Tulsi Gabbard Declassified Documents over CIA Objections

Saturday, August 09, 2025

National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard decided to declassify a document on Russia's interference in the 2016 election last month over the objections of CIA officials who argued that more details should remain secret to protect sensitive spying sources and methods, according to two sources with knowledge of the matter.

Posted by reinheitsgebot at 06:32 PM | 21 COMMENTS | permalink

Exclusive: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a minimally redacted version of a highly classified document on Russia's interference in the 2016 election after an intense behind-the-scenes struggle over secrecy with the CIA.

[image or embed]
-- The Washington Post (@washingtonpost.com) Aug 6, 2025 at 1:56 PM

Comments

Burning the spies, because they made the Republican President look bad.

Same thing Cheney did to Valerie Wilson.

#1 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-08 07:41 AM

It's amazing to me that Gabbard still has a job after Trump publicly proclaimed that she was wrong when she testified to Congress that Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon.
Either she's wrong thus utterly incompetent at her job and is putting the country at grave risk or Trump is completely ignoring the national security experts and putting the country at grave risk.

#2 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2025-08-08 10:16 AM

Johnny, why can't it be both?

#3 | Posted by Wardog at 2025-08-08 11:41 AM

Tulsi Garbage?

That's kinda funny.

#4 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-08 05:28 PM

What's not funny is that this is the kind of s^%# you uncritically support while acting like you're the one with good, well thought out opinions.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-09 02:39 PM

"according to two sources with knowledge of the matter"

I like my sources to have names.

#6 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-09 06:52 PM

In a perfect world, sources wouldn't need to hide their names, and law enforcement agents wouldn't have to hide their faces.

#7 | Posted by sentinel at 2025-08-10 10:49 AM

#6 no, you just want to rationalize ignoring this.

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-10 11:17 AM

I like my sources to have names.

Your source does have a name, -------. It's Trump.

#9 | Posted by horstngraben at 2025-08-10 01:23 PM

Of course the CIA dem Deep Staters would be against something that implicates some of them of nefarious actions, and that has nothing to do with spies overseas.

#10 | Posted by MSgt at 2025-08-10 01:24 PM

I like my sources to have names.
#6 | Posted by lfthndthrds

You're the guy who says he doesn't want the Epstein Files released.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-10 01:26 PM

You're the guy who says he doesn't want the Epstein Files released.

#11 | Posted by snoofy

Because it's better to suspect that Trump is a sexual criminal than prove him to be one.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2025-08-10 01:52 PM

Of course the CIA dem Deep Staters

#10 | Posted by MSgt

Those boogers from your childhood have always lived in your head.

#13 | Posted by Zed at 2025-08-10 01:53 PM