President Trump has ordered his incoming acting Director of National Intelligence, Bill Pulte, to begin firing officials from the Obama and Biden administrations across the 18 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community, a sweeping directive that covers the CIA, FBI, and more than $100 billion in annual federal spending.
The move, first reported by the Daily Mail, puts a former Florida real estate executive and current Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency at the helm of the nation's spy apparatus, and hands him a clear mandate to shrink it before a permanent replacement is even named.
Trump told reporters he wants Pulte to "start the process" of removing personnel he considers unnecessary. The president made no secret of his reasoning or his timeline: get the hard work done now, while Pulte serves in an acting capacity, so a future Senate-confirmed director inherits a leaner operation.
Pulte replaces Tulsi Gabbard, who resigned last month after her husband was diagnosed with a rare bone cancer. Rather than nominate a successor and wait for Senate confirmation, Trump elevated Pulte into the role on an acting basis, a procedural choice the president described in blunt terms.
"You're less shackled. It sort of gives you more power, you know, for a somewhat limited period of time."
That limited window is the point. By sidestepping the confirmation process, Pulte can move immediately on workforce reductions, budget reviews, and declassification decisions that might otherwise stall in committee hearings or become bargaining chips in Senate negotiations.
Trump framed the arrangement as a feature, not a workaround. He told reporters that Pulte can "do a lot of the hard work and we wouldn't have to saddle somebody that goes in." In other words, the acting director absorbs the political friction so the permanent pick arrives to a cleaner house.
Trump told the Wall Street Journal he wants the intelligence community to be smaller. He said he believes "there are a lot of people in there that shouldn't be there." Asked which agencies or offices Pulte should examine, the president left nothing off the table.
"I would say everything, he should look at everything and make a determination."
That "everything" encompasses 18 intelligence agencies and a combined annual budget exceeding $100 billion. Pulte now controls that budget. He will also brief the president on the most classified areas of intelligence, a remarkable portfolio for someone whose background is in housing finance and real estate, not espionage or national security.
The job also gives Pulte the power to declassify vast numbers of secret documents. Trump told the Wall Street Journal he wants Pulte to release more classified materials related to the 2020 election and Trump's claims of voter fraud, a directive that could produce significant public disclosures in the weeks ahead.
Pulte's elevation has not gone unnoticed on Capitol Hill. His appointment this week sparked backlash among Republican lawmakers, a notable development given that intra-party friction over executive branch personnel moves has been relatively muted during this administration.
The concern appears to center on qualifications. Pulte has no intelligence background. He has been angling for the DNI job in recent weeks, and he reportedly told Trump he would be loyal and would carry out the president's directives to the intelligence community. Loyalty is a virtue in any organization, but critics may reasonably ask whether it is sufficient preparation for overseeing the CIA, FBI, and sixteen other agencies tasked with protecting national security.
That said, the intelligence community's track record over the past decade has not exactly inspired confidence in the credentialed class. The same agencies now facing potential reductions were at the center of the Russia-collusion investigation, the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, and a letter signed by 51 former intelligence officials dismissing that laptop as Russian disinformation, weeks before the 2020 election. Those episodes did more to erode public trust in the intelligence community than any outside critic ever could.
A spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence signaled that the agency is on board with the incoming acting director's mandate.
"We look forward to working with Mr. Pulte and President Trump on additional initiatives to advance savings and root out deep state bad actors."
The phrase "deep state bad actors" is notable coming from an official ODNI spokesman, language that would have been unthinkable from the same office four years ago. It suggests that the institutional culture at ODNI has already shifted, or at least that the office's communications staff understands which way the wind is blowing.
Whether that cooperation extends beyond press statements and into actual workforce reductions remains to be seen. The intelligence community is vast, layered with civil-service protections, and historically resistant to outside reform efforts. Past presidents have tried to reorganize the intelligence apparatus. Most settled for marginal changes.
Several important questions remain unanswered. It is unclear when the reported firings will begin, or whether some have already started. No specific officials from the Obama or Biden administrations have been publicly named as targets. The identity of Trump's eventual permanent intelligence chief is unknown. And the specific classified documents Trump wants released regarding the 2020 election have not been identified.
The timeline matters. Acting appointments carry legal time limits, and the scope of Pulte's planned changes could face legal challenges from affected employees, civil-service unions, or congressional opponents. The administration appears to be betting that speed and executive authority will outpace institutional resistance.
For years, conservatives have argued that the intelligence community became politicized under the Obama and Biden administrations, that career officials used their positions and their access to classified information to undermine elected leadership. That argument gained traction not through conspiracy theories but through documented actions: the FISA warrant abuses in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, the intelligence community's handling of the Biden laptop, and the selective leaking that defined the first Trump term.
Trump's directive to Pulte is the most concrete step any president has taken to address those concerns. Whether it produces meaningful reform or simply reshuffles personnel will depend on execution, legal durability, and whether the permanent DNI nominee, whoever that turns out to be, continues the effort or quietly lets it fade.
The intelligence community has survived decades of oversight hearings, inspector general reports, and bipartisan hand-wringing. A real restructuring would be something new. Trump is clearly betting that an acting director with no ties to the old guard and nothing to lose in a confirmation fight is exactly the person to attempt it.
Washington's permanent class has weathered plenty of reform talk. This time, the man giving the orders seems less interested in talking.
