[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 106 (Wednesday, June 24, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3174-S3175]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4876
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, first of all, I want to thank my friend
from Delaware. I am going to take that admonition, as we approach the
Fourth of July, and reflect back on, obviously, what makes this country
great.
Mr. President, I rise today to ask for unanimous consent on my bill
to reassert congressional will when it comes to the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence.
My bill, the Do Not Interfere in Our Intelligence Act of 2026, or the
DNII Act of 2026, would strengthen the existing line of succession if
the position of the Director of National Intelligence is vacant and
ensure that the leadership of the intelligence community remains in the
hands of experienced Senate-confirmed national security officials.
As my colleagues have heard me say repeatedly, the President's
appointment of Bill Pulte to be the Acting DNI is dangerous. It is
dangerous for the rule of law. It is dangerous for our national
security.
The ODNI was created in the aftermath of the tragic terrorist attacks
of 9/11. Its purpose was to make sure that the now-18 intelligence
Agencies actually coordinated with each other, so we didn't have the
kind of intelligence missteps that led to the most devastating
terrorist attack on our country in the history. And, thus far, thank
God, we have not had another 9/11.
And because of its important mission, when Congress created the ODNI,
an effort championed by my good friend Susan Collins, it codified into
law--we didn't leave any ambiguity--it codified into law that the
Director of National Intelligence must have extensive national security
experience. It doesn't matter whether that comes from military service,
being an intelligence officer, being a Member of Congress on a national
security committee, or heading an Agency that deals with national
security. You just have to have the experience and the judgment to lead
18 intelligence Agencies and understand their mission.
Unfortunately, Trump's choice Bill Pulte has literately no national
security experience. In fact, it seems like the only experience he
has--and the only reason President Trump installed him as the DNI--is
leaking and weaponizing sensitive information for political purposes.
He is and currently remains the head of our mortgage regulatory
Agencies. So that kind of person can absolutely not have access to all
our Nation's most sensitive secrets.
If you think we were, like, just making it up, look at the pressure
points so far. The guy has gone in for a few days. There are reports of
firings. I don't even know how he knows who the people who are being
fired or reassigned are.
We have heard, as well, that he wants to take home the Presidential
daily brief. Anybody--the most junior aide in national security--knows
you don't take classified information to your private residence. But in
a very kind of way that reflects some of the folks around the
President, the one thing he was most interested in: When is he going to
get a government plane, paid for by taxpayer dollars, so he can zip
between DC and his house in Chicago and his place near President Trump
in Florida? Remember, those are your taxpayer dollars at work.
And on these concerns about Mr. Pulte, don't take my word for it. So
many Republican colleagues of mine have also publicly expressed their
concerns, many of them explicitly expressing surprise at his nomination
and calling him unqualified.
But that is not the only place where President Trump has decided to
ignore Congress and the law creating the Director of National
Intelligence. The law also explicitly states that, in the event there
is an absence of a Senate-confirmed Director, ``the Principal Deputy
Director of National Intelligence''--that is the No. 2--``shall act
for, and exercise the powers of, the Director of National
Intelligence''--not ``may'' or ``if the President wants.'' The word is
``shall.''
And the interesting thing is, there is currently a Senate-confirmed
Principal Deputy whom President Trump himself nominated. This
gentleman, Mr. Lukas--I may not agree with all the things that Mr.
Lukas has suggested, but there is no question, given his decades of
patriotic service as a national intelligence officer and on President
Trump's own National Security Council staff, that he has the experience
and qualifications to serve as the Acting DNI.
So then, once again, I must ask: Why, when there is a qualified
individual--one President Trump himself nominated--would President
Trump ignore the law and install Bill Pulte?
The only answer is the one that President Trump has actually admitted
to. He said the quiet part out loud, which is that he trusts Bill Pulte
to recklessly divulge America's secrets--even if it harms our national
security--all in the service of the Big Lie and his obsession that he
can't get over the fact that he lost the election in 2020.
So my bill is quite simple. So I ask unanimous consent--let's make it
explicitly clear that, if the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence becomes vacant, you put in place the Principal Deputy or
someone else who has got intelligence experience that has been
confirmed by the Senate.
We have to do this before Mr. Pulte irreversibly harms our national
security.
Mr. President, now, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous
consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S.
4876, introduced yesterday; that the bill be considered read a third
time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be made and laid
upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence was formed after the 9/11 attacks, understandably, to try
to address some of the failures that led to those attacks.
Unfortunately, I think we can now assess, a couple of decades on, that
it is something of a failed experiment itself.
