Intel Community Frame Another “Anonymous” Inspector General Complaint Against DNI Tulsi

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

The Wall Street Journal is out with a very specific hit piece against Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. The article is 100% Intelligence Community insider lawfare against DNI Gabbard; however, in addition to being completely bogus the construct of the hit itself is very revealing.

Within this current story we are going to find out why it is so important for someone, anyone to reveal how the 2019 CIA operation against President Trump was created. {GO DEEP}

The first CIA operation (2017) involved the National Intelligence Council (NIC sub-silo) and a Russian intelligence analyst, Eric Ciaramella. That was the creation of the fraudulent Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) written from within the NIC at the direction of John Brennan. The second CIA operation was the 2019 fraudulent Trump impeachment effort, again originating from Russian analyst Eric Ciaramella (anonymous whistleblower) who was represented by legal counsel Andrew Bakaj.

The current attack against DNI Tulsi Gabbard involves her May 2025 move to take the National Intelligence Counsel out of the CIA, and remove the heads of the agency, Chairman Mike Collins (friend of Mike Morrell) and Deputy Chair Maria Langan-Riekhof. {GO DEEP}

Within the current “leak”, structurally another false narrative, the Wall Street Journal frames yet another anonymous intelligence community whistleblower complaint, this time against DNI Tulsi Gabbard. Notice: the “anonymous whistleblower” is again represented by legal counsel Andrew Bakaj. The anti-Trump intelligence officials are running the same play.

As noted by DNI Spokesperson Olivia Coleman, “This is a classic case of a politically motivated individual weaponizing their position in the Intelligence Community, submitting a baseless complaint and then burying it in highly classified information to create 1) false intrigue, 2) a manufactured narrative, and 3) conditions which make it substantially more difficult to produce “security guidance” for transmittal to Congress.”

---