<\/p>\n
At his confirmation<\/span> hearing to serve as the nation\u2019s top intelligence officer, Jay Clayton dodged questions about whether the White House ordered him to send subpoenas to New York Times journalists as part of an FBI investigation into alleged leaks of classified information.<\/p>\n Under questioning from Democratic senators, Clayton, who currently serves as the top federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, defended the process that resulted in FBI agents showing up to the reporters\u2019 homes to hand-deliver subpoenas seeking the source of disclosures about security flaws in the Qatari-donated new Air Force One jet.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m not going to get into the details. But what I can tell you is that we followed the procedures.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n Clayton declined to answer questions, however, on whether the White House or top officials at the Justice Department ordered him to send the subpoenas.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m not going to get into the details,\u201d Clayton said under questioning from Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo. \u201cBut what I can tell you is that we followed the procedures, and those procedures, for the reasons that I believe firmly and you believe \u2014 protecting the freedom of the press, being the least intrusive possible \u2014 require consultation.\u201d<\/p>\n Clayton\u2019s role in sending the subpoenas, which went out under his signature Friday shortly after FBI Director Kash Patel met with Trump, has emerged as a flashpoint in his nomination to replace Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence.<\/p>\n A press freedom advocate said he found Clayton\u2019s testimony about the subpoenas to be \u201ctotally disingenuous\u201d because Trump\u2019s own subpoena guidelines say the government must exhaust other means of getting evidence before going to journalists.<\/p>\n \u201cYet these subpoenas were issued less than two days after the story came out, and just hours after Patel\u2019s reported White House meeting with Trump,\u201d Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in an email. \u201cAll evidence points to Trump ordering this action for retribution because he\u2019s embarrassed about the plane debacle, not because of anything to do with \u2018national security.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Housing czar and Trump loyalist Bill Pulte<\/a> is currently serving as the intelligence chief on a temporary basis, and some centrist Democrats have argued that Clayton should be swiftly confirmed<\/a> to shut off Pulte\u2019s access to classified information.<\/p>\n For Democrats on the intelligence committee, however, Clayton\u2019s role in the subpoena to New York Times journalists suggested that he may be just as eager as Gabbard and Pulte to use the powers of public office to appease the president.<\/p>\n Those concerns about the subpoenas dovetailed with worries about Clayton\u2019s views on election fraud. Democratic senators repeatedly questioned Clayton on whether former President Joe Biden won the 2020 election, which has emerged as an important litmus test in light of Gabbard\u2019s role in an ongoing administration effort to relitigate the president\u2019s loss.<\/p>\n Clayton repeatedly confirmed the fact that Biden\u2019s election was certified by Congress but declined to say whether he thought Biden actually won the race.<\/p>\n \u201cIsn\u2019t it humiliating to be unable to answer this question? To have to indulge the president\u2019s delusions?\u201d Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., said at one point. \u201cWhy can you not give it?\u201d<\/p>\n On the subpoena issue, Clayton\u2019s answers offered little new light on why the subpoenas were swiftly delivered to journalists<\/a>. He repeatedly said that the subpoenas were the \u201cleast intrusive\u201d means possible to discover the source of the New York Times\u2019s reporting on the new Air Force One.<\/p>\n The reporting revealed that Trump was forced to use an older version of the presidential airplane on his return from a recent trip to Turkey because the new one lacked missile defense systems<\/a> despite a pricey retrofit.<\/p>\n\n