<\/p>\n
Last spring, the National Security Agency (NSA) detected evidence of an unusual phone call between an individual associated with foreign intelligence and a person close to Donald Trump<\/a>, <\/strong>according to a whistleblower\u2019s attorney briefed on the existence of the call.<\/p>\n The highly sensitive communique, which has roiled Washington<\/a> over the past week, was brought to the attention of the director of national intelligence (DNI), Tulsi Gabbard \u2013 but rather than allowing NSA officials to distribute the information further, she took a paper copy of the intelligence directly to the president\u2019s chief of staff, Susie Wiles, the attorney, Andrew Bakaj, said.<\/p>\n One day after meeting Wiles, Gabbard told the NSA<\/a> not to publish the intelligence report. Instead, she instructed NSA officials to transmit the highly classified details directly to her office.<\/p>\n Details of this exchange between Gabbard and the NSA were shared directly with the Guardian and <\/strong>have not been previously reported. Nor has Wiles receipt of the intelligence report.<\/p>\n The office of the director of national intelligence (ODNI) did not immediately respond to questions about the unusual call detected by the NSA, or Gabbard\u2019s handling of the intelligence.<\/p>\n On 17 April, a whistleblower contacted the office of the inspector general alleging that Gabbard had blocked highly classified intelligence from routine dispatch, according to <\/strong>Bakaj, who has been briefed on details surrounding the highly sensitive phone call flagged by the NSA. The whistleblower filed a formal complaint about Gabbard\u2019s actions on 21 May, Bakaj said.<\/p>\n For eight months, the intelligence report has been kept under lock and key, even after the whistleblower pushed<\/a> to disclose details to congressional intelligence committees.<\/p>\n Acting inspector general Tamara A Johnson dismissed the complaint at the end of a 14-day review period, writing in a 6 June letter<\/a> addressed to the whistleblower that \u201cthe Inspector General could not determine if the allegations appear credible\u201d.<\/p>\n The letter stipulated that the whistleblower could take their concerns to Congress, only after receiving DNI guidance on how to proceed, given the highly sensitive nature of the complaint.<\/p>\n The independence of the watchdog\u2019s office may be compromised, lawmakers have said, ever since Gabbard assigned<\/a> one of her top advisers, Dennis Kirk, to work there on 9 May, two weeks after the whistleblower first made contact with the inspector general\u2019s hotline.<\/p>\n Gabbard\u2019s office issued its first public acknowledgment of the highly sensitive complaint in a letter addressed to lawmakers on Tuesday, one day after the Wall Street Journal reported<\/a> on the classified brief. It was posted<\/a> to the ODNI\u2019s X account, including claims that the inspector general had not informed Gabbard of her obligations to transmit the complaint to Congress.<\/p>\n Bakaj said that the ODNI\u2019s office cited various reasons for the delay in intelligence sharing, including the complaints\u2019 top secret classification, the fall government shutdown and the intelligence community inspector general\u2019s failure to notify Gabbard of her reporting requirements.<\/p>\n Two attorneys and two former intelligence professionals who reviewed details of the incident and ensuing complaint shared with the Guardian have identified what they believe are a series of procedural anomalies that raise questions about Gabbard\u2019s handling of national intelligence and the whistleblower disclosure, which was reported to the inspector general as a matter of \u201curgent concern\u201d.<\/p>\n Members of the \u201cgang of eight\u201d, a group of Senate and House leaders privy to classified information from the executive branch, received a heavily redacted version for review on Tuesday night. They have disagreed about the legality of Gabbard\u2019s conduct, as well as the credibility of the whistleblower complaint.<\/p>\n Two Republican lawmakers dismissed its credibility and backed Gabbard\u2019s conduct, including the Arkansas senator Tom Cotton, who said in a statement on X<\/a> that \u201cthe DNI took the necessary steps to ensure the material has handled and transmitted appropriately in accordance with law\u201d.<\/p>\n But Democrats have raised questions about the delay. \u201cThe law is clear: when a whistleblower makes a complaint and wants to get it before Congress the agency has 21 days to relay it,\u201d said the senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the senior Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, in a Thursday press conference. \u201cThis whistleblower complaint was issued in May. We didn\u2019t receive it until February.\u201d<\/p>\n Warner said that the months-long delay reflected an effort to \u201cbury the complaint\u201d.<\/p>\n The contents of the whistleblower complaint are still largely unknown. Bakaj, the whistleblower\u2019s attorney, said that Gabbard\u2019s office had redacted much of the complaint that was released to intelligence committee members on Tuesday, citing executive privilege.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t know the contents of the complaint, but by exercising executive privilege they are flagging that it involves presidential action,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n On 3 February, Bakaj again requested guidance from Gabbard\u2019s office about how to share the whistleblower\u2019s full report while taking appropriate precautions.<\/p>\n \u201cAs you are well aware, our client\u2019s disclosure directly impacts our national security and the American people,\u201d Bakaj wrote<\/a>. \u201cThis means that our client\u2019s complete whistleblower disclosure must be transmitted to Congress, and that we, as their counsel, speak with members and cleared staff.\u201d<\/p>\n Bakaj said that the DNI\u2019s office did not respond to his letter by its Friday deadline. <\/strong>He plans to contact members of the Senate and House intelligence committees on Monday to schedule an unclassified briefing on Gabbard\u2019s conduct and the \u201cunderlying intelligence concerns\u201d.<\/p>\n Members of the gang of eight have contacted the NSA to request the underlying intelligence that the whistleblower says Gabbard blocked, according to staff in Warner\u2019s office.<\/p>\n Lawmakers can make routine requests for classified information directly from intelligence agencies such as the NSA. The request circumvents the ODNI\u2019s involvement, as well as the office of the inspector general.<\/p>\n The leading Democrat on the House oversight committee, Stephen F Lynch, wrote a letter to acting inspector general Johnson to warn her that the integrity of the watchdog office could be compromised by Kirk\u2019s May appointment to the group.<\/p>\n