Tulsi Gabbard has strongly repudiated allegations suggesting that she or the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) deliberately withheld a whistleblower complaint from appropriate oversight, accusing Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, of promulgating "blatant lies" motivated by political objectives.
In a statement posted Saturday on the social media platform X, Gabbard unequivocally stated, "I am not now, nor have I ever been, in possession or control of the Whistleblower's complaint, so I obviously could not have ‘hidden’ it in a safe." This declaration was made in response to Warner's public accusations implying concealment of the document.
Expanding on the handling and custody of the complaint, Gabbard informed that the whistleblower document was secured and managed by the Intelligence Community (IC) Inspector General office, specifically by Tamara Johnson during the Biden administration and subsequently by her successor, Chris Fox. This chain of custody, according to Gabbard, ensured adherence to protocols for classified and sensitive materials.
Detailing her own involvement, Gabbard explained that she first reviewed the whistleblower complaint approximately two weeks prior to her public statement. Her examination was aimed solely at advising on the appropriate manner and channels for sharing the complaint with Congress. She underscored the classification level of the document, describing it as containing highly compartmented intelligence which necessitates stringent security measures.
Regarding procedural handling after the complaint was delivered to congressional oversight members, Gabbard described that once Inspector General Fox personally hand-delivered the complaint to the so-called “Gang of 8” — a group of congressional leaders granted access to sensitive intelligence — the complaint was promptly returned to a secure safe. This placement satisfies protocols generally observed for handling information of this sensitivity.
Gabbard also disputed Senator Warner's references to a 21-day legal deadline concerning the disclosure of whistleblower complaints. She clarified that such deadlines are applicable only to complaints deemed urgent and credible, a characterization she contested for the complaint in question. According to her, the complaint did not meet this threshold, explaining that either Senator Warner is aware of the factual criteria and is thus knowingly misrepresenting the situation to the public, or he lacks understanding of the established processes.
Additional context surrounding the whistleblower complaint emerged from Reuters reports highlighting that the complaint was filed in May with the intelligence community's inspector general and was classified as top secret. Allegations within the complaint concerned the obstruction of classified intelligence from routine congressional review based on political considerations.
Lawmakers, including Warner, have argued that the complaint should have been disseminated to Congress within a 21-day period. However, multiple inspectors general who examined the matter concluded that the complaint did not qualify as credible, and legal requirements for expedited disclosure are only binding when urgency and credibility criteria are met.
Press coverage suggests that the underlying intelligence involved intercepts connected to an individual close to former President Donald Trump, and that delays in Congressional sharing related to the necessity of consulting security officials on proper handling procedures.
These developments come amid a highly charged political environment concerning whistleblower protections, intelligence oversight, and the proper flow of classified information to elected representatives.