Trump's latest rejection of intelligence isn't the first time he hasn't trusted spy agencies
President Donald Trump 's fights with the intelligence community were a running theme of his first term, and not much has changed.
This latest friction echoes the tumultuous relationship that defined much of his first term, particularly his vocal opposition to investigations into his campaign's alleged ties to Russia.
Now, a sequel is playing out as Trump battles to shape the public's understanding of his foreign policy gamble in Iran.
An early U.S. intelligence assessment said Iran's nuclear program has been set back only a few months following last weekend's American strikes on three sites. Trump has rejected the finding, asserting that the programme is now "completely and fully obliterated."
The dispute is unlikely to fade anytime soon. Top administration officials are pressing Trump's case, with a news conference set for Thursday at the Pentagon. Briefings are also scheduled for lawmakers on Capitol Hill, though the White House plans to limit the sharing of classified information after the initial intelligence assessment leaked this week.
'Intelligence people strive to live in a world as it is, describe the world as it is, where politicians are all about describing the world as they want it to be,' said Larry Pfeiffer, a 32-year intelligence veteran who held positions including CIA chief of staff and senior director of the White House Situation Room.
Though it's hardly unheard of for presidents to bristle at what they perceive as bad news from the intelligence community, it's rare for the conflict to spill into public view as it did this week.
'I don't think we've seen another president push back as strong as this guy has,' Pfeiffer said.
Trump has a history of distrusting spy services
Trump's suspicion of the intelligence community, particularly when its assessments do not align with his worldview, dates back to even before his first term.
His 2016 campaign was shadowed by an investigation into whether his team had coordinated with Russia to sway the outcome of the election.
He was so infuriated by the scrutiny over a dossier of unverified and salacious claims connecting him to Russia that, one week before he was sworn in, he tweeted: 'Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to 'leak' into the public. One last shot at me. Are we living in Nazi Germany?'
Trump disputed the assessment that Russia had interfered in the election on his behalf, decrying as a 'hoax' and a 'witch hunt' an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately concluded the Trump campaign had welcomed Moscow's help but did not find sufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy.
Trump also openly challenged the judgment of his intelligence agencies alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin at a Helsinki summit in 2018.
'I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today,' Trump said. 'He just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be.'
Such public protestation takes its toll on an intelligence community that historically has endeavored to produce data-driven and apolitical judgments, said Frank Montoya Jr., a former FBI supervisor who served as director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center.
'It's really demoralizing because nobody is looking at this stuff from a political perspective. They're looking at the data and they're analyzing the data,' he said. 'When you get this kind of unfounded criticism, especially from the policymaker in chief, it just destroys morale.'
Tensions with the intelligence community persist
Trump tapped loyalists to lead America's intelligence services in his second term — Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence and John Ratcliffe as CIA director. They promised to end what they said was the weaponization of intelligence and root out disloyal officers.
But there have already been conflicts.
Last month, the National Intelligence Council declassified a memo in response to an open records request that said American spy agencies found no coordination between the Venezuelan government and the Tren de Aragua gang, contradicting statements the Trump administration used to justify invoking the Alien Enemies Act and deporting Venezuelan immigrants.
Gabbard later fired the two veteran intelligence officers who led the council because of their perceived opposition to Trump.
More trouble came after the war between Israel and Iran began nearly two weeks ago.
Trump dismissed Gabbard's testimony to Congress in March that U.S. spy agencies did not believe Iran was actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. Trump insisted Iran was very close.
'I don't care what she said,' he told reporters last week.
Gabbard later accused the news media of mischaracterizing her testimony, noting that she had mentioned Iran's large stockpile of enriched uranium that goes beyond levels needed for civilian uses.
Iran maintains that its nuclear program was peaceful, though the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly warned that Tehran has enough highly enriched uranium to make several nuclear bombs if it chooses.
A preliminary report from the Defense Intelligence Agency that emerged this week said that while the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities did significant damage, the facilities were not totally destroyed and the program was only set back by a few months.
The White House called the assessment 'flat-out wrong.' The DIA said the initial findings will be refined as new information becomes available.
