to fabricate reports that would align with White House policy goals. This is according to a survey of CIA agents conducted recently, which reveals a troubling atmosphere of political pressure and “concern among the rank and file that Trump administration meddling is undermining intelligence work.”

The survey was revealed on Friday in a report by the Atlantic, and in it, agent comments “show how acutely some of them feel pressured to reach preferred outcomes instead of following the facts wherever they lead.” Insiders familiar with the survey spoke with the Atlantic on the condition of strict anonymity so they could speak candidly.

As the Atlantic explains, “The survey, which covers last year and was sent to members of the agency’s analytic workforce, combines multiple-choice questions with an open-ended section where respondents can give feedback in their own words. Most analysts who provided written responses objected specifically to actions by then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard." For example, “Among the analysts’ concerns was last year’s dismissal of two senior career intelligence officers after one of Gabbard’s deputies tried to rewrite their assessment that Venezuela was not directing a criminal gang, Tren de Aragua. The administration wanted to claim the opposite to create a legal basis for deporting Venezuelan immigrants."

Another major issue involved President Donald Trump’s concerns about investigations into Russian election interference. According to the Atlantic, “Respondents also cited Gabbard’s decision to revoke the security clearances of more than three dozen current and former national-security officials, without citing any evidence of wrongdoing. Some of them had worked on the intelligence community’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, which Trump derisively refers to as ‘the Russia hoax.’ Gabbard, who left office last month, spent much of her time in office trying unsuccessfully to gin up evidence that intelligence leaders had engaged in a conspiracy to link Trump to Russia.”

But, warned insiders, the respondents should not be interpreted as a criticism of Gabbard alone. The survey also reflects “broader concerns about a political climate in which the president has routinely misrepresented intelligence to the public and directed his advisers to find evidence, however dubious, to support his claims about a stolen election in 2020.”

The Atlantic raises another example “of the cost that officers can pay for not toeing the administration’s political line.” Last year, “the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Jeffrey Kruse, was dismissed following a preliminary report that the air strikes had set back Iran’s nuclear capabilities by only a few months. Trump had said they were ‘obliterated.’”

According to CIA insiders, while subtle political pressure has always been an issue regardless of administration, “intelligence officers have rarely had to worry that they might lose their job, or worse, for telling the truth. Officers whose names are not publicly disclosed have had their identities revealed and been harassed online.” Agents who spoke with the Atlantic said “they worry that, in addition to losing their clearances, fanatical supporters of the president might show up at their home.”

“In my time, I don’t think anyone was afraid they’d get fired or your name would suddenly make your way to Laura Loomer’s blog,” said Steven Cash, a veteran intelligence officer who also served as a staff member on congressional oversight committees, told the Atlantic. “Trump ran on a platform, and ran his first term, in a way that made it clear that he saw the intelligence community more like a press and propaganda office. That’s fundamentally at odds with why there is an intelligence community.”