A top aide of Tulsi Gabbard ordered officials to scrap a damning study finding the administration would not be justified in deporting Venezuelan migrants without due process.
An unnamed White House official ordered an intelligence study about whether the administration could legally justify the deportations under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798—which allows removals without court hearings during wartime and requires the involvement of a foreign power—by linking the Tren de Aragua gang to the Venezuelan government, The New York Times reported.
The resulting report, promulgated in February, found no links between the Venezuelan government and the gang.
ADVERTISEMENT
But then Joe Kent, Director of National Intelligence Gabbard‘s chief of staff, ordered investigators to redo the assessment, the Times reported.
Behind the scenes, Kent told Michael Collins, acting chair of the National Intelligence Council (NIC), to redo the assessment, asking him to “rethink” the earlier analysis.
In March, Trump invoked the law to deport suspected members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua without court hearings.
The NIC then reaffirmed the original findings on April 7 after re-examining all evidence, concluding that the Venezuelan government “probably does not have a policy of cooperating with [the Tren de Aragua gang] and is not directing T.D.A. movement to and operations in the United States,” the Times reported.
This week, Gabbard removed Collins and his deputy from leading the NIC.
It is not clear which White House official made the original request to commission the study.
The White House hit back at criticism over the Times report.
“President Trump rightfully designated Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization based on intelligence assessments and, frankly, common sense,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told the Times.
The Times report is the latest stain on the intelligence community’s reputation. In 2002, intelligence agencies determined that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, which became the primary justification for the 2003 invasion of the country. No such weapons were found in the resulting invasion, setting off waves of criticism from opponents of the war.
