Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, has drawn controversy after revoking the security clearances of 37 individuals last month without first notifying the White House.
The move, which included stripping access from top deputies to CIA director John Ratcliffe, caught officials off guard and has intensified tensions within the intelligence community and the Trump administration.
Surprise move without White House vetting
According to three people familiar with the matter, the White House was blindsided because it was not given the chance to review the list before the clearances were revoked. The lack of an official paper trail from the president directing the effort raised additional concerns.
Officials only realized after the fact that Gabbard’s decision had targeted career CIA officers, including a senior adviser to Ratcliffe who had played a role in highly sensitive military operations. The list also extended beyond intelligence officials to include two Democratic congressional staffers: Maher Bitar, national security adviser to Senator Adam Schiff, and Thomas West, an aide to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This aspect of the move sparked fears of a looming separation-of-powers clash between the executive branch and Congress.
Frustrations within Trump’s circle
Weeks later, senior Trump advisers remain frustrated, calling the episode a blunder that reinforces Trump’s distrust of the intelligence community. The decision also appears to have widened rifts between Gabbard and the CIA, whose officers are responsible for producing the president’s daily intelligence briefings that she delivers.
Some advisers complained that Gabbard’s deputy chief of staff, Alexa Henning, provided little explanation on how the list was compiled or what evidence justified stripping the clearances.
Conflicting accounts
A senior intelligence official, however, disputed these claims, asserting that Gabbard briefed Trump directly in the Oval Office. According to this account, Gabbard presented a list of individuals who had contributed to intelligence assessments on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, suggesting they should be dismissed. Trump reportedly told her that if those individuals were still working in government, they should be removed, and Gabbard was simply carrying out his wishes.
The official added that the clearance revocation list had been emailed to senior White House staff, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, counsel David Warrington, communications leaders Steven Cheung and Taylor Budowich, as well as the National Security Council and chiefs of staff at major intelligence agencies. “The CIA just wants to blame ODNI all the time,” the official said.
White House response
A White House spokesperson declined to clarify whether there was advance notice but issued a statement praising Gabbard. “Director Gabbard is doing a phenomenal job and the White House has worked closely with her on implementing the President’s objectives,” the spokesperson said. They added that the administration is united in holding accountable those accused of misusing security clearances to manipulate intelligence or leak classified material.
Political and operational context
The clearance revocations are part of Trump’s broader effort to punish officials he believes misrepresented intelligence regarding Russian election interference in 2016. Gabbard, in a memo announcing the move, asserted that her actions were taken at Trump’s direction and aimed at individuals who “politicized or weaponized intelligence” or engaged in unauthorized leaks. “Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right,” she wrote.
This latest episode aligns with previous moves by the administration, including pulling security clearances from several of Trump’s political opponents, such as Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, during his first impeachment.
Gabbard’s strained relationship with Trump
Despite her alignment with Trump on intelligence matters, Gabbard’s relationship with the president has been rocky. She has faced his public rebukes in the past, including when Trump contradicted her assessment that Iran was far from acquiring nuclear weapons. “I don’t care what she said,” Trump remarked at the time, insisting Iran was close to having a bomb.
In another instance, Gabbard drew Trump’s ire after posting a video warning of nuclear annihilation, which he criticized as fearmongering and self-promotional. Some advisers believe these incidents reflect Gabbard’s ambitions for higher office.
Conclusion
For now, Gabbard is unlikely to face significant consequences over the clearance controversy. While the move has exacerbated friction between ODNI and the CIA, she has weathered similar storms before and remains positioned as one of Trump’s key intelligence leaders. The episode underscores the persistent challenges between the administration, the intelligence community, and questions over the politicization of national security decisions.
Leo Cruz brings sharp insights into the world of politics, offering balanced reporting and analysis on the latest policies, elections, and global political events. With years of experience covering campaigns and interviewing world leaders, Leo ensures readers are always informed and engaged.
