Campaign Action
The occupier of the Oval Office has suggested via tweet, of course, that pending the confirmation of his lackey and conspiracy theorist Rep. John Ratcliffe as director of national intelligence, he'll choose an acting director for the organization. Furthermore, CNN reports that he "may go outside the normal protocol" in bypassing ODNI deputy director Sue Gordon as the acting chief during the confirmation process. National security reporter Natasha Bertrand says her sources tell her Gordon has been informed she "would not be considered to replace Coats, and that she would not be selected to serve as the acting, which came as a surprise to her & other intel professionals."
That might be surprising because what the administration is calling "outside the normal protocol" is illegal. Robert Chesney writes at Lawfare that "The president does not have discretion in this matter, however, so long as there is a current principal deputy."
The question comes down to which statute rules in this situation: the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) which gives the president great flexibility and discretion, or the 2004 statute called the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) that created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the director position. In Chesney's reading of the statutes, the IRTPA rules, and Gordon would be the deputy by law. "It is specifically on point for this office and situation. Its language is not vague. Its language is not ambiguous. It uses the compulsory word 'shall' in order to vest the acting director role in the principal deputy in this specific scenario."
But there's a bad precedent that comes immediately to mind: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In this same situation, the White House Office of Legal Counsel overrode the statute creating the bureau and the position and an appeals court agreed with it.
Chesney argues that the statute for the DNI position is stronger than the CFPB law because the "CFPB had provision akin to the language[…] in which the IRTPA addresses the FVRA as to all other ODNI offices but expressly excludes the DNI position from that analysis." That means the statute makes clear that among all the positions in the ODNI, the one the president doesn't get to mess around with is the director. This was on purpose. Congress was trying very hard in creating this position to keep it from being partisan and allowing it to elevate career professionals over toadies.
Ratcliffe is a toady: one who has lied about his intelligence and national security experience (he has none) and has probably lied about more than that. He's woefully unqualified for the job and is largely up for it because he won't try to curtail Russian interference in our elections and the Trump administration.
Trump is trying to force out a well-qualified and respected woman, Susan Gordon, and illegally install his own people, which is a very dangerous thing. It's also one more thing to add to the articles of impeachment against him.