
"Actively Harassing Intel Officials": Tulsi Gabbard Slams Washington Post Reporter
'It has come to my attention that Washington Post reporter @nakashimae appears to be actively harassing ODNI staff,' Gabbard wrote in a post on X.
She added, 'Instead of reaching out to my press office, she is calling high-level Intelligence Officers from a burner phone, refusing to identify herself, lying about the fact that she works for the Washington Post, and then demanding they share sensitive information.'
She further accused the leading daily of engaging in politically motivated journalism. 'This is a clear political op by the same outlet and the same reporter who harassed and stalked my family in Hawaii,' Gabbard claimed in the post.
She concluded by saying, 'This kind of deranged behaviour reflects a media establishment so desperate to sabotage @POTUS's successful agenda that they've abandoned even a facade of journalistic integrity and ethics. The Washington Post should be ashamed, and they should put an end to this immediately.'
It has come to my attention that Washington Post reporter @nakashimae appears to be actively harassing ODNI staff. Instead of reaching out to my press office, she is calling high level Intelligence Officers from a burner phone, refusing to identify herself, lying about the fact…
— DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) July 3, 2025
Ellen Nakashima, a reporter with decades of experience in national security reporting, has been part of three Pulitzer Prize-winning teams at The Washington Post, The Hill reported. Her reporting credentials include sensitive coverage of intelligence operations and foreign threats.
In response to Gabbard's accusations, The Washington Post's executive editor Matt Murray issued a statement defending Nakashima's work and condemning the Director of National Intelligence's remark.
'For three decades, Ellen Nakashima has been one of the most careful, fair-minded, and highly regarded reporters covering national security,' said Murray, according to The Hill. 'Reaching out to potential sources rather than relying solely on official government press statements regarding matters of public interest is neither nefarious nor is it harassment. It is basic journalism.'
Murray described Gabbard's post as 'unfounded' and 'personal,' adding that it 'reflects a fundamental misunderstanding about the role of journalists to report on government officials and hold power to account, without fear or favour and regardless of party.'
The confrontation echoes recent tensions between members of the Trump administration and journalists. In June, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth criticised reporters during a news conference, claiming they were deliberately undermining the success of American military operations against Iranian nuclear sites.
Trump also publicly demanded that CNN fire national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand over her reporting on the Defence Intelligence Agency's assessments.
In response, CNN said it stood '100% behind Natasha Bertrand's journalism'.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
6 hours ago
- First Post
Why Trump's deflection playbook is faltering as Epstein case stirs Republican unrest
President Donald Trump is facing growing pressure from his Republican base over unresolved questions about Jeffrey Epstein as his usual tactics of distraction and denial fail to silence calls for transparency and accountability. read more Once masterful at deflecting controversy, President Donald Trump is now finding his usual playbook less effective as pressure mounts over the unresolved Jeffrey Epstein saga even from within his loyal conservative base. Despite years of successfully shifting focus through bluster, distractions and conspiracy-laden narratives, Trump's White House is now grappling with persistent questions about his past ties to Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died in prison in 2019. The calls for transparency aren't just coming from Democrats or the media but increasingly from his own supporters. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump has responded with familiar tactics: dodging questions, downplaying his connection to Epstein and blaming the media. Yet the scrutiny persists, exposing a rare vulnerability in his ability to control the narrative. 'This is one issue the president can't seem to shake,' said Republican strategist Erin Maguire, a former Trump campaign spokeswoman. 'He's usually excellent at steering the conversationbut not this time.' What distinguishes this controversy from earlier political storms including two impeachments and the Russia probe is the source of the agitation. It's the president's right-wing supporters, long suspicious of a government cover-up involving Epstein's powerful connections, who are now demanding accountability. That suspicion has only intensified as Trump's administration downplays his past friendship with Epstein while acknowledging his name appears in case documents. 