On North Korea and Iran, Intelligence Chiefs Contradict Trump – The New York Times

Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from that agreement last year. He called it “defective at its core” and said if the deal remained in place, Iran would“be on the cusp of acquiring the world’s most dangerous weapons.” The agreement still stands, largely with support from European capitals.

Senator Angus King, the Maine independent who caucuses with Democrats, asked Ms. Haspel point-blank if Iran remained in compliance with the nuclear deal. She said it was, but added that Iranian leaders were considering steps that would “lessen their adherence” to the agreement.

“They are making preparations that would increase their ability to take a step back if they make that decision,” Ms. Haspel said. “At the moment, technically they are in compliance, but we do see them debating among themselves because they haven’t seen the economic benefits they hoped for from the deal.”

Intelligence officials have long taken stronger positions than Mr. Trump on North Korea’s continuing nuclear activity, the strength of the Islamic State and Russia’s attempts to influence elections.

April F. Doss, a former associate general counsel at the National Security Agency, said the most recent National Intelligence Strategy made a point of highlighting the responsibility of the intelligence agencies to “speak truth to power” and to deliver intelligence objectively.

“They are going to be very mindful of reassuring the Intelligence Committee and the public they are committed to carrying out their work in an apolitical, nonpartisan fashion,” said Ms. Doss, now a partner at the law firm Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr.

Perhaps the strongest rebuke of Mr. Trump’s security priorities comes in what is missing from the threat assessment: any rationale for building a wall along the southwestern border, which Mr. Trump has advertised as among the most critical security threats facing the United States. The first mention of Mexico and drug cartels comes on Page 18 of the 42-page report, well after a range of other, more pressing threats are reviewed.