Given Trump's skeptical view of intelligence officials, Pfeiffer said, 'his initial instinct is to assume that if the intelligence community is telling him something different than he would like it to be, that it's because they're trying to undermine him.'
Trump team says there's no conflict
Gabbard and Ratcliffe have sought to brush off any perceived conflict between their agencies and Trump. Ratcliffe said Wednesday that new intelligence from a 'historically reliable and accurate' source reveals that U.S. strikes 'destroyed' several of Iran's nuclear facilities that would require years to be rebuilt.
'CIA continues to collect additional reliably sourced information to keep appropriate decision-makers and oversight bodies fully informed,' Ratcliffe said in a statement. 'When possible, we will also provide updates and information to the American public, given the national importance of this matter and in every attempt to provide transparency.'
Gabbard noted the DIA assessment was of 'low confidence,' an acknowledgment by its authors that their conclusions could be mistaken.
'The propaganda media has deployed their usual tactic: selectively release portions of illegally leaked classified intelligence assessments,' she wrote on X.
Trump narrated his own intelligence assessment while attending the NATO summit in the Netherlands. He mentioned satellite images showing the area around nuclear facilities 'burned black' and said the underground tunnels had 'all collapsed.'
He also suggested Israel had sources on the ground in Iran: 'They have guys that go in there after the hit' to evaluate the damage.
The White House pointed to an Israel Atomic Energy Commission assessment that the U.S. and Israeli strikes have 'set back Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years.'
Assessing the US strike will take time
Intelligence officers routinely craft assessments about global threats and specific incidents — information vital to the decision-making of national security officials and lawmakers. Assessments are regularly updated as new intelligence is produced from sources including field agents, informants, open source material and secret surveillance.
The work is secretive to protect the methods and sources of intelligence agencies and to avoid becoming a political football.
Former intelligence officials said it's likely to take days, weeks, or even months to form a full picture of the impact of the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear capabilities.
'I would call for patience,' said John Negroponte, a former ambassador who served as the first director of national intelligence under President George W. Bush. 'Avoid the temptation to rush to judgment.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
39 minutes ago
- The Sun
Trump reveals what mystery trucks at nuke site were REALLY doing before blitz… destroying claims Iran rushed uranium out
Israel didn't know if US would join Iran strikes, says Defense Minister Katz Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz admitted in an interview with Channel 12 that Israel launched its assault on Iran without knowing if the US would join in, according to The Times of Israel. 'In defense, we knew they [the US] were with us — and they did an amazing job,' Katz said, praising American support once the operation began. He confirmed the uranium stockpiles weren't directly targeted: 'The uranium itself, the material, was not a target for attack.' Katz added that Israel would have taken out Ayatollah Khamenei 'if he had been in our sights.' Defence Minister Israel Katz
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump Cabinet secretary to get swanky new setup as major agency moves headquarters out of D.C.
The Trump administration is moving one federal agency out of D.C. and displacing another – with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development set to score choice new digs in the progress. Coming out on top in the situation is HUD Secretary Scott Turner, who is set to get an executive suite up on the 19th floor of his gleaming new headquarters when his current 2,700 employees make the move. But the 1,800 National Science Foundation employees who currently occupy the building are in the dark about their own prospects, according to American Federation of Government Employees Local 3403, which represents federal workers it says were blindsided by the move. 'While Secretary Turner and his staff are busy enjoying private dining and a custom gym, NSF employees are being displaced with no plan, no communication, and no respect,' the union fumed. It said the 'callous disregard for taxpayer dollars and NSF employees comes after the Administration already cut NSF's budget, staff and science grants and forced NSF employees back into the office.' The furious union local, which says it got briefed on the plan when it was suddenly announced, lists perks it said Turner is set to garner in his new space. HUD currently occupies a brutalist 1960s building near the Southeast-Southwest freeway in downtown Washington with a long list of upkeep needs. They include a 'dedicated executive suite' for the secretary, an executive dining room, reserved parking for five cars (presumably his security detail), plus 'exclusive use' of an elevator and a 'potential gym for the HUD Secretary and his family.' Also blasting the move was Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, the top Democrat on the House Science Committee. She slammed the administration for 'kicking dedicated scientists out of their building so HUD Secretary Turner can have a penthouse dining suite' in a blistering statement. 