'Trump's been running a propaganda machine for years, but it's running out of steam,' said Geoff Duncan, a Republican and vocal Trump critic. 'The far-right base is relentless on this issue. They want the truth.' In public remarks, Trump has repeatedly sought to change the subject. Ahead of a trip to Scotland, he urged the media to focus on the country's economic performance rather than on Epstein. 'They don't talk about the others, they talk about me. I have nothing to do with the guy,' he said. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But deflection has only gone so far. Trump's recent distractions included lashing out at a reporter in the Cabinet Room, claiming disinterest in the Epstein matter and teaming up with Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard to accuse former President Barack Obama of treason, a pivot seen by some strategists as tone-deaf. Republican strategist Brad Todd argued that Trump's confrontation with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell over interest rates had more resonance than his backward-looking claims against Obama. 'Going after the Fed touches on affordability. That works better than rehashing 2016,' he said. Democrats, meanwhile, sense an opening. With Trump's grip on the GOP showing signs of strain, especially in the aftermath of poor Democratic showings in last year's elections, Epstein's lingering shadow offers a wedge issue. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found most Americans believe the Trump administration is concealing information about Epstein. Democrats and some Republicans alike are pushing for the release of government files on the case—documents the Justice Department had once pledged to publish. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Yesterday was another example of Trump's team trying to drown out calls for the Epstein files with noise,' said Senator Mark Warner, commenting on Gabbard's attack on Obama. Inside the White House, officials maintain their strategy of flooding the news cycle. 'They're constantly on the offensive, every agency pumping out stories, trying to control what dominates the headlines,' said Maguire. Still, despite the growing unrest over Epstein, Trump retains strong support on key issues. A July Reuters/Ipsos poll showed 56% of Republicans back his immigration workplace raids. And history shows his base often overlooks even more serious allegations. Pollster Frank Luntz put it bluntly: 'Trump's faced indictments, impeachments, and criminal charges and still got re-elected. He's slipped past before. But this one may take longer to fade.' With inputs from agencies


Hindustan Times
18 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Is Obama suing Trump over Russian interference claims, treason warning? Here's the truth
A claim about former President Barack Obama planning to sue President Donald Trump is going viral on social media. This comes as the 79-year-old accused the Democrat of 'treason', saying he and his administrated pushed a Russian interference hoax during the 2016 election. National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard released declassified documents saying they support her claims of Obama's 'treasonous conspiracy' to undermine Trump. Donald Trump speaks with former U.S. President Barack Obama as Melania Trump looks on during the state funeral for former U.S. President Jimmy Carter(Getty Images via AFP) On Friday, Trump said that Obama owes him for the Supreme Court's ruling that presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts in office. "He owes me, Obama owes me big," Trump said before leaving for Scotland. The former president is yet to respond to the claims. Read More: Pam Bondi branded 'unnecessary embarrassment' to Trump over Epstein file fiasco Is Obama planning to sue Trump? As Trump claimed Obama 'owes' him, a post about the latter planning to file a lawsuit went viral. 'Barack Obama just announced he will be suing Donald Trump for $500 billion over Trump's claim that Obama led a coup,' The Halfway Post said in a post on X, platform formerly known as Twitter. However, the user did not provide any evidence to back their claim. There is no evidence that Obama is suing Trump. The viral post seems satirical. 'No, Barack Obama is not suing Donald Trump. The claim stems from a satirical post by HalfwayPost, a comedy account. Fact-checks from reliable sources like NYT, CNN, and Politico confirm no such lawsuit exists as of July 26, 2025,' Elon Musk-led xAI's bot Grok clarified. "The post you're referencing is satire from a comedy account. No, Barack Obama is not suing Donald Trump for $500 billion. However, Trump did recently accuse Obama of treason and orchestrating a "coup" in the context of the 2016 Russia probe, based on declassified documents. Obama dismissed these claims as outrageous," another person added. Earlier this week, Trump posted an AI-generated video of Obama's arrest and called for accountability.


