The Hill
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday that President Trump should no longer receive daily intelligence briefings and be prohibited from receiving such briefings once he leaves office.
In an interview on CBS's "Face the Nation," Schiff agreed with calls from Susan Gordon, Trump's former principal deputy director of national intelligence, to cease providing Trump with intelligence immediately given his actions surrounding the riot that overtook the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
"There's no circumstance in which this president should get another intelligence briefing, not now, not in the future. I don't think he can be trusted with it now, and in the future he certainly can't be trusted," Schiff said.
From Susan Gordon’s Op-Ed in the Washington Post:
Susan M. Gordon was the principal deputy director of national intelligence from 2017 to 2019.
(snip)
My recommendation, as a 30-plus-year veteran of the intelligence community, is not to provide him any briefings after Jan. 20. With this simple act — which is solely the new president’s prerogative — Joe Biden can mitigate one aspect of the potential national security risk posed by Donald Trump, private citizen.
(snip)
His post-White House “security profile,” as the professionals like to call it, is daunting. Any former president is by definition a target and presents some risks. But a former president Trump, even before the events of last week, might be unusually vulnerable to bad actors with ill intent. He leaves, unlike his predecessors who embraced the muted responsibilities of being a “former,” with a stated agenda to stay engaged in politics and policy. No departing president in the modern era has hinted at or planned on becoming a political actor immediately after leaving office.
In addition, Trump has significant business entanglements that involve foreign entities. Many of these current business relationships are in parts of the world that are vulnerable to intelligence services from other nation-states. And it is not clear that he understands the tradecraft to which he has been exposed, the reasons the knowledge he has acquired must be protected from disclosure, or the intentions and capabilities of adversaries and competitors who will use any means to advance their interests at the expense of ours.
I agree wholeheartedly.