Dem
47
GOP
53
We had an item last week about the dilemma surrounding the post of Director of National Intelligence. In short, Donald Trump wants to install Bill Pulte on an acting basis. Pulte is absolutely unqualified for the job, and all he would do as DNI is abuse his position to either provide propaganda in support of Trump's various foreign policy "adventures," or to provide information to weaponize against Trump's enemies (see above for more on this general point).
The members of Congress do not want Pulte on the job for even a single minute, even though he's legally entitled to act as DNI, as he is Senate-confirmed to another position. In an effort to stop this from happening, both chambers of Congress declined to extend FISA last Thursday, meaning that the legal basis for collecting some forms of intelligence on foreigners has temporarily expired. In exchange for renewal, the members demanded that Trump: (1) nominate a permanent DNI, and one who is qualified and (2) not allow Pulte to do the job, for even one day. Congress got one of the two things it demanded, in that Trump did nominate a more appropriate candidate, namely U.S. Attorney for SDNY Jay Clayton.
Taking stock of the situation, and noting that the House is out of town until next Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) has developed a plan. He wants to rush the Clayton nomination, so that confirmation will be complete by the end of the week. Presumably, even someone as corrupt as Pulte can't do too much damage in just 4 days.
In order to make this happen, certain steps in the process will have to be done with unanimous consent, and without debate. Is it worth it to all 100 senators to do virtually no vetting of Clayton, so as to 86 Pulte? It just might be. This is a very unusual way for the Senate to lay down the law, but it's probably the best that Thune, et al. can do, under the circumstances. (Z)