Donald Trump privately asked cabinet officials in recent weeks whether he should replace his director of national intelligence, tulsi gabbard, after testy hearings tied to a deputy’s resignation over the Iran war. The discussions unfolded inside the administration amid frustration that Gabbard protected a former deputy who publicly undercut the administration’s rationale. Officials cautioned that removing a sitting intelligence chief without a ready successor could create unwanted political distraction.
Why Trump Questioned Tulsi Gabbard
Senior aides say the president’s doubts followed Gabbard’s testimony at a worldwide threats hearing, where she declined to condemn Joe Kent, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center who resigned and argued Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the United States. That exchange drew particular anger from the president because Kent’s resignation letter directly challenged the administration’s justification for military action.
The deliberations moved beyond personal displeasure to practical concerns: advisers warned that creating a high‑profile vacancy before a clearly vetted successor is in place could be politically damaging. The administration has a recent pattern of shifting officials into different roles rather than outright firings, and officials noted past internal reassignments as precedent for handling perceived liabilities.
Immediate Reactions
Donald Trump, President of the United States, when asked on Sunday (ET) whether he still had confidence in Gabbard, offered a mixed endorsement: “Yeah, sure. I mean, she’s a little bit different in her thought process than me, but that doesn’t make somebody not available to serve. ”
Steven Cheung, White House spokesperson, defended her tenure in a formal statement: “As President Trump just said in his remarks, he has confidence in Director Gabbard and the tireless work she is doing. He has assembled the most talented and impactful cabinet ever, and they have collectively delivered historic victories on behalf of the American people. ”
Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, when pressed on whether she agreed with Kent’s assessment, said: “He said a lot of things in that letter. Ultimately, we have provided the President with the intelligence assessments, and the President is elected by the American people and makes his own decisions based on the information that’s available to him. ”
What’s Next
Advisers caution the administration may avoid a sudden ouster without a successor ready to step in; they note a vacancy could spark political fallout. Gabbard’s position is precarious because her testimony aligned with a longstanding anti‑war stance and because her handling of the Kent episode has drawn the president’s ire.
Officials will likely watch public and congressional reactions closely as internal deliberations continue; any personnel move would be weighed against the risk of creating additional headlines and disrupting intelligence leadership. For now, tulsi gabbard remains in her post while the White House debates whether a change would help or harm the administration’s broader agenda.