I remember my first days on the Intelligence Committee, when I sat
far down the dais from the distinguished vice chairman, and an ODNI
aide came in to brief us about a new fusion cell they had created to
fight against the Islamic State. And one of our senior members, Dan
Coats, who later himself became the DNI, observed that he was concerned
that, with the growing bureaucracy at the ODNI, pretty soon they would
need a fusion cell for their fusion cells.
Now, the vice chairman and I largely agree that the ODNI needs to be
downsized and streamlined, that it does perform some important
functions. We may not agree on every single particular. I think many of
those functions could be performed elsewhere.
But I have had an opportunity to speak, in the last few days, with
Acting Director Pulte. He agrees in those general terms with us that we
need to return the ODNI to its original size, scope, and mission by
spinning off some of these functional centers and sending intelligence
officers who have been detailed there back to their home Agencies so
they can do actual intelligence work. And if he continues the work that
the vice chairman and I have begun through the annual Intelligence
Authorization Act and that Director Gabbard started to carry out, I
think that is a win for our national security.
The vice chairman cited various media reports about Director Pulte. I
can't comment on all of them. It won't shock anyone to know that I
don't take CNN or the Washington Post as ironclad as the Lord's
Scripture. But there is one media report that I will comment on, since
I discussed it with Director Pulte: the claim that mass firings had
begun. That is not accurate. He informed me that, yes, a small
[[Page S3175]]
handful of front-office personnel are leaving Federal employment, which
is not at all uncommon when a senior leader leaves an Agency or one
comes into an Agency. But a small handful--maybe counted on one hand,
maybe two hands. He also said that a few dozen--around 45 or 50--career
officers are, in fact, returning to their home Agencies. I think that
is a step in the right direction. It is less than 5 percent of the
DNI's personnel. I might put a zero after that 5. I might put a 7 in
front of that 5 in terms of how many personnel need to go back to their
home Agencies.
A second point, if Director Pulte can, in fact, take these steps in
the right direction, I think that can benefit Jay Clayton, once he is
confirmed. Mr. Clayton will be able to inherit an organization that has
already been downsized, and he can hit the ground running on day one to
continue that work and to ensure that the DNI is promoting our
intelligence community's important work, not hindering it.
A third point, as President Trump has said, Jay Clayton is a patriot,
and he will make a great DNI once confirmed. I intend to hold a hearing
for Mr. Clayton in the weeks ahead. As the vice chairman knows, it is
not just our committee that moved at a very rapid pace to confirm Mr.
Clayton to this new post. I want to thank President Trump and the Trump
administration for moving at lightning speed as well. The FBI finished
its background check in record time. The intelligence community and the
Department of Justice helped Mr. Clayton through hundreds of advanced
policy questions in record time. Even the President's own White House
Counsel's Office completed Mr. Clayton's work in record time.
Of course, the backdrop here is the lapse in authorization for
section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The vice
chairman and I have worked well together to craft a bill that can get
60 votes in the Senate, 218 or more votes in the House. I wish we could
simply pass that bill. I think it is regrettable that Minority Leader
Schumer and Minority Leader Jeffries have linked together
reauthorization of section 702 with the confirmation of an official to
a position that really has very little to do with section 702 or, for
that matter, with operational activities of the intelligence community
at large.
So with those observations, I do, in fact, object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, just a few closing comments.
The chairman and I are working very well together. I know he has
probably taken some heat, so I don't want to say too many good things
about him on the floor for working so well together.
I would simply point out the part he left out about Mr. Clayton, when
we were trying to move fast and the White House was moving fast and
everything--all the paperwork--was done. We had a scheduled hearing for
Mr. Clayton. I was even getting some of our most ferocious opponents to
702 to probably waive some of their objections.
And at the last minute, with no notice to our committee or even to
Mr. Clayton, the President pulled his nomination. I have never heard of
a President complaining about moving too quickly on one of his
nominees.
On the size of the DNI, the chairman and I, we are working together.
I even am open to the notion that the office could be obliterated or
removed or potentially repurposed somewhere else. Again, that makes
sense. But it ought to be done in an orderly fashion. It ought to be
done by somebody with national security experience. It ought to be done
not in a way where he comes in on the first day--how did he even know
whom to fire?
So, again, we will agree to disagree on that, but--boy oh boy--let's
do it the right way.
And, again, I do hope--I look forward to asking Mr. Clayton
questions. But I know him, and I think he is--I know he respects the
Constitution, which is my first question to anybody. And I would point
out--and I am absolutely in favor of renewing 702 quickly--the good
news, though, is that the communication providers are still working
with us; we have not gone dark.
But I agree with the chairman that we need to move as quickly as
possible. But everybody has been pretty clear on this: We have to get a
real DNI in that office before we get that reauthorization.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed
to speak for 1 minute on the upcoming vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.