Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee on Monday launched a probe into the Trump administration’s decision to revoke 37 officials’ security clearances, and questioned the rationale behind listing them publicly.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard last month stripped clearances from a number of current and former intelligence officials who have ties to the Biden administration or have spoken out against Trump policies.
Gabbard, without evidence, accused those listed of politicizing or leaking intelligence or “committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards.”
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the panel, asked for “the specific evidence” behind each of the revocations.
“If there is evidence of misconduct to warrant revoking the clearances of these 37 individuals, some of whom were senior IC officers at the time of your memo, it would indicate a systemic issue in the granting of security clearances. It is hard to imagine an issue more deserving of congressional oversight and corrective action,” Himes wrote in a letter to Gabbard signed by all Democratic members on the panel.
“If, however, these revocations occurred outside of established process and don’t reflect fundamental risk, an immense amount of IC knowledge and capability has been lost.”
The letter noted that at least one of those listed had been serving undercover at the time of the announcement, and questioned why Gabbard’s office would make a public announcement concerning the matter.
Others on the list included those who Himes said have key skillsets or are working on top priorities for the intelligence community.
“At least two of the individuals listed in the memo are currently employed as congressional staff, raising serious separation of powers concerns,” he wrote.
That includes a former National Security Council staffer targeted by Laura Loomer who worked for then-House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) during the first Trump impeachment and who has since returned to his office.
The letter asks Gabbard to detail whether protocol was followed, including whether those who lost their clearances were given advance warning, if they had a chance to appeal the decision and if their agencies were consulted.
A source familiar with the Office of Director of National Intelligence said agencies were consulted and disputed that one of the officials whose clearance was revoked was actively undercover.
“Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right. Those in the Intelligence Community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold,” Gabbard said in August.
“In doing so, they undermine our national security, the safety and security of the American people and the foundational principles of our democratic republic.”
