When people within the CIA participate in an internal presidential campaign, using their positions to favor one side over the other, leaking information (whether true or false) to the media, these people are certainly open to criticism, and should have expected it when their candidate lost. I'm sure they were believing their own lies and, having no idea that Trump might win, they had no reason to think that this would ever come back on them, given that Obama favored using the intelligence agencies for internal political purposes. Well, they lost and some of them won't be working for the CIA much longer. When they decided to take sides during a political campaign, and to use their office to aid one candidate while denigrating another, they should have been prepared for the possibility that their candidate might lose. I don't know how deep the problem is, but I'm sure Trump will figure it out. Probably, most of the people working for the CIA have lived up to the trust that is being placed with them, and they should be fine. They were likely among the majority there who applauded Trump's remarks.
I really do not ever remember Trump saying that he "preferred" Putin. He did say that he believed Putin to be a good leader, which by the pure definition of being a leader he very well is. Now, is the leader of Russia the type of person who stands as a role model for our new president? To say "yes" would be a complete adulteration of everything Trump has stood for in his past dealings and during his campaign. The media has done an extremely good job of expounding upon and expanding a single phrase to mean more than it actually did. They depend on the unstudied for acceptance of a new "truth" no matter how false it might be while also allowing their patronage to believe that there are no consequences for accepting such drivel. So far as Trump's speech to the CIA, I consider it an act of walking into the lions den rather than lurking around and taking a wide swathe while ignoring the actual problem. He spoke his piece, everyone is hopefully on the same page and for that I commend him. For me to write anything else on the matter would be a simple reiteration of the more in depth considerations of @Ken Anderson.
I think President Trump's visit was a show of good will and Bobby's analogy of walking into the lion's den is a good one.
Speaking to his newly appointed senior staff, Trump told them, “This is not about party. This is not about ideology. This is about country. It’s about serving the American people. We’re not here to help ourselves. So many people are dependent on us." -- The Hill
Just to piggy back on Trump's visit with the CIA, I ran into a piece that isn't being published by the media in general. Sean Spicer, Trump's new news guy, tore into the media during his first "unofficial" press conference. He confronted the media about a couple of untrue broadcasts that were deliberately delivered to the populous in order to create division and more strife among the American people. It's only 2 days in and the left side of the news agencies are already throwing land mines in front of our new leader and his administration. Basically, Spicer threw down the gauntlet and pretty much condemned the media, without mentioning any names, while also placing the blame on the DNC for holding up Trump's pick for the new CIA director. Here's a taste of what I expect the future will bring if the media doesn't perk up and start reporting real and truthful news. https://www.facebook.com/THEHermanCain/posts/10155123181944170
He is cleaning the snakes out of the CIA I just started a thread that should have been here. http://www.seniorsonly.club/threads/trump-cleaning-out-muslims.6265/
Yesterday.... Senate confirms Mike Pompeo to lead CIA "Mr. Pompeo, a congressman from Kansas, was approved on a 66-32 vote, but only after Democrats forced a three-day delay, demanding more time to complain about his credentials and what they said was a confusing record on civil liberties protections". “I’m not sure that you can find a glove that fits any better — for the agency, for the Congress of the United States, for the administration, but more importantly for the American people,” said Sen. Richard Burr, chairman of the intelligence committee.