This guy makes a very compelling case and I somewhat agree with him.
I see motivational scenarios for these leaks: The first is a group of ideologically-driven intel professionals, aggrieved by their loss in November, have made it their partisan mission to destroy the administration via media assassination. They may or may not have enough damning material for impeachment, but they will leak just enough information to make it
look like they do.
The second is that you have a group of intelligence professionals who, while politically aware, have nonetheless accepted the election results. However, they've seen enough damning material on the administration that they feel it
must be acted upon. Some might have even gone through official whistleblower channels, although this is probably less-likely. They also are likely distressed at the very slow pace in which current investigations are progressing, and are using this slow drip of leaks in order to force the investigators' hand. In this scenario, it's not the scope of the material which is lacking, but the speed at which it is being investigated.
The truth is that the leakers are probably a mix of both groups - ideologically driven, as well as frustrated. Regardless of who is doing the leaking, the author is right - the Washington "deep state" deciding who has power is highly problematic. Our intelligence and diplomatic corps were not appointed to act as a check on executive power. That's what the other two branches are for. While it's important for these professionals to keep their eyes open to this kind of stuff, they should not be acting as a de facto fourth government branch.
Bill Moyers' site has this great (and long) piece about the evolution of a deep state:
Essay: Anatomy of the Deep State | BillMoyers.com
It was put out about two years ago some of the references may be a little dated, but it's a fascinating and somewhat prescient read.