'For an administration so obsessed with claiming that it's cutting spending, how can Trump justify the tax-payer dollars it will take to meet Turner's ridiculous demands, like a gym for his exclusive use or parking spaces for his five cars?' she said. She also asked where the NSF staff would go and what was the plan. 'Once again, science loses, the American taxpayer loses, and our competitors, like China, win.' A HUD press release features an image of the gleaming existing NSF building, which the agency occupied a few years ago. 'The move would unlock several hundred million dollars in taxpayer savings, address serious health and safety threats, enhance the Department's work culture, and present an opportunity for greater collaboration and service to the American people,' it says. Turner talked up the move at a press conference with Virginia Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, whose state has competed with Maryland and DC over the years to serve as host to the NSF and other federal agencies. The NSF used to have offices in downtown DC before moving to Virginia after the Secret Service took over its prior office space. 'We will work with our friends at [the General Services Administration] to coordinate a staggered and thoughtful relocation process which takes into account the current team and employees of this building and the work they do on a daily basis,' Turner said. He added: 'We are all on the same team.' He also blasted the claims about a posh setup as 'ridiculous and untrue.' 'This is about the posterity and the future of HUD, not just for now, but for those that are coming behind me. My family and I were already blessed before we came so, this is about the HUD employees. This is not about me,' he said. HUD spokeswoman Kasey Lovett told the Daily Mail that contrary to 'sensationalist reporting' no one would be 'displaced' and that there would be a 'staggered and thoughtful approach.' 'There will be a secretary office – just as there is at HUD currently – and every other place of operation with executive staff. There are no plans to "build out" anything more than what is currently there,' she said. The spokeswoman said the move was done for staff safety and did not have 'anything to do with a new space or bells and whistles for the secretary,' although she did not deny that Turner would get the building features the union described. The agency release makes no mention of what would happen to the NSF employees beyond the 'staggered employee relocation plan.' It claims the move 'will save American taxpayers hundreds of millions in deferred maintenance and modernization needs.' HUD's building showed up on a list of government buildings to be disposed of – although numerous buildings fell off the initial draft. A GSA fact sheet now begins with the question: 'The first list was much longer, why is this list shorter?' It responds: 'Due to the overwhelming response that we received after publishing the first list, we are refining our process.' A federal judge has put a temporary pause on massive cuts to research funding that goes out to universities around the country. Universities have sued over Trump administration changes to 'indirect' costs that get awarded to their scientists. One plaintiff, the University of California system, estimates the change will cost it nearly $100 million a year.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Celebrity enclave at war after 'Taylor Swift tax' threatens to wipe out holiday homes of the wealthy
Swifties, sun-seekers, and second-home millionaires — brace yourselves. Rhode Island just approved a controversial new real estate tax that's got wealthy seasonal residents fuming and threatening to pack up their beach chairs for good. Locals are calling it the ' Taylor Swift tax,' and yes — it could even hit the pop star's Watch Hill mansion. The proposed tax — which would impose fees that could soar into the six-figures for many — would apply to second homes worth $1million or more that aren't used for at least six months a year. Even Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy — a self-proclaimed Swiftie — joined the chorus of opposition, warning it could set off a dangerous trend among other Northeastern states. 'We don't like that tax,' Portnoy said. 'Now, I don't have any houses in Rhode Island, but I got some pretty close. I don't like those states getting the ideas.' Lawmakers say it's aimed at generating new revenue from properties often vacant for most of the year. Other famous celebrities who have real estate in Rhode Island and would get hit by the tax include Jay Leno, Conan O'Brien and Judge Judy Sheindlin. But critics argue it unfairly targets families and individuals who have spent decades summering in Rhode Island — and contribute to the economy without draining local resources. Local realtor and lifelong Watch Hill resident Geb Masterson said Rhode Island residents are so angry they're threatening to go elsewhere if the bill becomes law. 'These are people who put very little drain on Westerly and Watch Hill,' Masterson told DailyMail of two communities that will be hit hardest. 