Indian Express
18 hours ago
- Indian Express
In America, is the brouhaha all about Epstein? It depends on the reality you live in
Tintin fans will never forget the funny exchange between General Alcazar and his rival, the just-deposed General Tapioca, in Tintin and the Picaros. After Tapioca has surrendered, his ADC asks Alcazar what should be done with the old fellow; whether he should be executed promptly by firing squad. Alcazar refuses to do so, having promised Tintin that there would be no bloodshed in the coup. A seemingly disappointed Tapioca and a grouchily determined Alcazar then talk like a couple of serious elder figures about how the youngsters like Tintin have no respect for traditions like firing squads these days! The bitter brawl in America between the Democrats and Republicans, or between the pro-Trump and anti-Trump forces, has acquired all the twists and turns of a 'Picaresque' adventure. Critics of President Donald Trump had a triumphant run for a while watching the growing split among his supporters over his seeming backtracking on the long-running saga of the notorious 'Epstein files'. However, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's announcement that former president Barack Obama's actions over allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election were tantamount to an attempted 'years-long coup' has swung the pendulum once again. But unlike a pendulum that eventually seeks a position of quiet rest in the middle after having expended its energies at the extremes, the experience of living in American democracy continues to feel frantic, feverish, and fragmented for all camps concerned. It is not just political opinion, but one's sense of reality itself that seems polarised. Since the rise of social media, friends, family members, neighbours, students, everyone seems to be living in a different silo now as far as their knowledge, or even impression, of what is happening in the world is concerned. For those who consume National Public Radio and The New York Times, the news is still about the alleged troubles in the MAGA world over Epstein. Few of my friends in the Bay Area, for example, had even come across news of Gabbard's statements on Obama. But for those who follow a different set of sources, the news, and its implications for their sense of faith in the Trump presidency, will be very different indeed. Two differing tales will now unfold, much as they have these past 15-odd years. Critics of Trump will perceive what they see as a witch-hunt being unleashed against Obama. Trump's supporters, in turn, will see, or hope to see, their faith vindicated that 'Russiagate' was a hoax, and Obama-Biden-era officials who persecuted Trump and his supporters will be called out now for their actions. In one silo, the Democrats will wonder aloud at how their record of fair play and decency all these years has not been reciprocated at all by the Republicans. They will say that Hillary Clinton had the grace to concede in 2016, while Trump refused to do so in 2020. In the other silo, Trump's supporters will argue the opposite; they will point out that the Democrats relentlessly sought to deny legitimacy to Trump and his voters from all the way back in 2016, and that the Biden administration unleashed a witch-hunt on a former president and tried every nasty trick it could to keep him from running again in 2024. The real divide in America, as one of my old students once pointed out, isn't just between political loyalties, but simply a function of whether one is consuming editorialised news from 'legacy media' or long-form, direct, videos in the form of podcasts, campaign speeches, and interviews. For people who do both, the contradictions between these two worlds are astounding as is the possibility of a change, a halt to the onto-epistemological hostilities, a reality-reconciliation, if you will. Forced, or incentivised into performing their opinions on social media constantly, people have become incapable of humility, of a pause in their belief-torrents, of an opportunity to consider they may have been lied to, or at least misled in their understanding of things by partial pictures and frames in their news and social media feeds. And the institutions that might have played a role in helping to elevate real-life interactions and conversations over virtual reality-traps, schools, colleges, media education in particular, have themselves lost the plot, or at least a sense of memory about how we got here in just a few decades. Was it the victory of attention-seeking communication tactics over the soporific calm of political platitudes that marked the end of not just civility, but a shared sense of political reality? Was it the technology that came so fast no one had anything to work around it except for technocratic (pseudo) solutions of the 'Ministry of Truth' kind? It is fascinating to recall that even the complicated 2000 presidential election result did not end with supporters of Al Gore and George W Bush marching off into different sunsets. But by 2016, everything was different. Now, as the second decade of the Trump era unfolds, and the possibility of an ex-presidential inquisition once again lurks around the corner, the idea of how winners and losers, leaders and followers, can live together once again after the fall that was digital media remains a mystery. To conclude with a lesson from Tintin and the Picaros, let's remember that in the end, whether the sign over the slum says 'Viva Tapioca' or 'Viva Alcazar,' the reality of the mess there will still remain. But so will the hope that truth and loyalty, whether in Tintin or in real life, will win the day, too. The writer is professor of Media Studies, University of San Francisco