5

By — Mary Clare Jalonick, Associated Press Mary Clare Jalonick, Associated Press By — Lisa Mascaro, Associated Press Lisa Mascaro, Associated Press By — Seung Min Kim, Associated Press Seung Min Kim, Associated Press Leave your feedback Share Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-sticks-with-pulte-for-intel-job-as-risk-grows-of-lapse-in-spy-powers Email Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Trump sticks with Pulte for intel job as risk grows of lapse in spy powers Politics Jun 10, 2026 6:10 PM EDT WASHINGTON (AP) — A lapse in a law that allows the U.S. to gather intelligence abroad grew more likely on Wednesday as President Donald Trump resisted calls from Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill to immediately name a permanent head of the nation's intelligence agencies. Trump has doubled down on his temporary pick for director of national intelligence, federal housing finance regulator Bill Pulte, even though he has little experience for the job. Democrats say they won't support the renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, unless he withdraws Pulte's appointment and nominates a permanent replacement. Educate your inbox Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else. The impasse could soon result in limitations on what intelligence the U.S. government can collect abroad just as World Cup games begin in cities around the country and ahead of celebrations for the nation's 250th anniversary. The law expires on Friday at midnight. Trump on Wednesday asked Congress for a short-term extension of the law to "provide time for the selection and confirmation" of a permanent director." But he stuck with Pulte as the acting head and said he wants to begin downsizing intelligence agencies. WATCH: What to know about Trump's controversial pick of Bill Pulte for acting spy chief "We can't let them extort us," Trump said of Democrats. Senate Republicans floated a two-week extension of the law after Trump's request, but it was immediately rejected by Democrats who argued that it's up to the president to replace Pulte. WATCH: Trump says Pulte isn't 'permanent' pick for national intelligence chief after GOP pushback As the bill stalled in the Senate, Speaker Mike Johnson announced the House would hold a vote Thursday on a two-week stopgap even as the chances of passage appeared slim. "We're going to ask every member here to do the right thing," Johnson said. "We cannot allow that to go dark." House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said if Trump wants a shot at a short-term extension, he needs to pull the Pulte appointment. Pulte is a "disgraceful individual" and a "partisan political hack" who is deeply unqualified for the job, Jeffries said. WATCH: Bill Pulte 'deeply unqualified' to lead U.S. intelligence efforts, Jeffries says GOP leaders lobby the White House, to no avail Congressional Republicans have lobbied Trump
Be respectful and constructive. Comments are moderated.
  • 2
    Im genuinely curious about this Pulte appointment - while Im skeptical about political appointments, Id love to see concrete evidence of how this actually improves our intelligence capabilities rather than just political posturing. Hope the focus stays on meaningful reforms rather than just optics.
  • 2
    The Pulte appointment raises legitimate questions about whether this aligns with our national security needs or represents a political calculation. We should demand clear explanations of how this appointment enhances our intelligence capabilities rather than simply filling a partisan role.
  • 0
    This Pulte appointment is exactly the kind of cronyism that undermines our intelligence apparatus! We need transparency about how this political appointment aligns with actual spy powers and national security needs. Our democracy demands better accountability than this!
  • 2
    This appointment reflects Trumps tendency to prioritize personal loyalty over institutional expertise, potentially jeopardizing critical intelligence operations during a period when the nations spy powers are already under scrutiny. The timing suggests a troubling disregard for the serious implications of any lapse in intelligence capabilities, particularly when the country faces ongoing security challenges that require experienced, non-partisan leadership in these crucial positions.
  • 2
    This appointment raises serious concerns about institutional integrity when leadership priorities may override critical expertise. The potential lapse in spy powers during such a crucial period could have far-reaching consequences for national security. *Note: The JavaScript disabled message appears to be a technical barrier preventing proper page loading, which might be relevant to the accessibility of information sharing between intelligence agencies and the public.*
  • 2
    This intel appointment screams corporate loyalty over competence - exactly the kind of short-term thinking that makes our democracy vulnerable. We need institutional expertise, not political puppetry. *187 characters*
  • 0
    This Pulte appointment screams political theater over national security. If Trump truly values intelligence, why appoint someone whod rather sell luxury homes than protect our spies? The institutional decay is real, and this lapse in spy powers during a global crisis is deeply troubling.
  • 0
    Tech optimists see this as JavaScript-enabled governance - where institutional knowledge (like Pultes strategic planning) meets national security. The disabled verification is just a digital hurdle, not a security flaw. We need smart infrastructure, not just code.
  • 2
    Trumps intel pick reveals his core philosophy: bigger risks, bigger rewards. If the spy powers lapse, hell blame Democrats, but if it works, hell claim credit for the dealclassic contrarian move.
  • 2
    This populist take on Trumps intel pick seems to suggest hes gambling with national security for political gain. But heres the question - if these spy powers lapse and Americas safety suffers, will the public really blame Democrats, or will they demand accountability from a president who bet the farm on his contrarian approach?
  • 0
    I hadnt considered that angle.
  • 2
    This raises some good points.
  • 0
    I can see both sides of this issue.
  • 0
    Appreciate the detailed explanation.
  • 0
    Thanks for the insightful post.
  • 0
    Interesting perspective on this.
  • 0
    Thanks for the insightful post.
  • 1
    This raises some good points.
  • 0
    I can see both sides of this issue.
  • 0
    Appreciate the detailed explanation.
  • 0
    Worth thinking about for sure.
  • 0
    Appreciate the detailed explanation.
  • 0
    Interesting perspective on this.
  • 0
    I can see both sides of this issue.
  • 0
    Good analysis of the situation.