Monday, July 21, 2025

The Fount of USIC Corruption (SSCI) is Wee Wee'd Up Over Tulsi!

"Tulsi Bad!"
The response from Chairman Tom Cotton and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to the action of DNI Tulsi Gabbard was predictable.

The SSCI has now framed the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 [LINK] to modify the “responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence.” [Section 402]

We knew this was coming. The Intelligence Community does not like rogue actors amid their ranks, especially if those people have cross-silo access. The silo system is designed to protect the Deep State. Any entity who can cross reference the inserted information becomes a risk to the enterprise.

Senator Cotton cannot directly oppose Tulsi Gabbard without exposing himself. Thus someone, not the SSCI, writes the legislative changes to the Intelligence Community rules and procedures and Tom Cotton simply advances them. That’s the way DC operates.
Additionally, Chairman Cotton does not want the DNI to investigate or generate its own intelligence. Cotton demands the ODNI just accept and regurgitate the intelligence Tulsi Gabbard would be given by the other agencies; no independent review of analysis permitted. All of these actions push the Intelligence Community power center back into the CIA and away from the prying eyes of the DNI. That’s the SSCI motive.
WASHINGTON DC – A top Republican senator is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, slashing the workforce of an organization that has expanded since it was created in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Under a bill by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the chair of the Intelligence Committee, the ODNI’s staff of about 1,600 would be capped at 650, according to a senior Senate aide familiar with the proposed legislation.

ODNI’s workforce was about 2,000 in January, but National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard has already overseen a reduction of about 20% as part of the Trump administration’s drive to shrink the federal workforce. The reduction in the staff Gabbard oversees could weaken her role in the intelligence bureaucracy.

[…] The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, exposed a failure to share information across spy agencies with catastrophic results. As a result, Congress established the ODNI to oversee all of the country’s 18 intelligence services, including the CIA, and manage bureaucratic turf wars from a complex outside Washington, D.C.

What started as a relatively small office under the national intelligence director in 2005 has expanded over the last 20 years to include in-house analysis teams and centers focused on counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Cotton has described the ODNI as a bloated bureaucracy that should return to its original mission of coordinating the work of other spy agencies instead of producing its own reports and duplicating other agencies’ efforts.

“Congress in no way wanted yet another unruly bureaucracy layered on top of an already bureaucratic intelligence community,” Cotton said at Gabbard’s confirmation hearing in late January. “Unfortunately, 20 years later, that’s exactly what the ODNI has become.”

Gabbard herself expressed support for downsizing the ODNI’s workforce at the hearing, saying she would work with Cotton and other lawmakers to eliminate “redundancies and bloating.” (read more)
In the lead up to the election I outlined what the DNI could do with untapped power already given to the office. DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been following a path close to that outline. Now, we see Washington DC responding to that affirmed power structure and actively working to neuter the DNI. A very predictable outcome.

The only intelligence silo more corrupt than the CIA is the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that oversees it.
The UniParty SSCI (Where R's & D's Don't Matter):
Enforcers of the Post-WWII Neoliberal Open Society Consensus
Where democracy goes to die!

31 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tom Cotton, white supremacist and certifiable idiot.

    Tulsa Gabbard, an incompetent over her head loyalist to the Insurectionist FOTUS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tulsi - a target of the same Muh Russia smear machine under Hillary/ Barrack.

      Delete
    2. ps - The fact that you didn't smear Warner (D) as a racist simply highlights and illustrates the depth of your TDS.

      Delete
    3. ...induced through white guilt-pride and party politics, not reasoned judgement surrounding any related FACTS.

      Delete
    4. Copilot: Smearing typically implies spreading false, misleading, or malicious information with the intent to damage someone’s reputation. If what you're saying is demonstrably true and said in good faith—even if it's uncomfortable or unflattering—it's not a smear. That said, context matters:

      - 🧭 Intent: Are you trying to inform, critique, or destroy?

      - 🗣️ Tone and framing: Even truth can be weaponized if it's exaggerated, cherry-picked, or delivered in a way that distorts perception.

      - 👥 Audience impact: If your truth causes reputational harm, people might label it a smear—regardless of its factual basis.

      It’s a little like calling someone out publicly for lying. If it’s true, you’re illuminating their behavior; if it’s distorted or out of context, it becomes character assassination. [End]

      Tulsi Gabbard is smearing Barack Obama.

      Delete
    5. In the exact way Obama's weaponized USIC smeared Trump! Imagine that! Tit-4-tat. In 3 or 4 years we'll find out who gets "convicted". Lawfare is MAD (mutually assured destruction).

      Delete
  3. I'm not the deranged one. But believe on little one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^^Loves Mark Warner and the corrupt SSCI^^

      Globalism uber alles, right Les?

      Delete
  4. And yes, the world is now global. Get used to it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If so, who do you think is running it?

      Delete
    2. Is it a dictatorship of the proletariat?

      Delete
    3. You and Trotsky would have made fine companions.

      Delete
    4. ...but maybe not. HE wasn't a surrender monkey.

      Delete
  5. Actually, Trotsky would have been far better than Lenin. And I could have worked with a guy like Trotsky. Would have had him seeing things my way in short order. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would he? He couldn't brook Stalin's "national" communism. Why would he surrender to your redistributionist compromise with capital?

      Delete
  6. Dunno know. Perhaps you should see a psychic and maybe you can get in touch with him and ask him.

    Metninks your conditioning is complete my friend. I continue to seek. Maybe I'll see ya on the seekers path one day. Nah. Likely not.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Enjoy your suffering cause that us where your path leads to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Call me Robert Frost. I prefer the road less travelled.

      Delete
  8. Fine by me. Call yourself whatever trips your trigger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will. And I'll call you whatever trips it as well.

      Delete