

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
“We don’t need a weaponized DNI; we need professionals there," said Senate Majority Leader John Thune.
Republican US senators including Majority Leader John Thune on Tuesday joined a growing chorus of criticism in response to President Donald Trump's appointment of loyalist Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence, despite an utter lack of relevant experience or expertise.
Thune (SD) was asked by a reporter what he thought of Trump's appointment of the private equity firm founder and homebuilder—who is currently director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—to the top intel post, which current Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard will officially vacate on June 30.
“We don’t need a weaponized DNI; we need professionals there," Thune said, according to The Hill. “If they nominate him to take the position permanently, he’ll have to go through a confirmation process and hearings and everything else, so we’ll see."
Thune added that Pulte would have "a lengthy road ahead of him" if Trump sought to make him the permanent DNI.
The majority leader wasn't the only Senate Republican who voiced opposition to Trump's move.
"The best I can tell you is he’s not qualified, but I don’t know anything about him other than that," said outgoing Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who last month lost a primary to Trump-backed Republican challenger Rep. Julia Letlow.
Sen. John Cornyn—who also lost his recent primary runoff in Texas after Trump backed his opponent, state Attorney General Ken Paxton—told reporters that “I see no evidence of any qualifications for that job" for Pulte, "but I’m willing to listen.”
Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday on Democratic opposition to Pulte's appointment, mostly over allegations that he's used his position at FHFA to target Trump's political foes for politically motivated mortgage fraud investigations.
Targeted individuals include two figures involved in Trump's two impeachments: Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and former Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.); former FBI Director James Comey, who oversaw an investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election; New York Attorney General Letitia James, who won a $450 million judgment against the president and his business in a civil fraud case; and Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook, whom the president has been attempting to oust so that he can fill the US central bank with loyalists.
Last November, a federal judge dismissed the cases against Comey and James, ruling that Trump's handpicked prosecutor was illegally installed. The following month, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office agreed to investigate whether Pulte and other FHFA employees "potentially misused federal authority and resources to publicly accuse prominent Democrats and President Donald Trump’s perceived political enemies of mortgage fraud."
Even more Democrats piled on Pulte later on Tuesday.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan said on X: "As someone who helped set up the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, I oppose elevating Bill Pulte to acting director. He has no experience. Zero. And he is the wrong choice to help keep us safe."
"Mr. Pulte has weaponized his current agency against the president's critics, he's fired federal watchdogs looking into his allies, and he is under active investigation by the Government Accountability Office," she continued. "This all makes him an incredibly dangerous choice to be in charge of ODNI and have access to the tools of this office."
"As someone who has had the government weaponized against me, I cannot in good conscience support his elevation to such a sensitive post," added Slotkin, who drew Trump's ire and a federal probe with a video reminding US troops of their duty to not follow illegal orders. "The president should choose a serious nominee."
Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona—a retired Navy captain who was investigated by the Pentagon for comments similar to Slotkin's until a federal judge blocked the baseless probe—quipped, “If you’re good at drywall, you must be good at national intelligence."
"I don’t get it," he added. "This is an important job, you know. This is about the safety of all Americans.”
Advocacy groups also rejected Pulte's appointment, with the co-chairs of the Not Above the Law coalition issuing a statement reading, “This appointment is a reward, and has nothing to do with qualifications."
"At FHFA, Bill Pulte did one thing: hunt Trump’s perceived enemies," the statement by Public Citizen's Lisa Gilbert, Constitutional Accountability Center's Praveen Fernandes, MoveOn's Kelsey Herbert, and Stand Up America's Brett Edkins continued. "He ginned up mortgage fraud allegations against sitting officials, which federal investigators found baseless, and weaponized a housing regulator to punish those who tried to hold Trump accountable."
“If past is prologue, he will now do the same with the vast resources of the US intelligence community," the co-chairs asserted. "The agencies built to protect Americans, including our troops at home and abroad, will be turned into instruments of political retribution, betraying the men and women who serve those agencies and every American whose safety depends on them."
“Trump doesn’t staff his government with people who uphold the law," the statement adds. "He installs people willing to break it for him, and now he’s handing one of them the keys to our nation’s most sensitive information.”
"She never should've had this job to begin with," said one Democratic lawmaker.
Tulsi Gabbard resigned on Friday after serving as US President Donald Trump's Director of National Security during his second term in the White House.
"Good riddance," said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) in response. "She never should've had this job to begin with."
