Executive Summary
- Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard ousted a CIA expert who had briefed President Trump’s team, publicly naming the individual and revoking her security clearance, which sparked debate regarding the officer’s operational cover.
- Gabbard stated the revocations are to ensure individuals who have “weaponized, politicized, manipulated, or leaked classified intelligence” are no longer able to do so, aligning with her broader mandate to “depoliticize” the intelligence community.
- The incident highlights ongoing bureaucratic tension and coordination concerns between the ODNI and the CIA, reflecting broader friction within the U.S. intelligence community due to Gabbard’s personnel changes and reform efforts.
The Story So Far
- The current events, including the ousting of a CIA expert, are part of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s broader mission to “depoliticize” the intelligence community, which involves revoking security clearances for individuals she claims have weaponized or politicized intelligence. This initiative has generated significant internal tensions and friction between her office and other intelligence agencies, such as the CIA, often due to concerns over a perceived lack of coordination in these widespread personnel changes.
Why This Matters
- Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s public naming and revocation of a CIA officer’s security clearance, amid broader efforts to “depoliticize” the intelligence community, highlights escalating internal tensions and a perceived lack of coordination among agencies, which could compromise covert operations, undermine morale, and potentially erode critical intelligence gathering and analysis capabilities, particularly regarding expertise on issues like Russia.
Who Thinks What?
- Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s office stated that the revocation of security clearances, including for a CIA expert, was necessary to prevent individuals from weaponizing, politicizing, manipulating, or leaking classified intelligence, as part of her broader mission to “depoliticize” the intelligence community.
- Some CIA officers expressed concerns that Director Gabbard often acts without adequate coordination with intelligence agencies, believing she is effectively purging personnel and may have publicly identified an officer operating under cover.
- A person close to Director Gabbard disputed that the ousted CIA employee was operating under cover at the time, asserting that the ODNI had coordinated the decision with the CIA and White House Counsel’s office, and that the revocation was unrelated to Russia-related issues.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard abruptly ousted a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) expert who had helped brief President Trump’s team in the lead-up to his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to several people familiar with the episode. Gabbard publicly named the individual in a memo last week, announcing the revocation of security clearances for several current and former intelligence officials, an action that reportedly identified a CIA officer operating under cover.
Details of the Ousting
The DNI’s public naming of the employee in an X post, alongside the revocation of her security clearance, has sparked debate regarding her operational status. A source with direct knowledge of the matter stated that the employee was operating under cover at the time Gabbard named her, despite having been publicly affiliated with the CIA in the past. However, a person close to Gabbard disputes this, citing the employee’s past public affiliation with the agency.
Intelligence officers at the CIA traditionally move in and out of “covered” jobs depending on their specific roles. It remains unclear why Gabbard moved to effectively fire the officer, whose name appeared on a list of 37 current and former intelligence officers whose clearances were revoked.
Gabbard’s Rationale and Internal Tensions
A DNI spokesperson stated that Director Gabbard directed the revocations to ensure that “individuals who have violated the trust placed in them by weaponizing, politicizing, manipulating, or leaking classified intelligence are no longer allowed to do so.” Gabbard’s broader mandate includes “depoliticizing” the intelligence community, and she has reportedly dismissed nearly 30 percent of her own agency’s staff.
This incident is the latest example of bureaucratic tension between the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, which is led by Director John Ratcliffe. Some CIA officers have expressed concerns that Gabbard often acts without adequate coordination with the intelligence agencies whose personnel she is effectively purging.
Conversely, a person close to Gabbard denied that the CIA was caught by surprise, stating that the ODNI had emailed the CIA and other relevant agencies prior to Gabbard’s public post. This source also added that the decision was coordinated with the White House Counsel’s office and that the revocation of this CIA employee’s security clearance was unrelated to their work on Russia-related issues, noting plans to promote another intelligence official with similar expertise.
The episode highlights ongoing internal dynamics and friction within the U.S. intelligence community as Director Gabbard continues her stated mission to reform and “depoliticize” intelligence operations through significant personnel changes and security clearance revocations.
