President Donald Trump's vanity, insecurity and love of lackeys continue to have a role in his decisions without any precedent in modern American history. The latest example is the pending departure of former Sen. Dan Coats, R-Indiana, as director of national intelligence. Coats' sin? Angering Trump by publicly agreeing with the vastly documented evidence that Russia sought to intervene in the 2016 election to help Trump beat Hillary Clinton.
To his credit, the nation's second-most powerful Republican isn't happy about this development. In a statement posted Sunday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, "The U.S. intelligence community works best when it is led by professionals who protect its work from political or analytical bias and who deliver unvarnished hard truths to political leaders in both the executive and legislative branches. Very often the news these briefings bring is unpleasant, but it is essential that we be confronted with the facts. Dan Coats was such a leader."
If McConnell is sincere, he shouldn't support Trump's nomination of a like-minded conspiracy-monger _ Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas _ to replace Coats. ABC News documented how Ratcliffe had exaggerated his intelligence credentials. The Washington Post reported that current and former intelligence officials call him "the least-qualified person ever nominated to oversee the country's intelligence agencies." Post columnist David Ignatius warned that Trump's selection of "an inexperienced, partisan politician" as the nation's top spy would make other nations less likely to trust the U.S. government with sensitive information. Coats was confirmed 85-12. If he's a loyalist, Ratcliffe shouldn't be.
