Rep. Ben Cline (R., Va.), one of the Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is the latest to explain exclusively to the Washington Reporter why he is backing Director of National Intelligence (DNI) following a whistleblower complaint that has already been dismissed as “bunk.”
“The whistleblower complaint alleging that Director Gabbard improperly restricted the distribution of an intelligence report has been reviewed, and both the Biden-era Intelligence Community Inspector General and the current inspector general found it to be non-credible,” Cline exclusively told the Reporter.
“There is no evidence to support any of these claims, which are based on unverified assertions rather than documented intelligence or firsthand confirmation,” Cline added. “These allegations are just attempts by Democrats to distract from the great work being done by the Trump administration. Director Gabbard continues to carry out her national security responsibilities, and congressional oversight should be based on facts and established processes, not speculation or politically driven narratives.”
The complaint, which has been discredited by several lawmakers who have seen it, alleges that Gabbard blocked the National Security Agency (NSA) from sharing a report and delivered it to White House chief of staff.
Cline, a lawyer, is the latest lawmaker to explain first to the Reporter why the whistleblower complaint targeting Gabbard is problematic. Rep. Austin Scott (R., Ga.), the chair of the subcommittee on the Intel Committee that oversees the DNI, previously explained to the Reporter, said that the “whistleblower complaint against Director Gabbard is just another attempt to smear the Trump administration.” That was Scott’s first public defense of Gabbard amidst the fallout from the whistleblower complaint.
Gabbard’s team has spent days complementing what both Cline and Scott told the Reporter. Alexa Henning, Gabbard’s deputy chief of staff, noted that “two IC IGs (Biden and Trump era) found the complaint against the DNI NOT credible, the Guardian had to ‘clarify’ their wrong story…[and whistleblower complaints] can be both highly classified and false.”
Henning is referring to how Andrew Bakaj, the attorney for the whistleblower, revised his initial statements to the Guardian to clarify that “the phone call was between two people associated with foreign intelligence who discussed someone close to Donald Trump, not between someone and a person close to Trump. The earlier version was based on multiple phone calls with a source who later said he misspoke and clarified the actual details of the call.”
Jack Dever, the ODNI’s general counsel, responded to Bakaj by noting that Bakaj “falsely allege[d] misconduct, demand[ed] national security guidance —which has already been provided — and threaten[ed] an ‘unclassified briefing’ to congressional intelligence committees.”
Bakaj’s work on this case has already been fodder for lawmakers like Scott to use to further discredit the complaint. Bakaj, Scott noted to the Reporter, is the “same left-wing lawyer who has used witch hunts in the past to disrupt President Trump and his cabinet.” Bakaj previously represented a whistleblower who was a key player in the arguments Democrats made during their first impeachment of President Donald Trump.
“It is no surprise that Mr. Bakaj, a WhistleblowerAid.org lawyer, would attack Director Gabbard,” Scott added. Gabbard, he said, “is hated by the Democratic Party because of her honesty and effectiveness. She is doing a fantastic job as the Director of National Intelligence, and I look forward to continuing working together to ensure our national security.”
