Dr. Paul may not be the best example for a counter-argument, since he appears to be that rare individual without a partisan or special interest-laden agenda. Because of that and because I align with him almost perfectly in regard to matters of foreign policy, I would tend to place far greater stock in his truths than the truths of the current administration.
I'm sure we can all agree that a nuclear Iran poses a threat to some degree. Where I believe Dr. Paul has it right, is in his assertion that a non-nuclear Iran poses (nearly) no threat. If Dr. Paul wants an unbiased best assessment of the nuclear capabilities/ambitions of Iran, I would like to believe that's what he will receive.
In regard to Tenant, who do think was responsible for that sordid situation, Tenant himself?
Much as I like Mr Paul, I hope he doesn't make the mistake that Carter made and try to know everything about everything. The leadership models I have knowledge of and that I think were as near ideal as possible in a modern, complex USA were those of FDR and Eisenhower. Both of them depended on a strong staff, as did Reagan and Bush II.
However, both FDR and Ike were in undisputed command, made their desires crystal clear, and left no doubt about who was subordinate to whom. In contrast, Reagan and Bush II failed to command obedience of their subordinates. if they had appointed indecisive or barely competent department heads then they would have had presidencies more like Carter or Nixon. Instead, they appointed department heads of extraordinary intelligence and strength of personality. As a result, subordinates were able to run their departments without much presidential interference. The result in Reagan's case was Iran-Contra and in Bush's: Iraq. Neither event could have happened under Ike or FDR.
So I'll assume President Paul will appoint competent department heads. He will inherit, as do all presidents, the DCIA and other equivalent spooks. The history of CIA (especially) is one of political manipulation of the presidency & Congress. It is also one of tragically flawed or failed analysis concerning the most important events in the 2nd half of 20th and the opening of the 21st centuries.
The CIA screwed-up clandestine operations during the Korean war that resulted in torture and death of American and partisan forces; Botched operations against the legally elected Iranian government AND worse, leaving our fingerprints all over the squalid affair; f**ked-up in Cuba by creating the Bay of Pigs through complete misunderstanding of the Cuban people's revulsion toward the USA; f**ked-up in their assessment of Ho Chi Minh, the French colonialists, and the will of the Vietnamese to suffer any kind of government that would reject colonialism in any form; missed the build-up and war between Vietnam and China that resulted in China's complete overhaul of their own military (due to getting their ass handed to them by Vietnam); didn't predict the fall of the Berlin Wall; backed teh wrong side in the war against the USSR in Afghanistan; and failed to predict the sudden and complete collapse of the USSR -- probably the most incredibly important event in our nation's history since it's formation.
So where does President Paul turn for information concerning Iran?
PS In my opinion, CIA should be dismantled and divided between State and Defense. It's raison d'etre was to bridge that gap and provide the Executive Branch with the best summary analysis from those two camps. It has failed and the failure has cost us taxpayers trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of American lives. It has grown so powerful that it has an unelected political influence over every aspect of foreign policy. By enacting the Patriot Act, the President & Congress have given the CIA even more power.
Giving power to proven incompetence is worse than stupid.