U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has dismantled a task force she created last year to investigate alleged politicization within intelligence agencies, a move that follows mounting criticism and internal concerns, according to reporting by Reuters. The unit, known as the Director’s Initiatives Group (DIG), had been established to accelerate high-priority projects tied to presidential directives but was viewed by opponents as a vehicle for partisan scrutiny during the Trump administration.
Gabbard said she has reassigned DIG personnel to other roles across the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emphasizing that the group was always intended to be temporary. In a statement to Reuters, she described the initiative as a short-term effort designed to “surge resources” toward time-sensitive assignments, including the implementation of executive orders, and said its mission would continue through redistributed staff expertise.
Two sources familiar with the decision told Reuters that the task force’s closure followed alleged missteps, though an ODNI spokesperson denied any wrongdoing and maintained that the group fulfilled its intended purpose. The spokesperson added that the agency would continue cooperating with congressional oversight after lawmakers raised concerns about the task force’s structure and transparency.
The DIG had faced scrutiny on Capitol Hill, where members of Congress questioned its secrecy and management. Legislation passed in December required Gabbard to submit a classified report detailing the unit’s leadership, staffing, and hiring practices. While the ODNI missed the reporting deadline, officials said the information would still be delivered to lawmakers.
The task force’s dissolution comes at a politically sensitive moment for Gabbard. Democrats have voiced alarm over her attendance at a January 28 FBI raid that seized ballot boxes and materials from a Georgia county’s election archive. Reuters also reported that her office oversaw an investigation last year into voting machines in Puerto Rico, actions that critics argue extend beyond the traditional remit of U.S. intelligence agencies.
The White House has defended Gabbard’s involvement in reviewing election security, but Democratic leaders contend that such activities risk politicizing intelligence functions and could open the door to interference in future elections. Supporters of the DIG, however, point to achievements such as declassifying records related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and advancing several executive orders early in Donald Trump’s presidency.
Controversy also surrounded some of the group’s claims and investigations. The ODNI highlighted as a major accomplishment the declassification of documents that Gabbard alleged showed former President Barack Obama directed intelligence officials to shape assessments about Russian interference in the 2016 election. That allegation has been contradicted by multiple prior reviews, including a 2025 CIA assessment, a bipartisan 2018 Senate Intelligence Committee report, and findings from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, while Obama has denied wrongdoing.
Sources cited by Reuters said operational errors may have contributed to the decision to wind down the task force, including an instance in which the DIG allegedly linked a federal security worker to pipe bombs planted outside Democratic and Republican headquarters ahead of the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. The ODNI disputed that characterization, saying it was legally obligated to relay a whistleblower allegation and that agency counsel was involved.
Another source claimed the group disclosed the name of a CIA officer serving undercover overseas when revoking security clearances for 37 current and former officials, most of them Democrats. The ODNI denied revealing the officer’s identity, stating that no agency affiliation was named.
The end of the DIG closes a contentious chapter for U.S. intelligence leadership, leaving ongoing debates in Washington over oversight, political neutrality, and the appropriate boundaries of national security agencies in domestic matters.
