Interesting Names Being Floated for Permanent DNI Role
The author questions whether Stefanik would withstand pressure within the intelligence community and describes her as unwilling to disrupt its norms.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYThe Last Refuge is a blog, and this post gives no author attribution or reporting documentation. Its central claims about people being considered are attributed to another outlet, while much of the post is the author's unsupported assessment.
- Source type — A blog rather than an established newsroom, with limited evidence here of institutional editorial safeguards.
- Author attribution — The author is listed as unknown, limiting accountability.
- Editorial standards — The post explicitly frames its conclusions as speculation and does not explain its assessment method.
- Transparency — The initial list is attributed to The Gateway Pundit, but the post provides little sourcing for its own evaluations.
The post identifies its speculative nature and attributes the initial list of names to another outlet, but provides little verifiable evidence or sourcing for its judgments and offers no responses or competing perspectives.
HOW WE SCORE ↗This is an explicitly speculative personal assessment, not a report presenting competing views. It offers judgments about the named prospects without explaining their responses or providing evidence beyond the author's impressions.
- Opinion vs reporting — The author labels the discussion speculative and presents a personal ranking and evaluations.
- Source diversity — The post provides no interviews or competing viewpoints.
- Omitted context — It gives little evidence for the qualifications or criticisms it describes.
The post uses a right-leaning political frame, assessing several Republican figures for a senior national-security role and recommending weight for Gabbard’s recommendation. Its judgments are opinionated, though they are not framed as a broader partisan argument.
- Framing — The selection and assessment of prospective appointees centers on Republican figures and a recommendation from Gabbard.
- Language tone — The author uses strong personal judgments, including praise for some figures and a blunt dismissal of Chaffetz.
- Source selection — The initial list is attributed to The Gateway Pundit, and no alternative perspectives are presented.
The author offers a speculative ranking of people discussed for the permanent Director of National Intelligence role, favoring Michael Ellis, Rick Crawford and Dan Bishop while expressing reservations about Elise Stefanik and Jason Chaffetz. The author recommends giving substantial weight to Tulsi Gabbard’s recommendation.
The author says the names being discussed include Representatives Elise Stefanik and Rick Crawford, Michael Ellis, Cliff Sims and former Representative Jason Chaffetz. The author also considers Devin Nunes and Dan Bishop, and describes Ellis, Crawford and Bishop as strong possibilities.
The author questions whether Stefanik would stand up to pressure in the intelligence community, calls Chaffetz a poor choice, and says they lack enough information to assess Sims. The author suggests giving strong weight to Tulsi Gabbard’s recommendation.
Community verdict
VOTING CLOSEDNo good or bad look here
This story reports what happened without casting Stefanik in a good or bad light, so readers don’t rate it and it doesn’t count toward Stefanik’s record.
People in this story
SWIPE →Representative and a potential candidate for permanent DNI
Crawford's version of this story ↗Person whose recommendation the author says should carry substantial weight
Former Representative and a potential candidate for permanent DNI
Former Representative and former HPSCI chairman; considered by the author as a potential DNI
Former Representative and U.S. Attorney for North Carolina; potential candidate for permanent DNI
Vice President; Sims is described as his national security adviser
White House Chief of Staff, described as potentially favoring Stefanik for the role
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…







