Put a little context around the “withholding intelligence” statements. What most of those articles are saying is that the IC are avoiding telling the POTUS exactly HOW the information was gathered, not withholding the information itself. It’s not “critical intelligence” that is being denied him.
Say that our spies get information from Putin’s personal valet that he sleeps in pajamas with ping fuzzy unicorns embroidered on it. This is obviously of vital strategic importance, so the POTUS gets this information one morning in his briefing: “Putin sleeps in fuzzy unicorn pajamas.”
What’s different now is that the briefer might have mentioned that the info was received from Putin’s valet, but now they are neglecting to add that (mostly extraneous) piece of data from the President because they are worried that he might mention the source to some Russian buddy and the valet would end up dead behind a vodka supply store.
And while the fact that the IC can’t trust Trump not to blab this stuff is horrific, withholding (or rather, not including) information about sources is nothing new: the briefers routinely do this because knowing HOW the information was gathered isn’t generally something the POTUS actually needs in order to make a decision - he only needs the intelligence. And the more places you write the source’s information down is one more possibility that their identity will be compromised. Obama was no doubt kept in the dark about sources too; he (like Trump) did not have a need to know their identity.