'It's just another way to go after the wealthy when the state's funds run dry... It's another nail in the coffin.' The Rhode Island House of Representatives recently greenlit the proposed $13.9 billion state budget that includes the sweeping new real estate tax, which Masterson says residents are furious over. On Wednesday, Rhode Island Gov. Daniel J. McKee put the bill in limbo temporarily, saying he will not sign nor veto the $14.3 billion state budget as it stands because 'it taxes people and raises fees unnecessarily.' 'At this moment in time there wasn't a need to raise taxes on anyone,' he said, not fully ruling out future taxes on part-time residents. Gov. McKee's move isn't the same as a veto and the bill can move forward if revised to his liking. If the budget had been vetoed, the General Assembly would have to go back into session to override the veto, or make amendments to the budget. 'This won't affect just the wealthy, everyone will be affected by this,' Masterson, the Watch Hill resident, said of the potential new tax. 'It's a lot of old families here and for years it was a sort of a quiet sleepy town, most people have been coming here for generations with their parents. 'It' sort of changed a little a little bit, new blood has been coming into the area, the Swifties, which is actually fantastic for our summer tourism industry, because they come to see Taylor's house then they stay the weekend.' Masterson says tourism industry workers will feel the burn if homeowners start to flee the area because of the big tax. 'There's not a lot of winter industry around here so when the summer crowd comes in it's supporting a lot of a lot of people,' he says. 'This will hurt them too if no one is here.' If a law does pass in the future, Swift will face her own six-figure tax on her $17 million Watch Hill estate. Swift has famously owned the mansion in the upmarket beach town since 2013 and spends July 4th there nearly every year. Under the guise of helping Rhode Island's affordability crisis, those who have 'non-primary residences valued over $1 million' will be taxed under the proposal. Overall, homeowners would face an annual surcharge of $2.50 per $500 of assessed value above the first $1 million — meaning a $3 million second home would see a $10,000 yearly fee. Swift and her beachfront estate neighbors would likely get taxed $100,000 and up based on the size of their mansions. The budget also proposes a 63 percent hike in the real estate conveyance tax, which sellers pay upon transferring property. The state says revenue from both tax hikes would go toward affordable housing projects, including the construction of low-income units and expansion of housing tax credits. Kerry Park, a senior vice president Rhode Island Association of Realtors, tells DailyMail that many people who have median priced second homes are going to get hit hard. 'We do have a lot of smaller homes that are near the ocean. Since the pandemic those little tiny places are a lot of money now and if they've been in the family for generations now they're going to have to come up with this annual tax which isn't easy for a lot of those people,' she said. Watch Hill realtor Larry Burns warns the economic backlash of the tax will be brutal. Burns specializes in coastal and luxury properties, and says the impact of the tax will trickle down to longtime residents who are not wealthy, and to local economies. 'Rhode Island economy for the most part is driven by tourism, especially in all in New England especially coastal state like Rhode Island,' he told the Daily Mail. The beaches in Watch Hill are popular among residents who summer in the town 'And it's really going to discourage people from buying second homes here because of the added expense.' He continued: 'There's people like Taylor Swift — people will look at her and think, 'Well, she has so much money she'll never even notice an increase like this.' 'But it's not like the residents here have inexhaustible resources. '$100,000 here might be college education for the year for a kid, or two kids.' Burns added the tax could force many to part with cherished family homes. 'There's a lot of older folks or multigenerational properties where the siblings have inherited the property, and if you keep adding expenses people end up selling because they can't keep up with the cost,' he said. Local business owner James Nicholas, who is the fourth generation of his family to run St. Clair Annex, an ice cream shop down the hill from Swift's estate (yes, she's been in the shop and is lovely), put it best. 'As one of the people who run small businesses that benefit from from summer residents, I'm thinking of others like landscapers, lumber yards, contractors, pool companies who are are relying on these summer visitors,' he said. 'It's not the golden bullet that the people think it is that we're just gonna text rich people and nothing's gonna happen. There's downstream consequences. 'There's a stratum of society that can absorb that cost, but regular people, maybe they don't put an addition on the house, don't you know go to the local restaurants or they don't shop at the local shops as much, taxing them is short sighted thinking.' Whether the tax becomes law down the line remains uncertain, but Burns, the local realtor, says it could go either way.
