Whistleblower Alleges Gabbard Blocked NSA Intelligence Report on Trump-Linked Foreign Contact
In a development that has sent shockwaves through Washington's national security establishment, a whistleblower has come forward with explosive allegations regarding Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's handling of sensitive intelligence. According to attorney Andrew Bakaj, who represents the whistleblower, Gabbard personally intervened to prevent the National Security Agency from distributing a critical report about foreign contact with an individual close to former President Donald Trump.
Unusual Phone Call Detection and Controversial Handling
The controversy centres on a highly classified phone call detected by NSA analysts last spring. Intelligence officials identified what they described as an unusual communication between a foreign intelligence operative and a person with close connections to Donald Trump. This discovery, which has remained classified for eight months, represents precisely the type of intelligence that typically triggers immediate distribution through established channels.
Instead of allowing the NSA to follow standard protocols, Gabbard reportedly took extraordinary measures. According to Bakaj's account, she obtained a paper copy of the intelligence report and delivered it directly to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. The following day, Gabbard instructed NSA officials not to publish their intelligence report through normal channels, instead directing them to transmit the highly classified details exclusively to her office.
Whistleblower Complaint and Procedural Irregularities
The whistleblower first contacted the Office of the Inspector General on 17 April, alleging that Gabbard had blocked the routine dispatch of this highly classified intelligence. A formal complaint followed on 21 May, with the whistleblower categorising the matter as one of "urgent concern" requiring immediate congressional attention.
Acting Inspector General Tamara A. Johnson dismissed the complaint after a 14-day review period, writing in a 6 June letter that her office "could not determine if the allegations appear credible." This dismissal has raised eyebrows among legal experts and former intelligence professionals, who have identified what they describe as multiple procedural anomalies in Gabbard's handling of both the intelligence and the subsequent whistleblower disclosure.
Congressional Response and Partisan Divide
The delayed disclosure has created a sharp partisan divide in Congress. Members of the "gang of eight" – the group of Senate and House leaders with access to the most sensitive classified information – received a heavily redacted version of the complaint for review on Tuesday night. Their reactions have fallen along predictable party lines.
Republican lawmakers have largely dismissed the complaint's credibility and defended Gabbard's conduct. Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton stated publicly that "the DNI took the necessary steps to ensure the material was handled and transmitted appropriately in accordance with law."
Democrats, however, have raised serious questions about the months-long delay in disclosure. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, emphasised during a Thursday press conference that "the law is clear: when a whistleblower makes a complaint and wants to get it before Congress, the agency has 21 days to relay it. This whistleblower complaint was issued in May. We didn't receive it until February." Warner suggested the extended delay represented an effort to "bury the complaint" rather than address its substance.
Independence Concerns and Ongoing Investigations
Further complicating matters, lawmakers have expressed concern about the independence of the watchdog office overseeing such complaints. Gabbard assigned one of her top advisers, Dennis Kirk, to work within the Inspector General's office on 9 May – just two weeks after the whistleblower first made contact through the official hotline.
Representative Stephen F. Lynch, the leading Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, wrote to Acting Inspector General Johnson warning that Kirk's appointment "raises troubling questions about the independence of the IC IG." Kirk previously served in the first Trump administration and co-authored Project 2025, a controversial policy roadmap for restructuring the federal government.
In response to mounting pressure, Gabbard's office issued its first public acknowledgment of the complaint in a letter to lawmakers on Tuesday. The correspondence, posted to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence's official social media account, claimed the Inspector General had failed to notify Gabbard of her obligations to transmit the complaint to Congress.
Executive Privilege and Continued Secrecy
The actual contents of the whistleblower complaint remain largely unknown, even to members of congressional intelligence committees. Bakaj revealed that Gabbard's office redacted substantial portions of the complaint released to lawmakers, citing executive privilege. "I don't know the contents of the complaint," Bakaj acknowledged, "but by exercising executive privilege they are flagging that it involves presidential action."
As the controversy continues to unfold, members of the gang of eight have reportedly contacted the NSA directly to request the underlying intelligence that the whistleblower says Gabbard blocked. This direct approach circumvents both the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Inspector General's office, reflecting lawmakers' determination to obtain unfiltered information about what many consider a serious breach of intelligence protocols.
The whistleblower's attorney plans to contact members of the Senate and House intelligence committees to schedule an unclassified briefing about Gabbard's conduct and the "underlying intelligence concerns." With the intelligence community's credibility at stake and congressional investigations likely to intensify, this developing story represents one of the most significant national security controversies of recent years.
