Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dropped a whistleblower’s account detailing how a supervisor threatened them to go along with the Trump-Russia hoax.
“This release provides the Whistleblower’s firsthand account of the work carried out in the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the concerns they raised about the use of discredited information as then-DNI Clapper and Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan worked to craft the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) at President Obama’s request, and how a direct supervisor attempted to pressure the Whistleblower to endorse the January 2017 ICA’s key findings about the Russian Government’s alleged support for then-candidate Trump,” according to the press release.
For the new 2017 ICA [Intelligence Community Assessment], I was directed by-to focus on Russian attempts to access US election-related infrastructure. IC reporting suggested many Russia-attributed IP addresses were making attempts that the IC could not explain the purpose of. Later, when presenting [blacked out] with our findings, [blacked out] directed us to abandon any further study of the subject, saying “it’s something else.” In light of later development in open source repo1ting, I came to have concerns about this Russia-attributed cyber activity and the abrupt dismissal of the study effort.In addition, I noted other nations’ efforts to influence the 2016 Presidential election, but this critical context was omitted from the 2017 ICA. During conversion of the 2017 ICA to TS//SCI and UNCLASSIFIED versions, key context was not included, and I was pressured to alter my views on the 2017 ICA’s Key Judgements with the expressed intent by [blacked out] that my concurrence was sought to enable [blacked out] to sway the views of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).
The whistleblower relayed a conversation they had with the superior, who worked closely with Clapper, in early January 2017.
The superior allegedly told the whistleblower that they could not show them reporting, but insisted, “if you saw it, you would agree.”
The whistleblower stood their ground: “My response was that I concurred with varying confidence with most of the 2017 ICA’s Key Judgements, but I would need to review any reporting myself in order to consider it.”
The supervisor attempted to coax the whistleblower by asking if it’s possible Putin had something on Trump he could use for blackmail.
The whistleblower said no even after they debated on it.
The supervisor said, according to the whistleblower, “You need to TRUST ME on this.”
Then the supervisor dropped the biggest pressure: the whistleblower had “to demonstrate [their] ability to ‘outgrow'” their “tradecraft standards” in order for them to receive a recommendation for a promotion to a Senior Executive Service (SES) position.
Yes, do this or your superiors won’t give you a promotion.
My goodness, this supervisor even allegedly belittled the whistleblower. The names are blacked out but I’m guessing the supervisor told the whistleblower that the higher-ups “viewed [his] analyst culture and tradecraft as a pseudo-religion.'”
Okay so this person is a religious fanatic because they’re doing their job correctly? Lovely.
The whistleblower with the mic drop:
I held firm and explained that the “religion” of analysts as [blacked out] called it, to which I belonged, meant I could not claim to concur with analysis that I did not believe in.
Well, when that didn’t work, it looks like the supervisor tried to show the whistleblower their importance. (Which we totally believe after the supervisor belittled this person.)
The whistleblower claimed the supervisor told them that they needed their approval to get the Department of Defense’s Defense Intelligence Agency on board.
The whistleblower still refused to change anything in their assessment.
Not being able to receive information and changing assessments made the whistleblower curious. They reached out to NIC [National Intelligence Council] leadership asking them. The answer: “it is routine that we get material and don’t share it with everyone—and it’s not a matter of a particular clearance.”
Weird, considering this person was a member of the NIC’s Election Influence Team.
But then the person was removed from the email distribution without any warning or explanation.
The whistleblower transcribed the conversations in March 2023 because even though they tried to alert the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, Special Counsel John Durham, and Sen. Mark Warner, nothing panned out.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY