As far as I know He was always there for Trump from day 1 and I will forever respect him for this. Even when others questioned J6 and the election in the very beginning Kash never waivered. He's one of the most honorable.
There first has to be a decision as to whether any kind of "central" intelligence agency is needed. The original justification was to coordinate and synthesize intelligence from other agencies: military, diplomatic, earth sciences. If not, eliminate the CIA. But if so, determine its necessary functions and properties.
Then take charge of the CIA and declare there will be CIA1 and CIA2, with the present CIA being CIA1 and CIA2 being at present unpopulated. Then start hiring for CIA2, allowing CIA1 staff to apply. Pick whoever passes muster. Progressively start transferring portfolios from CIA1 to CIA2. When all portfolios are transferred, and CIA1 has no more function, and all the allowable transfers have taken place, declare CIA1 to be superfluous to requirements and slated for decommissioning. The staff have the option of applying to other agencies or taking early retirement. It might be effective to give the CIA2 a different name to fully establish the transformation. There should, of course, be physical and administrative firewalls between CIA1 and CIA2 during this process. (Trust me, any CIA personnel should adapt to this environment easily. It is no different than handling compartmented material.)
Some might advise removing such a CIA2 to another facility, but that's a hard call. The existing facility at Langley probably represents a significant investment in infrastructure and data hardcopy / digital copy and might logically be retained.
Just because you have a fixed idea does not mean the answer is "obvious." There is a substantial problem of resolving conflicting intelligence information. I'm not keen on the CIA, but I don't dismiss the problem. If you have a better solution, I'm all ears.
Kash won't be the director, he's the wrecking crew. u/#q129
Yes. I'm sure POTUS has something special in mind for Kash.
I hope so! Kash deserves it, he’s one of the few that I felt was loyal and wanting the same things as President Trump.
As far as I know He was always there for Trump from day 1 and I will forever respect him for this. Even when others questioned J6 and the election in the very beginning Kash never waivered. He's one of the most honorable.
Trump values loyalty highly. So anybody who stuck with him the last 4 years will not be forgotten.
He has to become the director first to wreck it. And then he will move on
I hope that is the case.
Chop it down ----- pull up the stump so it won't grow back.
Burn them both and cast the ashes into the wind.
There first has to be a decision as to whether any kind of "central" intelligence agency is needed. The original justification was to coordinate and synthesize intelligence from other agencies: military, diplomatic, earth sciences. If not, eliminate the CIA. But if so, determine its necessary functions and properties.
Then take charge of the CIA and declare there will be CIA1 and CIA2, with the present CIA being CIA1 and CIA2 being at present unpopulated. Then start hiring for CIA2, allowing CIA1 staff to apply. Pick whoever passes muster. Progressively start transferring portfolios from CIA1 to CIA2. When all portfolios are transferred, and CIA1 has no more function, and all the allowable transfers have taken place, declare CIA1 to be superfluous to requirements and slated for decommissioning. The staff have the option of applying to other agencies or taking early retirement. It might be effective to give the CIA2 a different name to fully establish the transformation. There should, of course, be physical and administrative firewalls between CIA1 and CIA2 during this process. (Trust me, any CIA personnel should adapt to this environment easily. It is no different than handling compartmented material.)
Some might advise removing such a CIA2 to another facility, but that's a hard call. The existing facility at Langley probably represents a significant investment in infrastructure and data hardcopy / digital copy and might logically be retained.
JFK already did this ----- IMO the answer is obvious.
Just because you have a fixed idea does not mean the answer is "obvious." There is a substantial problem of resolving conflicting intelligence information. I'm not keen on the CIA, but I don't dismiss the problem. If you have a better solution, I'm all ears.