Coats leaving as DNI and possibly being replaced by Ratcliffe: a regrettable situation

Coats has been a straight shooter from the get-go.

While he probably personally felt that the JCPOA was a bad idea, he reported that Iran was complying with its terms when Trump pulled out. Conversely, Coats poured cold water on Trump's coziness with Kim by telling Congress that North Korea would most certainly keep bolstering its nuclear capability, which it has.

(By the way, here's a great op-ed in the Washington Times by retired CIA officer Charles Faddis inviting us to consider that, given that Iran and North Korea are kindred spirits with a documented partnership, Iran may be looking at just buying some nukes off the shelf from NorKor.)

I'd like to see more specifics about this claim, but it does fit with so many people's observations about the Very Stable Genius's style of presiding:

In a sign of how dysfunctional President Trump’s relationship with the intelligence community has become already, some senior spies and analysts say having a political ally as DNI may not make much of a difference at this point. Trump, these senior officials point out, pays only sporadic attention to his daily briefings, routinely ignores analysis that contradicts his own views, and in many cases pursues policies that analysts have concluded are fruitless or misguided.

And given that Ratcliffe, whose background is as a Texas prosecutor and whose experience with intelligence is limited to seven months on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and given that he has an established track record as a Trump devotee, there's not likely to be a dissenting voice when push comes to shove in various world-stage situations.

So far, other great people in intelligence, national security and diplomacy functions seem likely to stick around for the tim being. It's just a matter of them getting the president's ear before any sycophants do.