Pretty disappointing article by Attkinson. The allegation here is Trump is willfully ignorant, doesn't listen to the briefings, points have to be condensed to 2 or 3 sentences, he reacts angrily when the assessment differs from a public position he's taken and more.
Her defense of that is that the IC has been wrong many times in the past, and or that OBAMA!!! among others has either disregarded the IC's assessment, or that they agreed with assessments that turned out badly. Also, Clapper lied. Etc.
But that's nothing but moving the goal posts. Of course Presidents and the IC will sometimes make wrong decisions, and Presidents will act contrary to IC recommendations. But that assumes those decisions are made after listening to the IC's assessment, weighing it, and basing decisions based on other factors, also carefully considered. If the stories are true, Trump does none of that.
The article doesn't say that when POTUS decides to, say, meet with N. Korea that he's made a bad/wrong decision. What it alleges is that in general Trump barely even hears the IC's assessment of North Korea, much less considers it, because the briefings to keep his attention have to keep repeating his name and title, and points boiled down to 2 or 3 sentences, and when it contradicts what he's said publicly, he gets angry. That seems to me dangerous, especially getting angry at people offering what we have to assume is their best assessment. Worse is the allegation that some have been told not to even offer assessments that contradict Trump's public comments. Those are reckless ways to make decisions. Carefully considering and rejecting isn't necessarily even wrong, but ignoring, dismissing, not even wanting to HEAR contrary info is the worst possible way to run a country.