against it. we are doing that and democrats and what you saw with senator schumer and others essentially grandstanding. a big change at the top of our intelligence apparatus, former colleague senator dan coats is going to be leaving, john ratcliff coming in. some complaints he may be too partisan. mike pompeo believes in him. he is very smart, i m confident he will do a good job. people said i would be too political to be the director too. i hope history will inform us all that that wasn t the case, i did my job, delivered on behalf of the american people in an appropriate way and didn t allow politics to interfere with delivering important timely
the discourse we have. obviously pointing out problems where policies have failed is something that is part of the public debate and i think if you look at areas of this country that haven t done well and the kind of leadership they have had over the years paints a clear contrast between the kind of leadership we want to see not only for cities or states that our country and is a clear stark contrast between that and what the democrats want to see, more socialistic policies which lead to the kinds of outcomes the president was talking about. thanks for your time. democrats opposing john ratcliff s nomination to be director of national intelligence arguing donald trump becomes solely based on loyalty in his line of questioning of robert mueller last week. let s bring in the shown and former deputy assistant attorney general john you, great to have you. former cia director john brennan is not impressed.
their lives to the satellite, the technology and analysis yochlt u have to have a deep background in world affairs, profound, you can t just wikipedia for the problems. so again, this candidate the wonderfully named congressman ratcliff that s a screen writer s cream, he just shouldn t be anywhere near the office of the director of national intelligence. think about the people we had, jim clapper, people like that that knew what they were doing and gave their life to intelligence and you put a ho monkey in there. you ve been critical of previous presidents and decisions based on intelligence they have received but you say this isis approaching a very dangerous bottom. can you explain? some people say this is a guy who may be able to have the president s ear because clearly the president believes he s very loyal and performance during the
and he has found it appears to me the perfect sick of it. someone who is utterly unqualified and profoundly unqualified to be the director of national intelligence and anderson, i heard someone on cnn saying well, you can learn on the job, no, you can t. like learning to be a brain surgeon on the job except that intelligence work is much, much tougher. it takes you can learn on the job if you have 20 years or 30 years but you got to understand everything from agents risking their lives to the satellite, the technology and analysis you have to have a deep background in world affairs, profound, you can t just wikipedia for the problems. so again, this candidate the wonderfully named congressman ratcliff that s a screen writer s cream, he just shouldn t be anywhere near the office of the director of
heads with his boss, publicly contradicting him multiple times, john ratcliff is a former us attorney with intelligence background during the george w. bush administration, got a lot of attention with his aggressive questioning of robert mueller on wednesday. can you give me an example other than donald trump or the justice department determined and investigated person was not exonerated, innocence was not conclusively determined. i cannot but this is unique. you can t find it because it doesn t exist. that was on last wednesday. ratcliff has to pass the senate vote to get the job. the moment he was announced democrats began pouncing on the