Infighting between the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) has intensified for over a year, disrupting collaboration on national security analyses critical for presidential decision-making on complex foreign issues, as noted by a U.S. official and three informed individuals.
The sources requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the information.
Central to the disagreements is a clash over a task force established in April 2025 by Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, according to the sources.
The CIA, under Director John Ratcliffe, asserts that Gabbard’s Director’s Initiatives Group has acted irresponsibly by bypassing conventional intelligence-sharing and declassification norms, as reported by two of the individuals. Meanwhile, ODNI officials argue that the CIA has persistently blocked access for the group to essential intelligence.
This breakdown in inter-agency collaboration occurs during a critical time for the Trump administration, with the U.S. involved in the Iran conflict and facing national security challenges such as Chinese military expansion and Russia’s actions in Ukraine.
It also suggests that the reforms enacted post-September 11, 2001, which aimed to unify the 18 U.S. intelligence agencies under a director of national intelligence, have not eliminated internal dysfunction.
“ODNI is expected to be the lubricant in the system that ensures the intelligence community operates smoothly, eliminating blockages,” stated Beth Sanner, a former deputy director of national intelligence during President Trump’s first term.
“When that doesn’t happen, agencies risk retreating into isolation, potentially setting the stage for intelligence failures.”
Last week, Gabbard announced her resignation as Trump’s top intelligence officer effective June 30, citing her husband’s health issues. Trump indicated on Tuesday that he would appoint Federal Housing Finance Agency chief Bill Pulte as the acting director of national intelligence.
“The president and policymakers continue to receive superior intelligence and analysis” from intelligence agencies, stated Olivia Coleman, an ODNI spokesperson, emphasizing ongoing communication and collaboration between ODNI and CIA across all intelligence products and operations.
Coleman also mentioned that the Director’s Initiatives Group “functioned within ODNI’s oversight and in support of the president’s executive orders.”
In February, Reuters reported that Gabbard had disbanded the group and reassigned its members elsewhere in her agency due to congressional scrutiny of its activities.
“Under Director Ratcliffe, the CIA swiftly aligned with President Trump’s priorities, adopting a more proactive stance to outmaneuver adversaries and offer decisive advantages to the U.S.,” said CIA Director of Public Affairs Liz Lyons.
White House spokesman Davis Ingle remarked that Trump’s “peace through strength foreign policy is a tried-and-true approach that safeguards America and deters global threats,” asserting that attempts to create internal division would be futile.
“President Trump has complete confidence in his entire exceptional national security team,” Ingle added.
The CIA’s decision to substantially reduce its contributions to assessments from Gabbard’s office represents a significant fallout from the distrust between the agencies.
Historically, the CIA has been a primary contributor to reports generated by the National Intelligence Council (NIC), which serves as the foremost U.S. intelligence analytical entity. These reports are particularly impactful during wartime.
Two of the sources with firsthand knowledge indicated that assessments related to Iran—where U.S. military involvement extends back to February—are among those the agency no longer consistently engages with.
Currently, the CIA and ODNI largely function independently in their analytical efforts, the sources revealed.
At one stage last year, in light of tensions between both agencies, the CIA ceased publishing NIC reports on its internal intelligence distribution service, momentarily limiting accessibility to these analytical products, noted the sources.
A U.S. official clarified that the reports were only withheld for “a few hours” due to a “processing issue.”
Interagency friction began shortly after Gabbard took her role in February 2025, according to the four sources.
Among her early decisions was to implement stricter control over the production of the Presidential Daily Brief, traditionally spearheaded by the CIA; this brief is a highly classified daily digest of intelligence prepared for the president.
The relationship further deteriorated with the establishment of the Director’s Initiatives Group aimed at addressing purported politicization within the intelligence community, according to the sources.
This group also focused on declassifying documents linked to the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy, as well as investigating the security of election voting machines and the origins of COVID-19.
Critics, including some former intelligence officials, contend that the group was created to retaliate against Trump’s perceived political adversaries.
Task force members at various times urged the CIA to share necessary intelligence and resources for ODNI-assigned investigations but felt that not enough was provided, as stated by two knowledgeable individuals.
In May 2025, Gabbard dismissed two senior CIA officials who had led the NIC.
An intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity, revealed that the ODNI removed the two “due to creating a toxic work environment, as reflected in workforce surveys, and a history of politicizing intelligence.”
The official did not provide supporting evidence for these claims.
In August, Gabbard revoked the security clearances of 37 current and former officials, inadvertently disclosing the identity of an undercover CIA officer active overseas.
Gabbard alleged that those 37 individuals had politicized and leaked intelligence but did not provide substantiating evidence.
Former officials and others suggest that this action, in part, retaliated against a 2017 intelligence assessment indicating that Russia had executed a broad influence operation to sway the 2016 presidential election in favor of Trump.
The CIA-ODNI tensions became public last month when a CIA officer assigned to the Director’s Initiatives Group testified to a Senate panel that the CIA had obstructed the group’s access to intelligence on the origins of COVID-19.
This dispute has prompted an investigation by the intelligence community inspector general’s office, an independent oversight body within the ODNI, according to two informed sources.
Reuters has not determined the full scope of the investigation.