Hegseth also scolded the US media for reporting negative news about the war and insisted that it wasn't a "quagmire."
President Donald Trump's unprovoked and unconstitutional war against Iran has led to energy prices surging across the globe while unleashing political instability across the Middle East.
However, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday that the world needs to show Trump more gratitude for everything he's done.
Speaking at a press conference, Hegseth lambasted US allies who so far have not joined Trump's Iran war, which he launched early on a Saturday morning without any approval from the US Congress.
"The world, the Middle East, our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump: 'Thank you,'" Hegseth said. "Thank you for the courage to stop this terror state from holding the world hostage with missiles while building, or attempting to build, a nuclear bomb. Thank you for doing the work of the free world."
Hegseth: "Our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump -- 'Thank you. Thank you for the courage to stop this terror stage from holding the world hostage while building or attempting to build a nuclear bomb.'" pic.twitter.com/EpuPOUDd6I
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 19, 2026
US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified under oath before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee on Wednesday that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been "obliterated" by US-led airstrikes that were launched last year, and that there "has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability" since then.
Former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent also said Iran had posed "no imminent threat" when he announced his resignation this week.
Despite those acknowledgments by high-level officials, elsewhere in the press conference, Hegseth attacked the US media for reporting negative news about the Iran war.
"The media here—not all of it, but much of it—wants you to think, just 19 days into this conflict, that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire," claimed the one-time Fox News host. "Nothing could be further from the truth."
Hegseth: The media wants you to think that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hear it from me.
One of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish… pic.twitter.com/qI3RpGzmy3
— Acyn (@Acyn) March 19, 2026
Hegseth then informed viewers that as "one of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish politicians like [Presidents George W.] Bush, [Barack] Obama, and [Joe] Biden squander American credibility," he could credibly claim that "this is not those wars" because "President Trump knows better."
Hegseth also defended the Pentagon's request for $200 billion in funding for the war, telling reporters, "IT takes money to kill bad guys."
The Iran Health Ministry has estimated more than 1,200 Iranians have been killed in Israeli and US strikes since the war began in late February.
A recent analysis of opinion polls conducted by data analyst G. Elliott Morris found that the Iran war is the most unpopular military conflict launched by the US over the span of at least three decades.
“The big takeaway from these numbers is that the new war in Iran is very unpopular,” Morris explained. “Not merely negative-number-so-what unpopular, but worst-ever-support-for-war-when-it-started unpopular. With just 38% of Americans in favor, support for bombing Iran is lower than retrospective support for the war in Iraq was in 2014.”
Sen. Jon Ossoff questioned how Iran could pose an "imminent nuclear threat" despite the purported "obliteration" of its nuclear program.
Sen. Jon Ossoff on Wednesday cornered Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard over President Donald Trump's false claims that he launched a war with Iran because it was an "imminent" threat to US national security.
During a Senate Select Intelligence Committee hearing, Ossoff (D-Ga.) questioned Gabbard about how any purported threat from Iran could possibly be deemed "imminent" given past administration statements about the state of its nuclear weapons program.
Ossoff began by noting that Gabbard's opening statement given to the committee ahead of the meeting claimed that "Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated" as a result of airstrikes launched last year by the US.
"So the assessment of the intelligence community is that Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated by last summer's airstrikes?" he asked.
"Yes," replied Gabbard, who prior to joining the Trump administration had a long history of advocating against launching a regime change war against Iran.
OSSOFF: Your opening statement stated that as a result of last summer's airstrikes, Iran's nuclear enrichment program was 'obliterated.' Correct?
GABBARD: That's right
OSSOFF: The WH stated on March 1 that this war was launched to 'eliminate the imminent nuclear threat posed by… pic.twitter.com/3rPVnmZVTb
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 18, 2026
"The opening statement you submitted to the community last night also stated, 'There has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability,' correct?" Ossoff continued.
"That's right," Gabbard replied.
"The White House stated on March 4 of this year that this war... was a 'military campaign to eliminate the imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime,'" Ossoff said. "That's a statement from the White House: 'The imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime.' Was it the assessment of the intelligence community that there was an imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?"
Gabbard briefly paused and then responded that "the intelligence community assessed that Iran maintained the intention to rebuild and to continue to grow their nuclear enrichment capabilities."
At this point, Ossoff interjected.
"Was it the assessment of the intelligence community that there was an 'imminent nuclear threat' posted by the Iranian regime, yes or no?" he pressed.
