I say to Senator Lieberman, I would share your view that the President is the No. 1 customer of the intelligence that comes forward. I think he may well need a No. 1 adviser to help assimilate all of it. But let's go back now. Would it normally be that the person who walks in there and looks the President in the eye--should not that person have line, control, and supervision over the people who provided him with that intelligence? And isn't that the only way he can be held responsible for the brief and the opinions to the President, if he obtained the information from sources that are accountable to him or her? Whereas, in this case, if the NID does it, and the information is coming up through the vast CIA network around the world, as it most often would be--not always but most often would be--then, isn't that a weakness in our concept here?
Pete Sessions: “I say to Senator Lieberman, I would share your view that the President is the No. 1 customer of the intelligence that…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the role of the National Intelligence Director in relation to presidential intelligence.
Share
More from Pete Sessions
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And Chairman Comer, I want to thank you for your not only meeting with at least Republicans before this hearing, but expressing your confidence that you believe that we could have a thoughtful meeting…
I rise to recognize Kathleen Spillane, chief of the Civil Works Branch for the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District. In this role, Kathy oversees a comprehensive portfolio of critical water resources development…
The purpose of this hearing is to begin this face-to-face investigation by the IG.
I cannot agree with is the way we have a political philosophy by the Democratic Party that we are going to open up completely our borders without regard for national security, without regard for the law, without regard for common sense…





