Morell didn't really regret

When the Politico interview of former CIA deputy director Michael J. Morell appeared, media reaction suggested that Morell regretted writing a New York Times op-ed endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.

Morell wrote, "I will do everything I can to ensure" the election of Hillary Clinton "as our 45th president."  He asserted that she was "highly qualified to be commander in chief[.] ... Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security."  Morell played the Putin card, claiming that Trump's positions on policy are "consistent with Russian, not American interests – endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea, and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States."  This former top CIA official offered no details on these bizarre claims.  Instead, he continued: "In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation."

In the Politico interview he claimed that he "had never been political before[,]" having "worked at this nonpolitical agency."  Morell said he "became political" with his endorsement of Clinton.  "[I] don't think it was a mistake."  Morell then indicated that he did not consider how a President Trump would react to Morell's endorsement of Clinton and to criticism from the heads of President Obama's intelligence agencies, including CIA director John Brennan.  Morell suggested that President Trump "must have thought ... 'Who are these guys? Are these guys out to get me? Is this a political organization, Can I think about them as a political organization when I become president?'"

Morell continued: "So, I think there was a significant downside to those of us who became political in that moment. So, if I could have thought of that, would I have ended up in a different place? I don't know. But it's something I didn't think about."

Morell's response is something Congress should indeed think about.  Look at that last comment: "those of us who became political" during the 2016 presidential election.  Seems like a pretty clear admission that Morell was not alone in meddling in domestic politics – that other senior officials in the intelligence community "became political" as well.  At the same time, none seems to have considered that Hillary Clinton could lose to Trump. How would the intelligence people defend their political transformation to the Trump administration?  By continuing the campaign of Russiagate innuendo by means of a stonewalling bureaucracy, backed by a media hostile to the Trump presidency.

Simply stated, is it more likely than not that the views expressed by Morell were shared by director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA director Brennan, and FBI head James Comey?

When the Politico interview of former CIA deputy director Michael J. Morell appeared, media reaction suggested that Morell regretted writing a New York Times op-ed endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.

Morell wrote, "I will do everything I can to ensure" the election of Hillary Clinton "as our 45th president."  He asserted that she was "highly qualified to be commander in chief[.] ... Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security."  Morell played the Putin card, claiming that Trump's positions on policy are "consistent with Russian, not American interests – endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea, and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States."  This former top CIA official offered no details on these bizarre claims.  Instead, he continued: "In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation."

In the Politico interview he claimed that he "had never been political before[,]" having "worked at this nonpolitical agency."  Morell said he "became political" with his endorsement of Clinton.  "[I] don't think it was a mistake."  Morell then indicated that he did not consider how a President Trump would react to Morell's endorsement of Clinton and to criticism from the heads of President Obama's intelligence agencies, including CIA director John Brennan.  Morell suggested that President Trump "must have thought ... 'Who are these guys? Are these guys out to get me? Is this a political organization, Can I think about them as a political organization when I become president?'"

Morell continued: "So, I think there was a significant downside to those of us who became political in that moment. So, if I could have thought of that, would I have ended up in a different place? I don't know. But it's something I didn't think about."

Morell's response is something Congress should indeed think about.  Look at that last comment: "those of us who became political" during the 2016 presidential election.  Seems like a pretty clear admission that Morell was not alone in meddling in domestic politics – that other senior officials in the intelligence community "became political" as well.  At the same time, none seems to have considered that Hillary Clinton could lose to Trump. How would the intelligence people defend their political transformation to the Trump administration?  By continuing the campaign of Russiagate innuendo by means of a stonewalling bureaucracy, backed by a media hostile to the Trump presidency.

Simply stated, is it more likely than not that the views expressed by Morell were shared by director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA director Brennan, and FBI head James Comey?