"Senator, the only person who can determine what is or is not an imminent threat is the president," Gabbard said.
"False," Ossoff shot back. "This is the worldwide threats hearing where you present to Congress national intelligence... you've stated today that the intelligence community's assessment is that Iran's nuclear enrichment program was 'obliterated,' and that there 'had been no efforts since then to try to enrich their capability.'"
Ossoff then asked Gabbard if the intelligence community believed Iran posed an "imminent nuclear threat" despite the purported "obliteration" of its nuclear program.
"It is not the intelligence community's responsibility to determined what is and is not an imminent threat," Gabbard said.
"It is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States," Ossoff countered. "This is the worldwide threats hearing."
Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, who received the invite, said that what the president is "trying to do is really disrupt the midterm election.”
State election officials were left unnerved after being summoned by the FBI to a mysterious conference to discuss "preparations" for this year's midterm elections, which President Donald Trump has recently called for Republicans to "nationalize" in violation of the Constitution.
On Tuesday, election officials in all 50 states received an email from Kellie M. Hardiman, who identified herself as an “FBI Election Executive.”
Hardiman said the officials were invited to a call on February 25 with “your election partners” at the FBI, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the US Postal Inspection Service (USPIS), and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
The email, obtained via a public records request by Matt Berg of Crooked Media, did not specify the purpose of the meeting other than to say it was "to prepare for the 2026 US midterm elections."
Hardiman added that the FBI and other agencies "would like to invite you to a call where we can discuss our preparations for the cycle, as well as updates and resources we can provide to you and your staff.”
At the end of the email, she reiterated, "We look forward to speaking with you in support of the 2026 midterm elections."
Berg said he contacted the FBI for comment, to which a spokesperson responded: "Thank you for reaching out. The FBI has no comment.”
The email has heightened fears that the Trump administration is meddling in the midterms or planning to do so; he has suggested on multiple occasions that the elections should be “canceled” outright. Republican strategists are reportedly increasingly worried that the GOP could lose control of both the US Senate and the House.
Although the Constitution plainly states that elections are to be run by state governments, Trump earlier this week said Republicans should "nationalize" elections and “take control of the voting in at least 15 places" led by Democrats.
Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar told Berg he'd never heard of a conference call like this. He said he wrote back to Hardiman: “Is this real? Given what’s occurred over the last two weeks, I am concerned.”
“I was just like, ‘What is this?’ It’s the strangest thing in the world that the FBI is reaching out to us and trying to coordinate election security,” Aguilar said. "It's never happened in the past. The casualness which they did… it was just beyond crazy.”
A former DOJ official told Berg that while it is normal for the department to monitor elections, the email and conference call were highly unusual: “I can’t imagine why it would be coordinated in that way," he said.
Another official who received the email told NBC News that the message was “unusual and unexpected."
Speaking of Hardiman, the official said, “No one has heard of this person—and we’re all wondering what an 'FBI Election Executive' is." NBC reported that a LinkedIn page for Hardiman showed she was appointed to the position seven months ago.
The inclusion of the Department of Homeland Security as one of the election "partners" is also noteworthy, given the recent suggestion by Trump ally Steve Bannon that the president will "have ICE surround the polls," referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The agency has increasingly acted as a sort of paramilitary force for Trump in the localities where it's been deployed, most recently in Minnesota.
After federal agents killed three US citizens and provoked furious protests, Trump offered to withdraw agents from the state, but only if it turned over its voting rolls to the federal government.
At Trump's apparent direction, the FBI raided an election hub in Atlanta last week to seize materials from the 2020 election to further his already disproven claims that his loss to former President Joe Biden was the result of fraud.
And earlier this week, it was reported that back in May, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard sent a team to Puerto Rico to seize voting machines in an effort to investigate another outlandish Trump claim that they were hacked by Venezuela. Sources with knowledge of the investigation told Reuters that no evidence of that conspiracy was uncovered.
“It’s unconstitutional for the president to do what he wants to do,” Aguilar said. “We understand that what he’s trying to do is really disrupt the midterm election, because the ‘26 election is critical to the ‘28 election.”
Aguilar said officials in Nevada are “constantly preparing and strategizing" for whatever Trump might attempt and said, “We have to prepare for that litigation at a moment’s notice, and we will be prepared in Nevada to push back."
