Trump Responds To Reports He’s Not Happy With DNI Gabbard

The White House moved swiftly this week to shut down speculation of internal discord, firmly backing Donald J. Trump’s Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard following the abrupt resignation of a key national security official.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed reports suggesting the president was losing confidence in Gabbard, offering a clear and direct response during an appearance on Fox News. When asked whether President Trump still supported his intelligence chief, Leavitt responded: “He does, yes.” The statement came as Gabbard was appearing before Congress, underscoring the administration’s effort to project unity amid the unfolding controversy.

The speculation followed the sudden departure of Joe Kent, who stepped down from his role as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Kent announced his resignation Tuesday, citing deep disagreements over U.S. policy toward Iran.

“After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today,” he wrote.

“I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby,” he continued.

“It has been an honor serving under @POTUS and @DNIGabbard and leading the professionals at NCTC,” Kent concluded.

Kent, long viewed as a staunch Trump ally, now becomes the first senior official to exit the administration during the president’s second term over a major policy dispute — a development that has drawn significant attention in Washington.

President Trump, however, appeared largely unfazed by the resignation. While noting that he “liked” Kent, the president made clear he viewed the former official’s stance as incompatible with the administration’s national security priorities.

“When I read his statement, I realized that it’s a good thing that he’s out because he said that Iran was not a threat. Iran was a threat – every country realized what a threat Iran was,” he said. “When somebody is working with us that says they didn’t think Iran is a threat – we don’t want those people.”

The situation escalated further with emerging reports that Kent had been under FBI investigation for allegedly leaking classified information to the media. Leavitt appeared to confirm those concerns, reinforcing the administration’s hardline stance against internal leaks.

“Anyone who has been suspected of leaking or is proven to be a leaker will not be welcome in this administration,” she said. “I know that for a fact because I’ve heard the President say it myself.”

Gabbard also weighed in publicly, defending the president’s authority and decision-making in matters of national security.

“As our Commander in Chief, he is responsible for determining what is and is not an imminent threat, and whether or not to take action he deems necessary to protect the safety and security of our troops, the American people and our country,” she wrote on X.

The broader debate centers on the administration’s military response to Iran. Following initial strikes, President Trump pointed to an “imminent threat” as justification for action, with officials arguing the move was necessary to prevent potential attacks on U.S. forces.

While some Pentagon briefings suggested Iran was not preparing immediate aggression unless provoked, the administration has maintained that decisive action was required to safeguard American interests and deter future threats — a position consistent with Trump’s long-standing doctrine of peace through strength.

Kent’s resignation letter, however, painted a sharply different picture, invoking past U.S. entanglements in the Middle East and warning against repeating what he described as costly strategic errors.

“Until June of 2025, you understood that the wars in the Middle East were a trap that robbed America of the precious lives of our patriots and depleted the wealth and prosperity of our nation,” Kent wrote.

He also referenced Trump’s earlier approach to military force, noting how the president previously acted decisively without committing to prolonged conflicts, including the targeted killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

In his final remarks, Kent accused foreign influence and media narratives of shaping U.S. policy decisions.

“This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that should you strike now, there was a clear path to victory,” he wrote. “This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq war that cost our nation the lives of thousands of our best men and women. We cannot make this mistake again.”

Despite the controversy, the Trump administration is signaling zero tolerance for dissent that undermines its national security posture — and a continued commitment to assertive, America-first foreign policy decisions.