WASHINGTON – Today, Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense Chris Coons (D-DE), Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Jim Himes (D-CT-04), and Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense Betty McCollum (D-MN-04) sent a letter to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard expressing “grave concern” about her recent interference in the independence of the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG).

In the letter, the lawmakers strongly objected to Director Gabbard’s decision to unilaterally terminate the Acting Counsel to the ICIG and to appoint a “Senior Advisor” to work within the ICIG’s office while reporting directly to the Director herself. The letter notes that these actions were taken without the approval of the Acting ICIG, in direct contravention of federal statues designed to protect the independence of the Inspector General’s office. Director Gabbard’s actions were brought to Congress’s attention in a letter the Acting Inspector General sent to lawmakers on May 28.

“Your actions violate both the letter and the spirit of the law,” the lawmakers wrote. “Despite your obligation to keep the congressional oversight committees fully and currently informed, our committees were notified of your decision to terminate the Acting Counsel, not by your office, but by the Acting ICIG.”

The lawmakers underscored that Director Gabbard’s appointment of a Senior Advisor inside the ICIG’s office compromised the ability to carry out its statutory mission of identifying and preventing waste, fraud, and abuse in the intelligence community.

“[The Acting ICIG’s] letter also disclosed that you have appointed a ‘Senior Advisor’ within the Office of the ICIG who reports to you but works in the ICIG’s office spaces, which presents significant concerns not only for the independence of the ICIG but also the ability of the ICIG to protect confidential whistleblower information,” the lawmakers stated. “Our understanding is that your decision to terminate the Acting Counsel was made 48 hours after she made inquiries regarding the legal basis for the appointment of the Senior Advisor.”

“Your recent actions undermine this independence and are contrary to commitments you made during your confirmation process,” the lawmakers wrote.

The lawmakers called on Director Gabbard to immediately cease “illegal interference into the ICIG’s operations” and to provide a detailed accounting of the personnel actions and communications that led to these decisions.

The letter concludes with a clear warning: “The ICIG must remain independent of political influence, and we will continue to oppose any attempt to interfere with its work, or silence its conclusions.”

A copy of letter is available here and text is below.

Director Gabbard:

We are writing to express our grave concern with your decision to terminate the Acting Counsel to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (ICIG) and to appoint a “Senior Advisor” within the Office of the ICIG without the approval of the Acting ICIG. 

The Office of the ICIG was established by the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 with a stated purpose of creating “an objective and effective office, appropriately accountable to Congress, to initiate and conduct independent investigations, inspections, audits, and reviews on programs and activities within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence.”  To protect the independence of the Office, the law provides that the ICIG has “final approval of . . . personnel decisions concerning personnel permanently assigned to the Office of the Inspector General” and “shall . . . appoint a Counsel to the Inspector General who shall report to the Inspector General.”

Your actions violate both the letter and the spirit of the law.  Despite your obligation to keep the congressional oversight committees fully and currently informed, our committees were notified of your decision to terminate the Acting Counsel, not by your office, but by the Acting ICIG.  Her letter also disclosed that you have appointed a “Senior Advisor” within the Office of the ICIG who reports to you but works in the ICIG’s office spaces, which presents significant concerns not only for the independence of the ICIG but also the ability of the ICIG to protect confidential whistleblower information.  Our understanding is that your decision to terminate the Acting Counsel was made 48 hours after she made inquiries regarding the legal basis for the appointment of the Senior Advisor. 

The Acting ICIG disputes your assertion that she “agreed” to terminate the Acting Counsel and described your actions as “contrary to law” and “never sufficiently explained.”  As you testified at your confirmation hearing, the ICIG’s independence is “essential to ensure oversight and accountability.”  Your recent actions undermine this independence and are contrary to commitments you made during your confirmation process.  Therefore, we ask that you immediately provide our committees with the following information:

The justification for your decision to terminate the Acting Counsel to the ICIG.

The justification and legal basis for your decision to appoint a “Senior Advisor” within the Office of the ICIG who reports to you but works in the ICIG’s office spaces.

The identity of the “Senior Advisor” described in the Acting ICIG’s letter.

The names and positions of all ODNI personnel who participated in meetings regarding the decision to terminate the Acting Counsel to the ICIG or appoint a “Senior Advisor” to work within the Office of the ICIG.

All correspondence you have had with the Office of the ICIG since February 12, 2025.

A description of, along with the justification and legal basis for any other personnel actions you have taken with regard to the Office of the ICIG.

The ICIG must remain independent of political influence, and we will continue to oppose any attempt to interfere with its work, or silence its conclusions.

We request that you immediately cease your illegal interference into the ICIG’s operations, and look forward to your prompt reply to the information we are requesting.

Sincerely,

###