Danny Miller, an attorney who has worked for Renew Democracy and Democracy Forward, expressed fear about Trump's coordination of federal law enforcement agencies to patrol elections, given that he has already supported one violent attempt to overturn his loss in 2020.
"Trump will try to do something far worse than January 6th before all is said and done," Miller said. "It’s up to civil society to use all the tools of democracy to stop him."
"When Wyden sends a cryptic letter or asks a pointed question suggesting something concerning is happening behind the classification curtain, something concerning is absolutely happening," said one observer.
Sen. Ron Wyden "only talks like this when the spies do something *real* bad."
That's how journalist Spencer Ackerman reacted Thursday to a letter from the Oregon Democrat to Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe expressing alarm over unspecified CIA activities, as observers noted Wyden's history of heads-up previews of government wrongdoing.
“I write to alert you to a classified letter I sent you earlier today, in which I express deep concerns about CIA activities,” Wyden, who is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in the letter. “Thank you for your attention to this important matter.”
Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner “shares many of the concerns expressed by Sen. Wyden in his letter, and in fact he has expressed them to... Ratcliffe himself," according to a spokesperson for the Virginia Democrat.
This is how Sen. Ron Wyden clues the public into activity that he finds extremely alarming. He does a press release about a letter he sent to the director of the CIA that basically says, 'I want to make sure you saw the classified letter I sent early today.' www.wyden.senate.gov/imo/media/do...
[image or embed]
— Kashmir Hill (@kashhill.bsky.social) February 4, 2026 at 1:53 PM
Wyden told HuffPost Thursday that “the reason I sent the public letter is that is all that I’m allowed to say publicly, and I’m gonna leave it at that.”
“I said what I did for a specific reason," he added. "I wrote it for a specific reason. That’s all I can say.”
Wyden has a storied history of issuing cryptic warnings about classified government or intelligence misdeeds before they are disclosed to the public, going back to the Obama administration's secret reinterpretation of the PATRIOT Act in 2011.
The senator also warned about a withheld 2015 Department of Justice legal opinion on cybersecurity, Section 702 surveillance during the first Trump administration, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) use of bulk administrative subpoenas to collect millions of Americans’ financial records during the Biden administration, and more.
Techdirt blog editor Mike Masnick calls it the "Wyden Siren": "The pattern repeats. Wyden asks a specific question about surveillance. The intelligence community answers a slightly different question in a way that technically isn’t lying but is designed to mislead. Wyden calls them out. Eventually, the truth comes out, and it’s always worse than people assumed."
"The track record here is essentially perfect," Masnick added. "When Wyden sends a cryptic letter or asks a pointed question suggesting something concerning is happening behind the classification curtain, something concerning is absolutely happening behind the classification curtain."
Masnick continued:
So what’s happening at the CIA that has Wyden sending a two-sentence letter that amounts to “I legally cannot tell you what’s wrong, but something is very wrong?"
We don’t know yet. That’s the whole point of classification—it keeps the public in the dark about what their government is doing in their name. But Wyden’s letter is the equivalent of a fire alarm. He’s seen something. He can’t say what. But he wants there to be a record that he raised the concern.
"Given the current administration’s approach to, well, everything, the possibilities are unfortunately vast," Masnick said. "Is it about domestic surveillance? Something about current [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] Tulsi Gabbard? International operations gone sideways? Some new interpretation of the CIA’s authorities that would make Americans’ hair stand on end if they knew about it? We’re left guessing, just like we were guessing about the PATRIOT Act’s secret interpretation back in 2011."
"But here’s what we do know: Ron Wyden has been doing this for at least 15 years," Masnick added. "And every single time, he’s been vindicated. The secret programs were real. The abuses were real. The gap between what the public thought was happening and what was actually happening was real."
"The Wyden Siren is blaring," he added. "Pay attention."
The attorney representing the whistleblower called it "confounding" that it took Gabbard’s office eight months to send a disclosure to Congress.
A whistleblower last year filed a complaint against US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard whose contents are so sensitive that the complaint itself has reportedly been locked in a safe.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that the complaint was filed in May, and it set off "a continuing, behind-the-scenes struggle about how to assess and handle it, with the whistleblower’s lawyer accusing Gabbard of stonewalling the complaint."
The Journal's sources say that the complaint is so classified that no one in the US Congress has even laid eyes on it, as disclosure of its contents could cause "grave damage to national security."
