Former CIA Officer John Kiriakou reveals that not even the President of the United States truly controls the CIA, exposing a shadow power structure where intelligence officials outlast elected leaders and resist presidential directives they disagree with.
Key Takeaways
- Former CIA officer John Kiriakou claims the CIA operates largely beyond presidential control, with long-serving intelligence officials who can “wait out” presidents whose directives they oppose.
- After exposing CIA torture operations, Kiriakou became a target of both the CIA and FBI, facing imprisonment while receiving little support from elected officials.
- Kiriakou validates President Trump’s concerns about the “deep state,” confirming that career bureaucrats in intelligence agencies wield substantial power over American governance.
- The intelligence community’s targeting of whistleblowers established legal precedents later used against President Trump, suggesting a pattern of weaponizing government against perceived threats.
- Kiriakou’s experience highlights how intelligence agencies resist accountability and oversight, with career officials serving 25-35 years while presidents serve at most 8 years.
Intelligence Agencies Operating Beyond Presidential Control
In a revealing interview with Tucker Carlson, former CIA counterintelligence operations officer John Kiriakou exposed the uncomfortable truth about America’s intelligence power structure. Despite what organizational charts might suggest, Kiriakou explained that presidents have far less control over the CIA than Americans believe. This dynamic creates a concerning imbalance in our constitutional system where unelected officials can effectively override the policies of democratically elected leaders. Kiriakou’s firsthand experiences provide a rare window into how intelligence agencies maintain autonomy from executive oversight.
“I know we’re getting far-field, and we will get back to your story, but it doesn’t sound like, so if you look at the org chart, the president controls the CIA. But you’re describing a situation where the CIA kind of controls the president.” Tucker Carlson.
Kiriakou directly confirmed Carlson’s observation, explaining that intelligence officials can simply outlast any president they disagree with. This permanent bureaucracy creates a situation where career officials with decades of institutional knowledge and connections can effectively resist presidential directives by stalling implementation until a new administration takes office. This patient resistance strategy undermines democratic accountability and raises serious concerns about who truly directs America’s intelligence operations and foreign policy.
Whistleblower Persecution and Legal Precedents
Kiriakou’s personal journey from CIA officer to whistleblower illustrates the severe consequences facing those who challenge intelligence agency operations. After exposing the CIA’s torture program, Kiriakou became the target of an aggressive investigation by both the CIA and FBI. What followed was a years-long campaign to imprison him using the Espionage Act, despite his revelations serving the public interest by exposing unconstitutional activities. This persecution demonstrates how intelligence agencies protect their operations from public scrutiny.
“An interesting interview between Tucker Carlson and Former CIA Counterintelligence Operations Officer John Kiriakou about being targeted by the CIA and FBI after telling the truth about CIA torture ops.” said Tucker Carlson
The legal tactics used against Kiriakou created precedents that would later be weaponized against President Trump. A Clinton-appointed judge oversaw Kiriakou’s case and delivered a harsh sentence, establishing a blueprint for using the justice system against perceived threats to the intelligence establishment. This connection between the persecution of whistleblowers and the later lawfare against President Trump suggests a consistent pattern of weaponizing government institutions against those who challenge entrenched power structures.
Validating the Deep State Reality
President Trump faced widespread criticism from mainstream media and political opponents for his frequent references to the “deep state” during his first term. However, Kiriakou’s experiences provide compelling validation for these concerns. As someone who worked within the system for years, Kiriakou’s confirmation that the deep state exists carries significant weight. He acknowledges that while the terminology may be disputed, the reality of a permanent bureaucracy operating semi-independently from elected leadership is undeniable.
“Donald Trump took a lot of guff in his first term when he used on a regular basis the term ‘deep state.’ I argued from the very beginning, it is a deep state. Maybe you don’t like the terminology. You don’t have to call it the deep state. You can call it the federal bureaucracy. You can call it the state. But the truth is that it exists.” John Kiriakou, Former CIA Operations Officer.
These revelations highlight the wisdom behind President Trump’s appointments of figures like John Ratcliffe and Kash Patel to key intelligence positions. Their efforts to reduce politicization within intelligence agencies directly addressed the problems Kiriakou exposed. As President Trump navigates his second term, these insights into how intelligence agencies operate may prove invaluable in implementing his agenda. Americans concerned about democratic accountability should recognize the significant challenge presented by unelected officials who can circumvent presidential authority.
— Jared DuBois (@JaredDuBois) February 6, 2025
The Permanence Problem in Intelligence Agencies
The fundamental power imbalance Kiriakou identifies stems from the vast difference in tenure between presidents and intelligence officials. With presidents limited to at most eight years in office while CIA personnel often serve 25-35 years, the intelligence community can maintain consistent institutional priorities that transcend multiple administrations. This longevity gives them leverage to wait out presidents whose directives they find disagreeable, knowing they’ll outlast any administration’s reform efforts.
“This is another problem. It’s that presidents come and go every four years, every eight years. But these CIA people, they’re there for 25, 30, 35 years. They don’t go anywhere. So if they don’t like a president or if a president orders them to do something that they don’t want to do, they just wait because they know they can wait him out, and then he’s not going to be president anymore. They can continue on with whatever plan the blob or the deep state wants to implement.” John Kiriakou, Former CIA Operations Officer.
Kiriakou’s observations about the post-9/11 transformation of intelligence agencies further illuminate how these organizations have expanded their power. The CIA’s evolution from an intelligence-gathering organization to one increasingly involved in paramilitary operations and domestic surveillance represents a significant shift in its role. This expanded authority, combined with limited oversight and accountability, creates conditions where agency priorities can diverge significantly from those established by elected leaders.
