The headlines were everywhere last fall, and honestly, they didn't paint a pretty picture for anyone sitting in a cubicle at Langley or the NSA. Tulsi Gabbard, serving as Director of National Intelligence (DNI), basically dropped a bomb on the intelligence community. In August 2025, she officially directed the revocation of security clearances for 37 current and former officials.
It wasn't just a quiet HR move. No, it was a public declaration posted on X (formerly Twitter) that accused these individuals of "politicizing and manipulating intelligence."
The list included heavy hitters. We’re talking about people like former Obama DNI James Clapper, former NSA Deputy Director Richard Ledgett, and Stephanie O’Sullivan, who once held the #2 spot at the ODNI. Even current career staffers and Democratic congressional aides, like Maher Bitar, found themselves on the chopping block.
Why Tulsi Gabbard Revoked Clearances for the "37"
The move wasn't exactly a surprise if you'd been following the rhetoric coming out of the Trump administration. Basically, Gabbard claimed these officials had "broken the sacred trust" of the American people. The core of her argument rested on the idea that the Intelligence Community (IC) had been "weaponized" to undermine Donald Trump, specifically regarding the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian election interference.
Gabbard’s memo was pretty blunt. She argued that these people:
💡 You might also like: 39 Carl St and Kevin Lau: What Actually Happened at the Cole Valley Property
- Failed to adhere to professional analytic tradecraft standards.
- Leaked classified information without authorization.
- Used their clearances to advance partisan agendas.
Interestingly, many of the people on the list only found out they were losing their access through news reports. Imagine waking up, checking your phone, and realizing your 30-year career just hit a brick wall because of a social media post.
The Internal Chaos Nobody Talks About
There’s a part of this story that often gets buried. While the public saw a unified front, behind the scenes, things were kinda messy. According to reports from The Guardian and other outlets, Gabbard didn’t actually give the White House a heads-up before she pulled the trigger.
Advisers to the President, including high-level folks like Susie Wiles and David Warrington, reportedly only found out after the fact. This caused some serious friction. It turns out that some of the people Gabbard targeted were actually top deputies to CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
It’s one thing to go after "political enemies," but it’s another to accidentally kneecap your own team's sensitive military operations.
📖 Related: Effingham County Jail Bookings 72 Hours: What Really Happened
Is This Even Legal?
You’ve probably heard the phrase "a security clearance is a privilege, not a right." Gabbard used that exact line to defend her actions. And legally, she’s mostly right. The Supreme Court has historically given the executive branch huge amounts of leeway when it comes to national security access.
However, lawyers like Mark Zaid—who, ironically, also had his clearance revoked—argue that this is a dangerous departure from decades of precedent. The fear isn't just about the 37 people on the list. It’s about the "chilling effect" it has on everyone else still in the building.
If you're a mid-level analyst and you see your boss lose their livelihood for a conclusion the DNI doesn't like, are you going to speak truth to power? Probably not. You’re going to keep your head down and write whatever keeps your badge active.
Beyond the Revocations: The Polygraph Push
The clearance saga didn't end with the August memo. By October 2025, Gabbard was already moving on to her next project: random polygraphs.
👉 See also: Joseph Stalin Political Party: What Most People Get Wrong
She issued a directive asking agencies to see if it’s "feasible" to start doing random lie detector tests focused specifically on leaks to the press. Currently, polygraphs are mostly used for initial hiring or periodic "lifestyle" checks. Making them routine and random is a massive shift in culture.
It’s all part of a broader strategy to "clean house," which also included:
- Scrapping DEI Programs: Gabbard claimed she saved $20 million by shutting down diversity, equity, and inclusion offices at the ODNI.
- Criminal Referrals: She’s already referred multiple cases to the DOJ for prosecution regarding unauthorized disclosures.
- Closing the Human Capital Office: She described it as a "slush fund" and moved to shut it down entirely.
What This Means for the Future of Intelligence
Honestly, we are in uncharted territory. The intelligence community is built on the idea of being "apolitical." Whether you think Gabbard is "restoring balance" or "purging dissent" depends entirely on your political lens.
If you’re a contractor or a government employee, the landscape has changed. The "deep state" rhetoric has turned into policy. Access is now tied much more closely to perceived loyalty and "tradecraft" that aligns with the administration's views on past events like the Russia investigation.
Actionable Insights for National Security Professionals
If you currently hold a clearance or work in this space, here are a few things to keep in mind:
- Expect Increased Scrutiny on Public Statements: Any past or present affiliation with documents that have been labeled "politicized" (like the 2020 Hunter Biden laptop letter) is now a major red flag for the current ODNI.
- Review Your Nondisclosure Agreements: The administration is looking for reasons to refer leaks to the DOJ. Be extremely careful with what you consider "unclassified" vs. "protected."
- Polygraph Readiness: If you’re at a major agency like the CIA or NSA, the "feasibility" study for random polygraphs means you should expect more frequent invites to the "box."
- Document Everything: If your clearance is flagged for "politicization," the standard appeals process still exists, even if it feels weighted against you. Having a clear record of your analytical process can be your only defense.
The Tulsi Gabbard revokes clearances story is about much more than just 37 names. It’s a fundamental shift in how the U.S. government manages its most sensitive secrets and the people trusted to keep them.