A letter written by Andrew Bakaj, the whistleblower's attorney, to Gabbard in November accused her office of trying to block the complaint from reaching members of Congress by failing to provide guidance about how it should be handled while minimizing national security risks.
Gabbard's office told the Journal that it is working to get the issue resolved but that it is taking time because of the sensitive nature of the complaint, which it dismissed as "baseless and politically motivated."
However, Bakaj told the Journal that he doesn't believe Gabbard's office is making a good-faith effort to disclose the complaint to Congress.
“From my experience, it is confounding for [Gabbard’s office] to take weeks—let alone eight months—to transmit a disclosure to Congress,” he said.
The Journal was not able to verify the contents of the complaint against Gabbard, and Bakaj told the paper that its contents are so highly classified that he has not been allowed to view it.
Whistleblower Aid, the nonprofit legal organization where Bakaj serves as chief legal counsel, called on Monday for Congress to open an investigation into Gabbard "for hiding high-level intelligence... for nearly eight months," as well as for "her attempts to bury a whistleblower disclosure about her own actions," as required by US law.
National security attorney Mark Zaid, who co-founded Whistleblower Aid, praised the organization's work in representing the whistleblower and declared in a social media post that Gabbard and her office "have a lot of explaining to do."
Trump's director of National Intelligence used to warn against "regime change wars." Now she's enabling one.
Seven years ago, US Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard wrote in 2019 on Twitter: "The United States needs to stay out of Venezuela. Let the Venezuelan people determine their future. We don't other countries to choose our leaders—so we have to stop trying to choose theirs."
Now as director of National Intelligence in the Trump administration, Tulsi Gabbard is a key part of the US overthrow of the Venezuelan government and the kidnapping of the Venezuelan president and his wife and the deaths of at least 40 persons in Venezuela.
During her 2018 Congressional reelection campaign, she warned of “regime change wars:” “Every dollar spent on interventionist regime change wars is a dollar not spent on education, healthcare, infrastructure, and a myriad of other needs desperately needed right here at home.”
“We are spending trillions of dollars on unnecessary interventionist wars that do not serve the interests of the American people—money that should be spent on investing in infrastructure, affordable housing, education, healthcare, and other priorities here at home,” Gabbard said in 2018.

In 2019, Gabbard said: "Leaders in this country from both political parties looking around the world and picking and choosing which bad dictator they want to overthrow.... Sending our military into harm's way and then trying to export some American model of democracy that may or may not be welcome by the people in those countries, and it's proven to have been a failure."
As far as other countries interfering in the choice of their leaders, the president who nominated her to be the director of National Intelligence proudly states that his endorsement of a candidate in the presidential election in Honduras helped a right-wing candidate get elected in a still contested election, as well as candidates in Chile and Argentina. So much for not choosing leaders of other countries.
In a 2019 interview with NPR, Gabbard said: "I think that the outsized power that the political parties hold can often be used in the wrong way to squelch our democracy and dissenting voices even within our own party." But, she said, she has never considered leaving the Democratic Party… until she did for President Donald Trump’s party, which is doing the same.
What happened to Tulsi Gabbard and her principles?
As Reuters asked agencies about the Interagency Weaponization Working Group targeting "the Deep State," Fox News amplified key government leaders' claims about the initiative.
As President Donald Trump's increasingly authoritarian behavior draws millions of Americans to the streets in protest, his administration is pushing a narrative about a newly revealed interagency group formed in response to one of his executive orders.
Trump issued his Ending the Weaponization of the Federal Government order on the first day of his second administration, and US Attorney General Pam Bondi and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard swiftly announced related groups at their agencies. Reuters published a report late Monday after speaking with an unnamed source and obtaining federal records about an umbrella organization, the Interagency Weaponization Working Group (IWWG).
"Trump and his allies use the term 'weaponization' to refer to their unproven claims that officials from previous administrations abused federal power to target him during his two impeachments, his criminal prosecutions, and the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election," Reuters reported. The source said IWWG's mission is "basically to go after 'the Deep State,'" which, the outlet noted, is a term "used by Trump and his supporters to refer to the president's perceived foes from the Obama and Biden administrations and his own first term."
IWWG involves at least 39 officials from across the government, including the White House, Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Communications Commission, Internal Revenue Service, and departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Justice (DOJ), according to Reuters.
A group of dozens of officials from across the federal government, including U.S. intelligence officers, has been helping to steer Trump's drive for retribution against his perceived “Deep State” enemies, according to government records and a source familiar with the effort.
