Hidden in the spending bill, this may be the most damaging long-term

IN A DRAMATIC moment on the Senate floor Monday afternoon, as the upper chamber rushed a spending bill through to end the government shutdown, the top Republican and Democrat on the Intelligence Committee warned that the bill contains language that would kneecap Congress’s ability to oversee secret covert actions and surveillance programs. Their effort to amend the language was rebuffed.

[...]

The provision, first reported by The Intercept, appeared in the House version of the spending bill last week and modified the 70–year-old-law that first chartered the CIA. It removed language [...] requiring intelligence agencies to spend money according to Congress’s instructions, and replaced it with a provision that allows the agencies to move money around freely and without Congress’s knowledge.

[...]

The move cuts off the Intelligence Committee’s most effective means of oversight, because it allows the intelligence community to repurpose funds in the event that the legislature eliminates funding for a certain program, the senators charged.

  The Intercept

Or repurpose funds for something altogether new.

Recall that Eric Prince was meeting with the Trump cabal purportedly to set up a private intelligence agency for Trump before it was discovered and publicized. Perhaps it is unlikely that the intelligence community itself would shunt money out of their coffers for something like that. On the other hand, Trump-appointed CIA director Mike Pompeo was in on those talks. As director, could he move that money on his own?

I don't think we can even imagine where all this might go - or may have already gone. (We do have some indication by the types of things the CIA has come up with in the past, eg. MK Ultra, extraordinary rendition.) The language can be argued again in three weeks when the budget extension comes to an end, but it only takes a few seconds to reroute huge amounts of money, and once it's gone, it's gone. To do what?  For whom?

Jennifer Hing, a spokesperson for the House Appropriations Committee, said that the senators were blowing it out of proportion. “This language was publicly requested by OMB/DoD.

As if that's any comfort.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.