Intelligence Dispute Centers on Kushner Reference in Intercepted Communication

[dalton99a]

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/12/us/politics/kushner-gabbard-iran-intelligence.html

https://archive.ph/l0yf9

Intelligence Dispute Centers on Kushner Reference in Intercepted Communication
A whistle-blower has accused Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, of blocking distribution of a report that Jared Kushner’s name came up in an intercepted communication about Iran.
By Julian E. Barnes and Tyler Pager
Feb. 12, 2026 Updated 4:06 p.m. ET

It was a discussion last year between two foreign nationals about Iran, not an unusual topic for American spies to study. But an intercept of that communication, collected by a foreign spy service and given to the United States, has now become a flashpoint within the intelligence community and between the administration and Congress. The reason is a single name that came up in the discussion: Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law.

The previously unreported mention of Mr. Kushner in the discussion came after members of Congress were briefed last week about a classified report filed by a whistle-blower regarding the intercept, according to people familiar with the material. The whistle-blower has accused Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, of limiting who could see the report and of blocking wider distribution among the nation’s spy agencies, people familiar with the complaint said.

The whistle-blower report was drafted last May, while the Trump administration was deliberating about a strike on Iran. At the end of June, the military bombed Iranian nuclear sites on Mr. Trump’s orders.

Mr. Kushner has subsequently helped lead negotiations between the administration and Iran over Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs and its sponsorship of terrorism across the Middle East. He also has business interests in the Middle East and in other parts of the world.

...

[Deep State Witch]

1. Normally

Normally, when a US government official is mentioned in traffic, the person's name would be redacted by saying "U.S. Official 1" or "an identified U.S. Official." The report would probably go to a limited distribution, because it's politically sensitive. Even if it's a USP who is not affiliated with the government, it would still be "US Person 1" or "US Company 1". And yeah, stuff considered to be hearsay or gossip would be eliminated.

See, this shit is what happens when you force all of the experienced editors to retire or leave. There is no fucking way that would have made it past the review stage, much less gone up to the ODNI.