[image or embed]
— Jon Cooper (@joncooper-us.bsky.social) October 20, 2025 at 9:56 PM
"Shortly after Reuters asked the agencies for comment on Monday," the news outlet highlighted, "Fox News reported the existence of the group, citing Gabbard as saying she 'stood up this working group.'"
Specifically, Gabbard told Fox that IWWG has been meeting biweekly since April to "share information, coordinate, and execute."
"The American people made a clear choice when they elected President Trump—to stop the Biden administration's prolific and dangerous weaponization of government agencies against the American people and the Constitution," she said. "I stood up this working group to start the important work of interagency coordination under President Trump's leadership to deliver accountability."
"True accountability is the first step toward lasting change," added the former congresswoman.
The Fox article, published just a few hours before Reuters' reporting, also features comments from Bondi and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel, who have been accused of abusing their positions and politicizing their agencies for the president. The pair pointed to DOJ action against Trump, "pro-life" advocates, and parents at school board meetings during the Biden administration.
There are also complaints from unnamed officials that the media has attempted to "negatively spin lawful oversight and accountability" by claiming that IWWG is a way for the Trump administration to weaponize the government against political opponents. One official told Fox, "The irony is, accusing the Interagency Weaponization Working Group of targeting the president’s political opponents is classic projection and could not be further from the truth."
Such comments appear to be a direct response to Reuters, which reported: "Among those discussed by the interagency group, the source said, were former FBI Director James Comey; Anthony Fauci, Trump's chief medical adviser on the Covid-19 pandemic; and former top US military commanders who implemented orders to make Covid-19 vaccinations compulsory for servicemembers. Discussions of potential targets have ranged beyond current and former government employees to include former President Joe Biden's son, Hunter."
A senior ODNI official claimed that there was "no targeting of any individual person for retribution," and "IWWG is simply looking at available facts and evidence that may point to actions, reports, agencies, individuals, etc. who illegally weaponized the government in order to carry out political attacks."
Fauci and lawyers for Hunter Biden and Comey did not respond to requests for comment. Comey is fighting criminal charges that his legal team argues are an example of officials using "courts to punish and imprison their perceived personal and political enemies."
After Comey was indicted last month, Trump pledged that "there'll be others." Since then, Trump adviser-turned-critic John Bolton and New York Attorney General Letitia James—who successfully prosecuted the president for financial crimes—also have been indicted.
According to Reuters:
Another focus for the interagency group was retribution for the prosecution of the January 6 rioters, said the source.
Bondi tasked the DOJ Weaponization Working Group with reviewing the J6 prosecutions. Some of the documents seen by Reuters show that a smaller subset of employees from across the government have been convening on the topic. The Justice Department denied in its statement to Reuters that a separate January 6 group exists.
Among other issues the source recalled being discussed were the Jeffrey Epstein files, the prosecutions of Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, and the possibility of stripping security clearances from transgender US officials. Reuters could not independently confirm these were the subject of discussions.
Officials from the White House and ODNI denied that the Epstein files were discussed. The ODNI officials said the same about revoking security clearance for transgender officials and the Bannon and Navarro cases.
Despite officials' claims, readers of the reporting suggested that IWWG appears to be a way for the administration to target Trump's "enemies list."
Larry Pfeiffer, who was previously a senior director of the White House Situation Room and chief of staff to former Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael V. Hayden, sarcastically said on social media: "Great! An interagency enemies list committee. And with participants from CIA and the ODNI. Nothing unusual about that!"
Meanwhile, Mother Jones editor-in-chief Clara Jeffery dubbed IWWG the president's "revenge committee."
With violent rhetoric targeting Obama beginning to spread on fringe platforms, fanned by Trump’s and Gabbard’s posts, we risk further normalizing political violence which is already on the rise.
On July 18, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard made a post on Twitter alleging “the most powerful people in the Obama administration,” including former President Barack Obama, were involved in a “years-long coup” and a “treasonous conspiracy” against Donald Trump. Her post quickly went viral, amassing over 13 million views over the weekend, and galvanized the online fringe to fantasize about violence against their political enemies. Trump fanned Gabbard’s flames, sharing a racist AI-generated video of Obama being arrested on Truth Social, which Trump owns.
