Outside groups are urging House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner to step down from the high-profile role over his vague public warning about a national security threat — or urging Speaker Mike Johnson to replace him.
Four organizations sent Turner a letter Friday demanding his resignation, arguing his actions “undermined your credibility, your committee, and national security.” If Turner doesn’t voluntarily cede the Intelligence chairmanship — something he’s given no indication he’s considering — they are urging Johnson to remove him from the spot.
“The near-panic you caused by exploiting this potential future threat for immediate political gain is beneath a Member of Congress, and in particular the committee you currently lead, which was formed to rein in — not be a mouthpiece for — warrantless domestic spying. This week is the culmination of months of bad-faith tactics that collectively demonstrate you should not continue as Chairman,” the groups added.
The letter, obtained by POLITICO ahead of its release, is the latest fallout after Turner released a cryptic public statement Wednesday about “a serious” threat, requesting that the White House declassify all information relating to it. The intelligence was later confirmed to be about Russia’s nuclear capabilities in space.
Adam Brandon, the president of FreedomWorks, Jason Pye, the director for rule of law initiatives at the Due Process Institute, Sean Vitka, the policy director for Demand Progress, and Alex Marthews, the national chair for Restore the Fourth, signed the letter.
Several of Turner’s Intelligence colleagues, plus the Wall Street Journal editorial board, have defended his strategy. Johnson and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, held a joint press conference with Turner on Thursday, underscoring the bipartisan support for addressing the threat.
But a coalition combining privacy hawks, members of the House Freedom Caucus and libertarian-leaning Republicans have criticized Turner’s move. They argue it was meant to influence this week’s debate on reauthorizing Section 702, a spying authority that is meant to target foreigners abroad but has come under criticism for its ability to sweep in Americans.
Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) called for an investigation, while Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) called for Turner to lose his chairmanship. Like Biggs, each of the four groups represented in Friday’s letter are pushing for sweeping changes to the program that are opposed by Turner, other Intelligence Committee members and the administration.
One person familiar with the underlying intelligence told POLITICO earlier this week that at least some of the information was gathered using 702. Turner also recently traveled to Ukraine and is publicly pushing for Johnson to take up additional aid.
Turner, in a statement this week, defended his strategy, which also involved privately alerting members of Congress that the Intelligence Committee had voted to share information with their colleagues about the national security threat.
“The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence worked in consultation with the Biden Administration to notify Congress of this national security threat,” he said. “In addition, language in the bipartisan notification issued by the Chair and Ranking Member to all Members of the House was cleared by the Administration prior to its release.”
The move by Turner roiled Washington, sparking public questions about what the threat was. John Kirby, President Joe Biden’s top national security spokesperson, told reporters that the administration had not given a greenlight for the public statement.
But several members of the Intelligence Committee defended Turner’s decision, including Democrats on the panel. Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), a member of the panel, called the timing a “coincidence” and that Ogles should “fucking check himself.” Meanwhile, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) said that “anybody who’s familiar with what is the situation here, they should be thanking and hugging Mike Turner. Trust me.”
Himes, meanwhile, told POLITICO that he had privately urged Turner not to release the public statement, saying it was a bad idea. But he also defended the Ohio Republican’s motivations.
“I really don’t think it was three-dimensional chess,” Himes added about the theories that Turner was trying to impact the 702 or Ukraine debates. “I would have handled this differently. But he is a very serious professional when it comes to U.S. national security. So that’s another reason why I don’t think he was playing games.”
