There has been some speculation why Sue Gordon is leaving the CIA on August 15.
This may be the reason.
The New York Times reports that there is a federal statute called Federal Vacancies Reform Act which says that if the position of director of national intelligence becomes vacant, the deputy director — currently Ms. Gordon — shall serve as acting director.
According to LAWFARE, the FVRA says that …
the exclusive means for temporarily authorizing an acting official to perform the functions and duties of any office … unless … a statutory provision expressly … designates an officer or employee to perform the functions and duties of a specified office temporarily in an acting capacity …
And there IS a statutory provision, in the 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA):
The IRTPA included a provision addressing the question of who can serve as the acting DNI in the event of a vacancy. The provision, now codified as 50 U.S.C. § 3026(a)(6), states in relevant part:
(6) The Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence shall act for, and exercise the powers of, the Director of National Intelligence … during a vacancy in the position of Director of National Intelligence.
Taken literally, this would seem to override the discretion that the president otherwise would have enjoyed under the FVRA, compelling the conclusion instead that the current “principal deputy director” (Sue Gordon, who has held this position since 2017) “shall” serve as the acting DNI for so long as necessary.
Can the IRTPA be interpreted as simply an extra option, alongside the FVRA options?
Absolutely not.
As an initial matter, this is the best plain-text reading of the IRTPA, which is more recent than the FVRA. It is specifically on point for this office and situation. Its language is not vague. Its language is not ambiguous. It uses the compulsory word “shall” in order to vest the acting director role in the principal deputy in this specific scenario.
According to the New York Times, on August 2:
But there appears to be a loophole: The law gives the White House much more flexibility in choosing who to appoint as the acting deputy if the No. 2 position is vacant, said Robert M. Chesney, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, who specializes in national-security legal issues.
Ms. Gordon will retire if told by the White House that Mr. Trump wants someone else in the deputy’s role who could then rise to fill the vacancy created when Mr. Coats departs, according to officials.
So there we have it. Ms Gordon will leave the CIA on the same day that DNI Director Coats retires – August 15.
Stella's Place 
Stella, Sue Gordon spent most of her life at CIA and was a close protege of John Brennan. But Gordon currently serves as Principal Deputy of ODNI under Dan Coates. You see, Brennan moved Gordon to ODNI, and for some unknown reason, Pres Trump nominated her for Principal Deputy (prob connected to Brennan behind the scenes). Yup, the CIA would be running ODNI, thanks to Brennan.
Anyways, Gordon was asked to retire from ODNI by Pres Trump.
Gee wiz, the man catches on fast!
LikeLiked by 4 people
That’s about it. Now McGuire has been named Acting Director, taking over on Aug. 15.
LikeLike
…cleaning out the HOUSE!
LikeLiked by 3 people
I wonder how he talked her into quiting? Was this enough? “Ms. Gordon will retire if told by the White House that Mr. Trump wants someone else in the deputy’s role who could then rise to fill the vacancy created when Mr. Coats departs, according to officials.”
LikeLike
A ‘lifelong’ employee, and she’s risen to that position – she must be a loyal denizen of the swamp.
She was hired in 1980 so it’s not unreasonable to presume that she was hired under Stansfield Turner who, late in 1979, gutted the Company by cutting over 800 positions and rebuilt it by moving it more to signals and technical intelligence rather than human intelligence (we’re back to human intelligence again.
It’s interesting because Ms Gordon only has a BS in zoology which points to her being tracked, educated and built inside of the Agency, she was in the scientific and technical branch and became the director of the Office of Advanced Analytic Tools and stayed, moving up, in the IT division. Not bad for someone with a BS in zoology in an agency stuffed with PhDs.
Now she may have had some formal education outside of that BS but I’m not seeing it in her CV. She was hired under the shadow of Carter’s rebuilding of the agency as part of the new blood…but for an agency supposedly moving from human to scientific-based intelligence what does zoology have to do with anything? There was also the rush, under Carter, to redesign as much of the government as they could to accommodate women-I remember the project to create a new artillery piece that could be fielded by an all-female crew. I can’t help wonder if, in the rush to replace the traditional operations-centric agency with a techno-centric one, there weren’t too many Carter-thinkers hired? There was a lot of unhappy Carter bureaucrats when Reagan was elected, a lesser version of what’s going on now with Trump sloshing thru a sea of Clinton and Obama bureaucratic slush.
Is she another part of the draining process? I know my past experiences in the bureaucracy prejudice me but has she been identified as political pond scum, a creature created under 3 of the most liberal Democratic presidents, and marked for draining? Her career makes me think she was shepherded and mentored by someone, she appears to be a pure Company bureaucrat, maybe she’s part of thne great cleaning process.
LikeLiked by 3 people