Major news stories generally act as flashpoints for extremists online to ramp up their spread of hatred and advocating for violence. This time was no different, as extremists, clearly inspired by Trump and Gabbard’s posts, were given new reasons to target their long-time nemesis, former President Obama. The Global Project Against Hate and Extremism’s (GPAHE) research on unmoderated platforms like Truth Social, Gab, and Telegram, which are frequently used to spew hatred and share violent political fantasies, found that users directed racist comments at Barack Obama, and his wife Michelle, and dreamt of political violence, suggesting Obama should face a firing squad or public execution by hanging, a crude reference to America’s dark history of racist mobs lynching Black people.
On Truth Social, comments made between July 17 and July 20 targeting Obama as treasonous and deserving of either imprisonment or execution rose from 3 to 36, an 1,100% increase, including a high of 56 comments on July 19, reflecting a frightening 1,767% increase. Gabbard’s post enraged Trump supporters who were quick to call for a military tribunal against Obama, demanding that Attorney General Pam Bondi “get them all now and don’t waste another day… The punishment for Treason is Hanging,” and that Obama and his former cabinet “should all [be] put up against a wall for a firing squad.” One user expressed glee at the possibility of Obama being “prosecuted for the death penalty,” saying “I’m so happy finally accountability for that corrupt piece of dog sh*t.” Another called for “public trials and public executions” against former members of the Obama administration, saying “our enemies are from within not foreign,” sharing a similar remark from Vice President JD Vance, who in a February address to European leaders warned them of “the threat from within.”

On Gab, a platform similar to Twitter, comments made between July 17 and July 20 targeting Obama as treasonous and deserving of either imprisonment or execution rose from 9 to 48, representing a 433% increase. Users on Gab responded to Gabbard’s allegations by further accusing “commie Jews and black democrats” of “kill[ing] the American elections system.” Others exclaimed they weren’t satisfied with an arrest, saying “Obama should be prosecuted for treason, all asset ceases, and both him and Mooochelle deported to Tanzania,” but would “settle for a firing squad of all on [pay-per-view].” In the same comment, the user accuses Obama of being a “Radical Islamic Terrorist Sympathizer” whose goal was to transform America “into a socialist black terrorist sh*t-hole.” Users called for Obama to be lynched, writing, “All you need is some rope and a little wood.” Others wanted to take justice into their own hands, including one user who claimed, “I WILL DESTROY AND JAIL ALL OF THE FAKE NEWS MSM ALL CRIMINAL POLITICAL HACKS AND ALL DEEP STATE PLAYERS WILL BE TRIED AND EXCUTED!!!!!!”

On Telegram, comments made between July 17 and July 20 targeting Obama as treasonous and deserving of either imprisonment or death rose from 0 to 12. A manual review by GPAHE of private Telegram groups not immediately accessible by scraping revealed numerous other similar posts. Telegram channels, including ones associating themselves with the conspiratorial QAnon movement, were excited about the prospect of Obama being convicted of treason, which would lead to him facing “the rest of his life in federal prison or the death penalty.” Other chat groups on Telegram, which associate themselves with far-right influencers such as Catturd and extremist groups like the white supremacist Proud Boys, had several users calling to hang Obama (“he should swing,” “let’s see him swing on national TV”), including calls to “hang them all” and “have a huge fireworks exhibition,” while others fantasized about “DOZENS of executions,” saying “MAKE PUBLIC HANGINGS GREAT AGAIN,” a reference to Trump’s motto, “Make America Great Again.”

Trump has long threatened his political opponents with persecution, dating back to his first election campaign against Hillary Clinton when calls to “lock her up” ran rampant at his rallies (Clinton was never charged with any crime). He’s since continued his assault on democracy by targeting judges who’ve ruled against him, and now democrats such as Obama and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who Trump said should go to prison. Trump’s targeting of the judiciary has already led to judges experiencing growing, targeted threats against themselves and their families. And there has been other horrific political violence. In June, a Christian nationalist assassinated Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (DFL-34B) and her husband, seemingly with political motivations. With violent rhetoric targeting Obama beginning to spread on fringe platforms, fueled by Trump’s and Gabbard’s posts, we risk further normalizing political violence which is already on the rise.
GPAHE’s research regularly reveals spikes in online bigoted and violent rhetoric whenever the president targets people with his online posts. The combination of Director Gabbard and President Trump’s conspiracy-laden and racist posts not only inflamed extremists, but further normalized language, racism, and other ideas that are completely unacceptable in a thriving democracy. We, as a nation, cannot contribute to this normalization by staying silent.