Scoop: Gabbard tightens grip on intel assessments after Venezuela clash

Axios

a day ago

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has imposed a more intensive review process for inter-agency reports, slowing their publication and deepening internal fears about political influence on intelligence, two U.S. officials tell Axios.
The intrigue: The new layers of approval were introduced after Gabbard's acting chief of staff pushed for changes to a politically inconvenient report on Venezuela from experts across multiple intelligence agencies — an internal dispute that spilled into public view.
Driving the news: That report from the National Intelligence Council (NIC) cast doubt on links the White House had drawn between the Tren de Aragua cartel and the Venezuelan government to justify deporting suspected gang members to El Salvador.
Gabbard fired the acting heads of the NIC who approved that report last month. Her office said it was part of her efforts to "end the weaponization and politicization of the Intelligence Community."
Veterans of U.S. intelligence warned the episode would send a "chill" through the community. "Nobody wants to give the boss what he or she needs to hear if the messenger is going to get shot," a former senior intel official told Axios.
After the Venezuela controversy, Gabbard announced that she'd referred"deep-state criminals" to the Department of Justice over suspected leaks.
Behind the scenes: She also quietly added a new layer of approval for NIC reports. An intelligence official said everything now needs sign-off from Deputy DNI for Mission Integration William Ruger or from Gabbard herself.
An intelligence official told Axios the result was a slower flow of intelligence to policymakers. "The mere fact that they're going through all these steps has brought it to a trickle."
"The process has definitely become more cumbersome," another U.S. official said, concurring that the NIC was publishing less in recent weeks than it had previously.
In response to questions from Axios, an official from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said it was normal for the DNI or Deputy DNI to review reports prior to publication.
The official did confirm changes had been made. "Considering the heads of the NIC were terminated for their inability to remove political priorities from the workplace, there is an even more comprehensive review of the products coming out of the NIC to ensure the office is producing apolitical intelligence."
"This is good for the trust of the American people in the intelligence community and for the safety and security of our nation," the official contended.
The other side: A former member of the NIC, which is typically staffed by career intelligence officials on rotation from other agencies, told Axios he'd never heard of that level of intervention by DNI leadership into the publishing process.
"The NIC is a production mill for the DNI, so to require everything to be going through Mission Integration, or wherever else, would have constipated the system," he said.
Between the lines: The changes reflect the mutual distrust between the intelligence community and its new leadership.
Intelligence officials worry Gabbard's team may shape intelligence to match their political preferences. But Gabbard's team claims "deep state" officials are shaping the intelligence to match their political preferences, hence the review process.
How it works: The NIC is responsible for providing assessments that take in the views of all U.S. intelligence agencies, often in response to requests from the White House.
Typically a relevant subject matter expert at CIA or another agency will draft a paper which is then circulated among the relevant analysts at a dozen or so additional agencies for their input.
The final product is published by the NIC in a classified format, and provided to the relevant policymakers.
These can range from a one-pager turned around quickly on a hot-button issue — some aspect of the war in Ukraine, for example — or a months-long deep dive into an adversary's nuclear capabilities or terror threats to the homeland.
In the case of the Venezuela report, the assessment was that the Tren de Aragua cartel was not being controlled by the Venezuelan government — contradicting a claim President Trump made while invoking the Alien Enemies Act.
Joe Kent, Gabbard's chief of staff, wrote intel officials in April that "some rewriting" and more analytic work was needed "so this document is not used against the DNI or POTUS," the New York Times reported.
Intelligence community members Axios spoke to for this story raised concerns that after the Venezuela episode, analysts could start to self-censor or simply keep their heads down to avoid political backlash.
What they're saying: "Ensuring only the most timely, apolitical, and accurate intelligence reaches the desks of our decision makers is DNI Gabbard's top priority," Gabbard's spokesperson Olivia Coleman told Axios.