You mean "complaints" about non-consultation. After Hastert's hissy-fit over the Jefferson search, it's increasingly difficult to take any congress critter's complaints about Administration national security policies at face value.
Hoekstra complains about politicization of the CIA, and the resultant leaks on one hand, and the WH failure to inform the Congress of some programs on the other. He fails to mention the very strong possibility of some of these leaks originating in Congress (Jay Rockefeller, where are you?) He admits the glaring weakness of the CIA (for which Congress has oversight), but complains that the NID has appropriated too much of the disfunctional CIA's responsibilities.
Is Hoekstra genuine in his concerns, or is the goal to deflect attention from the failings of the good ol' boys club in an election year?
It's become almost impossible to judge where political grandstanding ends and sincere concern for national security begins.
Man, you paint with a pretty broad brush don't you? It's "increasingly difficult to take" your national security views at face value. Hastert is not a congressional expert on any of those. But, the Intel and Defense Committee regulars are solid, and in fact, a lot more so than the Administration has been on defense deployments, intel problems, readiness and minding the store. Keep in mind, that the Administration kept George Tenet, a Xlintonite, on for almost four years...because "they hit it off." He was either a wet noodle or a schill. Take your pick. Either way, the results were predictable.
Untold Disaster.
As Ronald Reagan knew, Personnel is Policy.