Trump Intelligence Crisis: CIA, FBI and US Agencies Face Growing Rift
US intelligence sharing faces disruption under Trump as CIA, FBI and ODNI disputes, political pressure and staffing cuts raise national security concerns.
Raja Awais Ali
11/3/20265 min read
Trump-Era Intelligence Crisis Deepens as CIA, FBI and US Agencies Struggle to Share Critical Information
The flow of sensitive intelligence information across the U.S. government has come under growing strain during President Donald Trump's second term, with disagreements between federal agencies disrupting the way national security assessments are prepared and shared. Information concerning Iran and other international threats has not always reached lawmakers and government officials through normal channels, while cooperation between some of America's most important intelligence institutions has weakened.
The concerns have been raised by eight current and former U.S. officials and individuals familiar with the situation. Former intelligence professionals warn that the lack of coordination could prevent policymakers from seeing the full picture of emerging security threats. They have drawn comparisons with intelligence shortcomings before the September 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks, when information held by separate agencies was not effectively combined. The issue has become particularly significant as the Trump administration considers the possibility of launching further military strikes against Iran after Tuesday's midterm elections.
Much of the friction developed while Tulsi Gabbard was serving as director of national intelligence. Her office experienced serious disagreements with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), creating difficulties in the relationship between two institutions responsible for coordinating and analysing sensitive security information. Although Gabbard left the position in June 2026 and tensions have since eased, officials say the consequences of the earlier disputes are still being felt.
A major area of disagreement involved the National Intelligence Council (NIC), which operates within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The council plays an important role in preparing assessments that bring together information and analysis from the United States' 18 intelligence agencies. These reports are designed to give senior officials and lawmakers a broader understanding of foreign governments, international conflicts and potential threats to American security.
The CIA changed its approach to this process last year by withdrawing from co-authoring some of the council's assessments. This reduced the amount of analysis produced jointly by the intelligence community. The change was significant because the NIC had long depended on CIA expertise when preparing reports about countries including Iran and Russia. After the disagreement, CIA analysts increasingly concentrated on producing independent assessments instead of contributing to the council's joint work.
The agency did not completely cut off its relationship with the NIC. It continued providing intelligence and remained involved in certain reports. However, people familiar with the situation said the council's assessment work slowed after the CIA reduced its participation. Five current and former officials said the council had not produced any assessments specifically addressing the war in Iran. A U.S. intelligence official, however, said the CIA had started returning to a co-authoring role in some reports during recent months.
The consequences extended beyond internal agency operations. Access to intelligence information in Congress was also interrupted on two occasions. People familiar with the matter said lawmakers and congressional staff temporarily stopped receiving reports from Gabbard's office after the U.S. military intervention in Iran in June 2025. The flow of reports was disrupted again following the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026.
Gabbard's team reportedly believed that sensitive information was being leaked to journalists by members of Congress or their staff. The interruptions meant that lawmakers temporarily had less access to intelligence reporting during important national security developments. This raised concerns among former officials because congressional oversight depends partly on receiving timely intelligence about foreign conflicts and potential threats.
Relations between the CIA and ODNI deteriorated further after Gabbard's office revoked the security clearances of several serving and former intelligence officials approximately a year earlier. The disagreement became so serious that White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles intervened several times to ease tensions, according to three former officials. They described the confrontation as one of the most serious disputes over responsibilities and influence between major U.S. intelligence agencies in nearly 30 years.
Institutional tensions were developing alongside substantial reductions in staffing across national security organisations, including the CIA and ODNI. The Trump administration had removed or sidelined officials it considered disloyal, adding to uncertainty within parts of the intelligence community. Some serving and former officials said analysts had become increasingly careful about presenting conclusions that differed from the White House's position because they feared possible political consequences.
Those officials did not identify the specific subjects on which analysts were allegedly exercising caution. Nevertheless, former CIA analyst Julia Curlee argued that intelligence professionals continued conducting their work but faced an environment in which information disliked by the president could be interpreted as disloyalty. Curlee also alleged that she was dismissed from Trump's National Security Council last year because of her transgender identity.
Beth Sanner, who served as deputy director of national intelligence during Trump's first administration, said the loss of coordination was especially concerning given the complexity of today's international security environment. In her assessment, American policymakers need detailed analysis that combines different sources of intelligence and presents competing developments in context. Instead, she warned, decision-makers are receiving a less integrated understanding of global events.
Morgan Muir, a former deputy director of national intelligence under the Biden administration who had also briefed former President George W. Bush, expressed concern about the creation of separate intelligence networks. He warned that weakening the institutions responsible for bringing agencies together could encourage officials to rely on whichever individual source or assessment they prefer. This could make it harder for policymakers to obtain a comprehensive view based on the collective work of the intelligence community.
Another breakdown in cooperation involved the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). The centre is responsible for bringing together intelligence concerning terrorism and related security threats. According to two former officials, the FBI stopped sharing some information with the NCTC for several weeks late last year after its then-director, Joe Kent, and his team attempted to investigate the shooting of Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA.
The disagreement centred on the authority of the counterterrorism centre. FBI officials told Kent that they believed his organisation was going beyond its legal responsibilities. The dispute resulted in a temporary halt to some intelligence exchanges between the two institutions, adding another example of coordination problems within the federal security system.
The handling of election-related intelligence also changed during Gabbard's leadership. Two people familiar with the situation and a former U.S. official said her office stopped briefing members of Congress about threats to elections in 2025. Those briefings were later restored after Jay Clayton took over as director of national intelligence in August 2026.
ODNI said Clayton was committed to ensuring that intelligence agencies received the resources needed to support government decision-makers and protect the American public. The office also defended the National Intelligence Council, stating that its production of assessments had remained close to historical levels. A U.S. official added that Clayton recognised the council's importance and had taken a more supportive approach towards its work.
The CIA also rejected the suggestion that it had withdrawn from the wider intelligence assessment process. Agency spokesperson Liz Lyons said the CIA continued to participate fully in intelligence reporting through the Presidential Daily Brief, led by ODNI, and through the National Intelligence Council. The White House did not respond to requests for comment on the reported divisions, while the FBI also provided no response.
Beyond the immediate disputes, former intelligence officials have begun working on proposals to strengthen the American intelligence system. Four former U.S. officials said a bipartisan group at Stanford University's Hoover Institution was developing recommendations for rebuilding the intelligence community under the next administration. The initiative reflects concerns about institutional coordination, the sharing of sensitive information and the ability of intelligence agencies to provide policymakers with reliable assessments.
The central challenge for Washington is no longer simply collecting intelligence but ensuring that information gathered by different agencies is properly analysed, shared and presented to those responsible for national security decisions. The return of some cooperation under Jay Clayton suggests that parts of the system are recovering, but disagreements involving the CIA, ODNI and FBI, alongside staffing reductions and concerns about political pressure, continue to raise questions about the effectiveness of America's intelligence network. With Iran and other international security threats remaining major concerns, restoring consistent cooperation between federal agencies will be an important test for the Trump administration.
Stay informed with the latest national and international news.
© 2026. All rights reserved.