When Joe Kent, a top counterterrorism official, walked out the door, he went putting a flamethrower to Operation Epic Fury, and now Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is trying to put the fire out.
Gabbard, who was on the record during the 2020 election cycle as being anti-Iran war, is now tasked with providing the intelligence to the president to make the call to strike or let be.
Gabbard defended Trump, sort of, doing so in a way that did not offer her personal assessment of whether the operation should have moved forward. Then she made a rather shocking move that I have to think is not going to sit well with President Trump, and surely has infuriated Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.
When I reported on Kent’s resignation, I stated that it was not something that would sit well with Trump and would be a direct reflection on Gabbard. I had also stated that due to Kent’s former service, this is something that the media and Dems would pounce on, and pounce they did. This forced Gabbard, who is openly antiwar, especially regarding Iran, to break her silence.
In response to the claims made by Kent, who disagreed that Iran was an imminent threat, she posted to X, “Donald Trump was overwhelmingly elected by the American people to be our President and Commander in Chief. As our Commander in Chief, he is responsible for determining what is and is not an imminent threat, and whether or not to take action he deems necessary to protect the safety and security of our troops, the American people and our country.
“The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is responsible for helping coordinate and integrate all intelligence to provide the President and Commander in Chief with the best information available to inform his decisions.
“After carefully reviewing all the information before him, President Trump concluded that the terrorist Islamist regime in Iran posed an imminent threat and he took action based on that conclusion.”
Kent was a Trump appointment, so the statements made by Trump after Kent left only damaged Trump, not Kent.
In reaction to the resignation, Trump stated, "Well, I read his statement. I always thought he was a nice guy, but he was always weak on security,” reported NBC News.
He continued, "When I read his statement, I realized that it's a good thing that he is out because he said that Iran was not a threat. Iran was a threat to every country.”
If he was always weak on security, then why was he placed as the director of the National Counterterrorism Center? I know why Trump said what he said, but sometimes he needs to think before he speaks. All Trump did was bring his own judgment into question, specifically regarding national security.
As if this fire was not already burning hot enough, Gabbard wound up hiring a former aide to Secretary Hegseth who had been fired.
Dan Caldwell was terminated from the Pentagon in 2025 during a high-profile investigation, but he was eventually cleared, and no charges were filed. Now, Gabbard has hired Caldwell in her department, according to Fox News.
Charges or not, this man, who was accused of leaking sensitive classified information, was hired after a man who was “weak on security” just resigned. This is not only a bad look, but it seems as though Gabbard is now daring Trump to fire her.
Like Gabbard and Kent, Caldwell has openly spoken against re-entering a conflict in the Middle East. So, as I said, this is utterly baffling to me, as Gabbard seems to be thumbing her nose at Hegseth at minimum, and possibly even to Trump. Gabbard used very guarded words in her statement, but her actions speak far more loudly.
