| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government Corruption |
| Tulsi Gabbard Blindsided CIA Over Revoking Clearance of Undercover Officer |
| 2025-08-28 |
| [WSJ] Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence, surprised Central Intelligence Agency officials last week when she included an undercover senior CIA officer on a roster of 37 current and former officials she stripped of security clearances. Most of the 37 people had either participated in intelligence assessments related to Russia’s attempt to influence the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election or had signed a 2019 letter calling for President Trump’s impeachment. Gabbard didn’t know the CIA officer had been working undercover, according to a person familiar with the fallout from the list’s release. Three other people with knowledge of the situation said that Gabbard’s office didn’t meaningfully consult with the CIA before releasing the list. Gabbard’s office delivered the list of 37 people to the CIA the evening before the list’s release, according to three people familiar with the communications and emails read to The Wall Street Journal. The national intelligence office didn’t seek the CIA’s input about the composition of the list, and the CIA had no foreknowledge of Gabbard’s posting on X the following day that revealed the names, including that of the covered CIA officer, according to two of the people familiar with the events. In a memo announcing the revocations, Gabbard said she had acted on Trump’s orders. "Director of National Intelligence Gabbard directed the revocations to ensure individuals who have violated the trust placed in them by weaponizing, politicizing, manipulating, or leaking classified intelligence are no longer allowed to do so," a spokeswoman in Gabbard’s office said. Last week’s episode illuminates ongoing tension between the two top U.S. intelligence officials. Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe had differences in July, when she declassified a lightly redacted document about Russian influence on the 2016 U.S. election. The CIA had wanted to redact a greater portion of the report because it revealed sensitive agency sources and methods, according to people familiar with the matter. The conflict over the document was earlier reported by the Washington Post. "A smart [director of national intelligence] would have consulted with CIA" before identifying the undercover officer, said Larry Pfeiffer, a former chief of staff at the CIA. "It could potentially put CIA cover procedures at risk. It could put relations with foreign governments at risk." So Larry Pfeiffer established the link between Clearance revocations and actual duty assignments did he ? Congress established the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2004 in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks as the coordinating agency of the intelligence community, an arrangement that has stoked previous conflicts. During the Obama administration, then-CIA director Leon Panetta and Dennis Blair, who was national intelligence director, sparred over intelligence personnel overseas and deliberations about the CIA’s covert action. "Director Ratcliffe and the President’s entire elite national security team are committed to eradicating the politicization of intelligence and are focused on executing President Trump’s national security priorities, and keeping the American people safe," CIA spokeswoman Liz Lyons said. The CIA official whose clearance was revoked last week is a longtime Russia hand at the agency. The officer has held intelligence posts for more than 20 years and worked from 2014 to 2017 as an expert on Russia and Eurasia on the National Intelligence Council, according to a publicly listed biography. Earlier this year, the CIA officer spoke at a classified intelligence conference and was described as a senior executive manager in the CIA’s Europe and Eurasia mission center. CIA officers can take civilian or government jobs outside the CIA and later rejoin the agency, where some can assume cover assignments. The CIA declined to comment about the officer, citing a policy against disclosing personnel information. Jobs at the WSJ as well ? The CIA officer didn’t respond to a request for comment. Security clearances allow a person to handle secret documents and are an essential part of working in intelligence. Revoking security clearances effectively terminates employment. Last month in the Oval Office, Gabbard presented the names of the 37 officials to Trump, who said that those on the list who still worked in government needed to be fired, according to an official in the national intelligence office who attended the meeting. You work at the pleasure of the Command In Chief. He can decide who comes and goes, has 'access' or does not. In the past month, Gabbard has solidified her position with Trump as she has pushed a re-examination of the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia worked to influence U.S. voters to favor him in the 2016 election. Previously, in June, Gabbard had fallen out of Trump’s favor over her release of a video in which she said "political elite warmongers" had brought the world closer to "the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before." Yet her political stock has risen as she has declassified documents as part of her campaign against current and former intelligence officials she alleges have manipulated intelligence assessments for political ends. At a White House cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Trump congratulated Gabbard. "You found some interesting things, Tulsi," he said. "She’s becoming a bigger and bigger star every day." In compiling last week’s list, Gabbard included several people who don’t possess security clearances. One of the 37 people—Richard H. Ledgett, a former deputy director of the National Security Agency—had already lost his clearance in a separate January executive order. It is a felony to reveal the identity of a covert intelligence officer or agent, though it is unclear if the statute could be applied to a government disclosure, or if including her on the list constitutes a disclosure. The Award or Revocation "of security access is a Special Security Officer (SSO) action. It does not include duty descriptions assignment status or reason for the revocation. It's just a simple notification of suspension or revocation. In 2003, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage inadvertently revealed to reporters the identity of Valerie Plame, who was at the time a covert officer working in the CIA’s counterproliferation division collecting intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. No one was charged in a subsequent criminal investigation, but Scooter Libby, chief of staff to then-Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted of lying to investigators. Former President George W. Bush commuted Libby’s sentence, and Trump pardoned him in 2018. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #8 It's so typical of the CIA to be caught by surprise. |
| Posted by: Matt 2025-08-28 13:11 |
| #7 Authorized for release So? It is the duty of the journalist to judge carefully whether allowing himself to be made a tool of the source is ethical. With limited space the reporter must choose what is put in the published article and what is left out or summarized rather than quoted extensively. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2025-08-28 12:27 |
| #6 /\ The Wall Street Journal reporter and editors need to bone up on opsec — this was ill done of them. Authorized for release (or written by) the Klingons in all probability. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2025-08-28 10:42 |
| #5 Given all the information in the article, we could probably deduce the gentleman’s identity from open sources alone — not that we will. The Wall Street Journal reporter and editors need to bone up on opsec — this was ill done of them. Also, wasn’t it a big name columnist who revealed Ms Plame’s identity, though he joined the Establishment in gleefully piling on to blame DSoS Armitage? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2025-08-28 10:07 |
| #4 Ohgeedarn.... trash is being taken out. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2025-08-28 08:41 |
| #3 I believe the DS tried this stunt on Trump's first term. |
| Posted by: The Walking Unvaxed 2025-08-28 07:27 |
| #2 He was fired because he cannot be trusted. If he can’t be trusted then having a security clearance is risky. Did the CIA mention if his undercover work was related to spying on the Trump Administration? |
| Posted by: Airandee 2025-08-28 06:49 |
| #1 Yet her political stock has risen as she has declassified documents as part of her campaign against current and former intelligence officials she alleges have manipulated intelligence assessments for political ends. And it will continue to "rise" as she cleans house. Let the pigs continue to squeal. WSJ article was it ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2025-08-28 05:55 |