Congressional Democrats and President Donald Trump are headed for a standoff over his appointment of Bill Pulte as “acting” director of national intelligence — and a crucial government surveillance authority is caught in the middle.
As opposition to Pulte’s appointment grows, top Democrats on Capitol Hill are threatening to block an extension of the government’s warrantless surveillance authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act unless the White House reverses course.
It’s a hardball tactic that puts the authority at risk of expiring by next Friday’s deadline — a confrontation Democrats argue is worth having.
Pulte, who is currently the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has no prior intelligence experience, leading lawmakers in both parties to argue he lacks the background for the role. (Federal law says any individual nominated for appointment as national intelligence director must have “extensive national security expertise.”)
Democrats also are pointing to Pulte’s tenure at the housing agency, where he pursued mortgage fraud allegations involving several Trump adversaries, as evidence that he could use access to sensitive intelligence for political purposes.
“There is no circumstance where Bill Pulte should be the acting Director of National Intelligence for the United States of America. Period. Full stop,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Wednesday. “This decision to elevate him, as someone who’s deeply unqualified and deeply dangerous, certainly puts Democratic support for FISA in jeopardy.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., struck a similar note, saying the timing of Pulte’s appointment “could not be worse” with the surveillance authority nearing expiration.
“This announcement and its timing clearly make passing an extension much harder,” Schumer said.
The dispute centers on Section 702 of the FISA Act, a surveillance authority enacted in 2008 that allows the government to collect foreign intelligence by targeting non-U.S. persons abroad. In the process, communications involving Americans may be incidentally collected, prompting objections from privacy hawks.
Section 702 has long created unusual coalitions on Capitol Hill, uniting privacy-minded Democrats and Republicans against intelligence-focused members in both parties. The issue is especially sensitive in the Senate, where any extension typically requires support from both parties to clear the 60-vote threshold.
Now, Pulte’s appointment is threatening to upend months of bipartisan negotiations.
Senators were zeroing in on a compromise to extend Section 702 for three years with some small changes, including more transparency and accountability, according to a source familiar with the situation who requested anonymity to discuss the private negotiations.
The negotiations come ahead of a June 12 deadline that was set after Congress twice passed short-term extensions. The Senate had been expected to take up a compromise after finishing work on the GOP’s immigration enforcement package this week, with the House then supposed to consider whatever the Senate approved.
But Pulte’s appointment has made the path forward less clear.
“It had problems then,” a House Democrat said of the FISA talks, “so now you’re on Pulte, and it’s gonna harden the opposition to it.”
The Democrat added that the FISA compromise “is on life support right now.”
“And it’s unfortunate because it’s such an important tool that people in the Intelligence Committee use all the time,” the lawmaker added.
The pressure campaign began with Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee and a key supporter of Section 702. According to a person familiar with the matter, Warner urged Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., to press Trump to reverse Pulte’s appointment.
The person said Warner warned that if the appointment stands, all options remain on the table, including sinking the FISA deal.
Asked about the threat Wednesday, Warner confirmed that “all the options” are “on the table at this point.”
“I hope it can still be resolved,” he said. “Should have been dealt with earlier.”
Warner said opposition to Pulte extends beyond Democrats, adding that many Republicans are also critical of the choice.
“Section 702 is the most important tool we have to protect our country. But I wonder, does the President want to kill Section 702?” Warner asked.
“I’ve yet to talk to a Republican that doesn’t think this is an outrageous choice,” Warner said. “Is anybody gonna tell the emperor in the White House that he has no clothes on this one? We’ll see.”
Some Republican lawmakers are beginning to voice those concerns publicly.
Recommended
“I see no evidence of any qualifications for that job,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who just lost re-election to a Trump-backed primary challenger, told MS NOW this week.
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., also noted in a statement, “Very few Senate-confirmable positions come with statutory eligibility requirements.”
“There are good reasons why the Director of National Intelligence is one of them,” McConnell said. “Anyone performing this role of such immense public trust must have the extensive national security experience required by statute, and no nominee who falls short of this requirement will earn my vote.”
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-La., a former FBI agent, said Pulte “shouldn’t be there,” citing his lack of intelligence experience.
“He’s got no background in intelligence,” Fitzpatrick said. “Fifteen years as an FBI agent in the [intelligence community], I chair the CIA subcommittee now. I’ve never met him and never had any exposure to him whatsoever in intelligence.”
But Fitzpatrick said Section 702 should not be pulled into the Pulte disagreement.
“The FISA vote ought to stick to the policy of FISA,” he told reporters. “It’s a very, very important tool.”
Meanwhile, GOP leaders are choosing their words carefully. Asked this week if he believes Pulte has the experience to be acting national intelligence director, Thune deferred to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who also dodged the question.
“We have four more weeks with Director Gabbard as the DNI,” he responded, referring to Tulsi Gabbard, who officially will depart the administration on June 30.
“And Pulte?” a reporter asked.
“I have no observations on the matter,” Cotton responded.
Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters that “the president obviously has a prerogative of choice on who he appoints to these positions,” and he said it was “absolutely outrageous” for Democrats to hold up FISA over Pulte.
“I’m calling on Democrat colleagues, put the politics aside for the sake of FISA reauthorization, if nothing else,” Johnson said. “This is the statute that keeps Americans safe, and if we want to prevent terrorist attacks on the homeland, we cannot allow that to go dark.”
Beyond his lack of intelligence experience, Democrats are also zeroing in on Pulte’s pursuit of Trump’s political opponents during his tenure at the Federal Housing Finance Agency. During that time, Pulte recommended the Justice Department investigate a number of Democrats for mortgage fraud, including New York Attorney General Letitia James; Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; and Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook.
All three have found themselves at odds with Trump, leading Democrats to denounce the referrals as politically motivated.
With Pulte now overseeing parts of the United States’ intelligence apparatus, Democrats are concerned he may take more vindictive actions using information he learns on the job.
“Could you imagine trying to convince people to vote for a guy whose only qualification seems to be his taking confidential mortgage information and using it to weaponize?” Warner said. “If you can weaponize mortgage information, and now we’re gonna give them the keys to all of the intelligence community information?”
Ali Vitali, Syedah Asghar, Jack Fitzpatrick and Lillie Boudreaux contributed.