Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has reportedly been sidelined from key Trump administration discussions on Israel and Iran, reflecting deepening divisions over U.S. policy toward Tehran.
At a Glance
- Gabbard contradicted President Trump in March by testifying that Iran isn’t actively building nuclear weapons
- As a result, she was “benched” and excluded from a June 8 Camp David meeting on Israel‑Iran strategy
- Trump now relies on an inner circle—VP Vance, Rubio, Ratcliffe, and military brass—for Iran decisions
- A White House video misstated her testimony, prompting criticism over internal manipulation
- The shift highlights a tension between Trump’s aggressive posture and Gabbard’s caution
Gabbard vs. Trump—Public Disagreement
In March, Gabbard told Congress that U.S. intelligence does not see Iran developing nuclear weapons—directly opposing Trump’s assertion they were “very close” to acquiring such arms, according to The Washington Post.
By June, internal sources report she was excluded from Camp David discussions focused on Israel–Iran tensions, effectively sidelining her from national security deliberations, as reported by The Atlantic.
Inner Circle Takes Control
Instead of Gabbard, Trump has leaned on a tighter group of advisors: Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Rubio, CIA Director Ratcliffe, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Caine. Gabbard’s insistence on sharing intelligence assessments—in opposition to Trump’s public rhetoric—has apparently cost her influence, according to Omni.
Messaging Showdown
The White House released a misleadingly edited video of Gabbard, suggesting she believed Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons—cutting out her clear statement to the contrary, as exposed by The Daily Beast.
Watch a report: Analysis of Gabbard’s sidelining in Trump’s Iran policy team.
Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy
Gabbard’s removal signals a shift toward a hawkish approach with Israel pushing U.S. escalation while sidelining dissenting voices. The sidelining raises concerns about politicizing intelligence and diminishing independent analysis, with potential consequences for national security decision-making, as noted by The Washington Post.
If Gabbard’s authority continues to wane, U.S. strategy on Iran may rely on ideological alignment rather than objective intelligence—a risky precedent at a time of high-stakes negotiation and military tension.
