By Erin Banco
NEW YORK (Global News) — A senior advisor to Tulsi Gabbard, who serves as the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, stated in an email dated March 24th that the Venezuelan government might not have directly instructed the actions of a gang which the Trump administration cited for expediting immigrant deportations. However, they maintained that it was logical to connect Caracas with the gang based on common understanding.
President Donald Trump of the United States has asserted that Tren de Aragua coordinates its operations within the U.S. with the administration led by Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro as grounds for using the Alien Enemies Act to support the deportation of suspected gang members to a high-security facility in El Salvador. Certain legal experts contend that employing this statute necessitates evidence linking these individuals directly to an opposing foreign power.
According to someone knowledgeable about the situation and verified by another source within the email, Acting Chief of Staff Joe Kent for Gabbard requested reconsideration of an intelligence report that contradicted the administration’s stance attributing US-based actions of Tren de Aragua gang members to Venezuela.
"I want to comprehend how any part of the intelligence community reached the conclusion that the Venezuelan government does not support and was not involved with the TDA operations in the U.S.," Kent stated in the email, referencing Tren de Aragua.
Flooding our country with immigrants, particularly those affiliated with violent gangs, is an act of hostility from another nation—even if the Venezuelan government isn't directly instructing or facilitating these activities.
He stated that analysts were required to generate a fresh evaluation of the gang that "embodies fundamental common sense."
The New York Times initially reported on Kent's correspondence with the National Intelligence Council, which is the pinnacle of the intelligence community's analytic division. In contrast, World News is the first outlet to extensively release the content of those emails.
This interaction highlights how extensively Kent, who was a previous CIA agent, urged Michael Collins, the leader of the National Intelligence Council, along with various other DNI officials, to revise their evaluation. They were asked to incorporate aspects that President Trump had previously expressed openly.
A representative from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence stated that the timeline mentioned in this article is "incorrect and made up" and referred to Kent as "an American patriot who continues to serve our country with honor."
"President Trump appropriately labeled Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization due to intelligence evaluations and, quite honestly, sound judgment," stated White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.
'COMMON SENSE'
In his email, Kent contended that it was reasonable for Venezuela, being an adversarial state to the U.S., to dispatch gang members over the border. He posited that any nation aiming to cause damage to the United States "would logically direct its problematic individuals to enter our country."
When Biden declared the border open, I believe our desire for... clear connections between the Venezuelan administration and TDA hindered fundamental logic," he stated, further suggesting that the National Intelligence Council should begin "working on producing a fresh evaluation of TDA’s ties with the Venezuelan government that aligns with sound judgment.
During Joe Biden's tenure as president before Trump, he dealt with significant unauthorized immigration. His administration implemented measures aimed at deterring unlawful entries across borders and promoting legal pathways for immigrants entering the U.S.
In later email exchanges with officials from the ODNI, Kent likewise mentioned that Gabbard should be "shielded" during the revision process, as stated by two individuals acquainted with the situation.
On Tuesday evening, The New York Times reported that in an email, Kent instructed analysts to “make some revisions” to the evaluation and conduct additional analysis to ensure “that this document does not get used against” Gabbard or Trump.
Kent's emails were in reply to a February report from the National Intelligence Council about the topic – one of possibly two such assessments in recent months – which incorporated analyses conducted by organizations including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Security Agency.
The initial report was released internally on February 26 and later became publicly known through reports from The New York Times in March. This document stated that the intelligence community did not conclude that the group was under control of the Venezuelan government.
The second report, released on April 7 and disclosed at the beginning of this month through the Freedom of Information Act, provided additional details and subtleties but reaffirmed the initial evaluation from the intelligence community, according to two individuals who were privy to the information.
Last week, Collins, who heads the NIC, was dismissed from his role as the interim chairman of the National Intelligence Council, alongside his deputy, Maria Langan-Riekhoff.
It remains unclear who initiated the original intelligence assessment or why Trump subsequently made remarks contradicting the conclusions of his own intelligence agencies.
It's typical for the White House — regardless of which administration holds power — to request that its intelligence agencies prepare assessments on different issues related to national security.
Historically, intelligence agencies have been responsible for generating evaluations free from political influence or prejudice, enabling the president and key national security personnel to make better-informed choices.
This action has caused significant concern among high-ranking officials within the intelligence community, as stated by three individuals knowledgeable about the situation.
Collins and Langan-Riekhoff have both faced public accusations from the ODNI regarding the politicization of intelligence.
However, two individuals acquainted with the matter stated that Kent urged Collins to revise the preliminary intelligence analysis so as to better match the administration’s public statements. Despite this pressure, Collins remained steadfast and backed the original conclusions of the intelligence community.
"The consensus seems to be that Collins was let go simply for performing his duties,” stated a previous high-ranking U.S. intelligence officer. “Collins enjoys widespread respect across the board and has consistently tackled complex issues with unwavering honesty.”
The people were granted anonymity so they could speak more freely about the internal deliberations surrounding the Tren de Aragua assessment.
(Reported by Erin Banco; Edited by Don Durfee, Deepa Babington, and Saad Sayeed)
Comments
Post a Comment