Trump's Intelligence Pick Can't Even Say Who Won in 2020.

VOTE COULD HAPPEN TONIGHT: TELL CONGRESS TO REJECT CLAYTON

On July 15, Jay Clayton sat before the Senate Intelligence Committee asking senators to trust him with one of the most powerful jobs in American government: Director of National Intelligence, the official who oversees all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies and is responsible for keeping this country safe.

He could not even bring himself to say Joe Biden won the 2020 election.

That should be disqualifying on its own. It is not the only reason it is.

Who is Jay Clayton, and why is he up for this job?

Trump nominated Clayton, a U.S. Attorney and former SEC chair, to be the permanent Director of National Intelligence. This came after Trump’s first pick for the role, Bill Pulte, drew bipartisan criticism for having no intelligence background at all. Clayton is supposed to be the more credible alternative.

But Clayton has no professional background in intelligence or national security either. He has spent most of his career representing major investment banks in international deals, which raises real questions about whether he would prioritize corporate financial interests over national security when it counts. And he has already shown a willingness to carry water for this administration’s worst instincts, from defending Trump’s proposed $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” slush fund to going on television to promote conspiracy theories about California’s primary election results.

This nomination also lands at a critical moment. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which governs how the government can conduct warrantless surveillance, has lapsed, and lawmakers have been unwilling to extend it in part because of concerns about the qualifications of the people running our intelligence agencies. Confirming Clayton without a real accounting of his fitness for the job would only compound the problem.

The hearing made the case against him

His confirmation hearing, before the Senate Intelligence Committee, gave Democratic senators the chance to test whether Clayton has the independence and judgment the job demands. He failed that test repeatedly.

He would not say who won the 2020 election. Senators Mark Warner of Virginia, Mark Kelly of Arizona, Jon Ossoff of Georgia, and independent Angus King of Maine each separately asked Clayton a simple question: did Joe Biden win the 2020 presidential election? Clayton dodged every time. He told Warner he wasn’t an “election denier” and noted that Biden had been certified as president, while insisting there was still significant work to do to improve the country’s electoral processes. When King pressed him further, Clayton grew visibly frustrated and repeated the same non-answer rather than simply saying the words. Ossoff did not mince words about what that evasion means for the job Clayton wants, asking him point-blank whether it was humiliating to dodge the question just to avoid contradicting the president’s delusions.

If a man cannot say a plainly true, settled fact about American democracy in a job interview, Americans have no reason to believe he will tell the president uncomfortable truths once he is in the room.

He subpoenaed journalists and could not fully explain why. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon pressed Clayton about subpoenas he issued, in his current role as U.S. Attorney, to New York Times journalists who had reported on potential security flaws in the president’s new Qatari-donated Air Force One. Wyden questioned whether the subpoenas even followed the administration’s own policy requiring prosecutors to exhaust other options before going after reporters. Clayton’s answer amounted to saying he had consulted his team before signing off, without addressing the substance of the concern. Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado followed up by asking Clayton directly whether he had talked to the Trump administration before issuing those subpoenas, a question that goes to the heart of whether the nation’s next intelligence chief would use his power independently or as a tool for the White House to go after unfavorable press coverage.

He claimed to know nothing about Tulsi Gabbard’s involvement in a domestic political raid. Ossoff also asked Clayton what he knew about outgoing DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s presence at FBI raids of election offices in Fulton County, Georgia earlier this year, raids tied to the president’s debunked fraud claims about the 2020 election. Ossoff noted that the Senate Intelligence Committee is actively probing Gabbard’s role in those raids. Clayton claimed he had only learned of Gabbard’s involvement the day before, in a private meeting with Ossoff himself. Warner, the committee’s top Democrat, said afterward that it strained credibility to believe Clayton would walk into this hearing unprepared for a question about one of the most scrutinized episodes involving the very office he wants to lead.

Taken together, these exchanges paint a clear picture: a nominee unwilling to state basic facts, unable or unwilling to draw a line between law enforcement power and political convenience, and either unprepared or unwilling to reckon with his predecessor’s role in politicizing domestic law enforcement around elections.

What happens next

Last week, the Senate Intelligence Committee recommended Clayton to the full Senate in a narrow 9-8 vote. And last night, the Senate held a procedural vote to advance Clayton’s ​nomination. A final confirmation vote is expected as soon as this evening. That gives us a narrow window to make our voices heard.

Take action now

Call your senators. Tell them Jay Clayton is not qualified to run America’s intelligence community and that you expect them to vote no.

You can reach the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121, and they will connect you directly to your senators’ offices. You can find your two Senators using this link and here is the link to see the members of the Intelligence Committee.

Sample call script:

“Hi, my name is [your name] and I’m a constituent from [your city/town]. I’m calling to urge Senator [name] to vote no on Jay Clayton’s nomination for Director of National Intelligence. Clayton has no intelligence or national security background, he refused to say who won the 2020 election in his confirmation hearing, and he couldn’t give straight answers about subpoenas issued against journalists or his knowledge of Tulsi Gabbard’s role in the Fulton County election raids. This is one of the most important national security posts in government, and it should not go to someone unwilling to tell the truth or push back on political pressure. Please vote no, and please urge your colleagues to do the same. Thank you.”

Share this post. The more people who understand what happened in this hearing, the harder it is for the Senate to quietly wave this nomination through.

America’s intelligence community deserves a leader with real experience, real independence, and the willingness to tell hard truths, even to the president. Jay Clayton has shown us that he is not that person.