U.S. advisers reportedly push officials to rewrite intelligence and therefore won't use it on Trump

National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard admitted in an email on March 24 that the Venezuelan government may not have clearly directed a gang's activities that the Trump administration used to justify the rapid deportation of immigrants, but believes that the link between Caragas and the gang is “common sense.”
U.S. President Donald Trump has said that Tren de Aragua is coordinating its U.S. activities with the administration of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to invoke the Alien Enemy Act to prove the deportation of alleged gang members to the highest security prison in El Salvador. Some legal scholars believe the bill requires ties with foreign governments.
The Trump administration has expelled more than 200 immigrants by invoking the Alien Enemy Act, a wartime measure, saying they are members of Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragya. Andrew Chang explains how Trump interprets the language of the 1798 law to avoid the standard immigration court system and why experts say it is a slippery slope.
In the email, Gabbard's acting chief of staff, Joe Kent, demanded a “rethinking” of intelligence assessments, which contradicts the government's argument that Venezuela is responsible for the U.S. activities of members of the Tren de Aragua Gang, according to a person familiar with the matter.
“I want to know any IC [intelligence community] The element concluded that the Venezuelan government did not support it and did not orchestrate the TDA that operates in the United States,” Kent said in an email, referring to Tren de Alaguya.
“Even if the Venezuelan government does not have a dedicated mission or achieve TDA operations, even if our immigrants, especially those belonging to violent criminal gangs, flood our country is an action of hostile states.”
He added that analysts need to conduct new assessments of gangs that “reflect basic common sense.”
The New York Times is the first to report Kent's communications with the National Intelligence Commission, the highest analytical body of the intelligence community. Reuters was the first to post the contents of the email in detail.
The exchange highlighted the extent to which former CIA official Kent pushed the head of the National Intelligence Commission, Michael Collins, and other DNI officials, Michael Collins, to re-do the assessment, taking into account the key points Trump had previously been publicly articulated by Trump.
A spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said the timeline proposed in the story was “false and fabricated” and called Kent “an American patriot who continues to serve our country.”
“President Trump rightly designated Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization based on intelligence assessments, frankly, common sense,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
Kent argued in his email that Venezuela was a U.S. rival, sending gang members to the border and said that any country trying to hurt the U.S. “Naturally, they will have their bad actors and send them to our country.”
“When Biden announced the border opening, I think we let…seek…the direct link between the Venezuelan government and the TDA blocks basic common sense,” he wrote. He added that the National Intelligence Commission needs to start “seeking a new assessment of the TDA and its relationship with the Venezuelan government to reflect basic common sense.”
Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, faced high levels of illegal immigration during his presidency, but his administration has also taken steps to block illegal border crossings and encourage immigrants to enter the United States legally.
In a subsequent email with ODNI officials, Kent also said that according to two people familiar with the matter, Gabbard needs to be “protected” during the rewrite process.
The New York Times reported late Tuesday that in an email, Kent ordered analysts to “do some rewrites” the assessment and more analytics work so that “the file does not apply” Gabbard or Trump.
Kent's email is in response to the February National Intelligence Commission assessment (at least two in recent months) on the subject, which was considered by agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency, the FBI and the National Security Agency.
The first time was released internally on February 26 and was published in March through the New York Times report. It said the intelligence community did not find the gang controlled by the Venezuelan government.
Two familiar people say the second book was released on April 7 and was released through the Freedom of Inlover Act, adding more context and nuance, but confirming the original assessment of the intelligence community.
Not sure why Trump's statement contradicts the discovery of his own agency
NIC head Collins joined Vice Chairman Maria Langan-Riekhof as acting chair of the National Intelligence Commission from his position.
It is unclear who ordered the original intelligence assessment or why Trump later made statements contradicting the discovery of his own intelligence agencies.
It is common for the White House (under any administration) to require its intelligence community to develop reports on various national security matters.
Traditionally, intelligence agencies are tasked with assessing without political intervention or bias, so the president and his top national security officials can make smarter decisions.
According to three people familiar with the matter, the relocations shocked the upper echelons of the intelligence community.
Both Collins and Langa Rickhoff were publicly accused of political intelligence by Odney.
But two people familiar with the situation say Kent forces Collins to re-do the initial intelligence assessment to bring the government's public remarks closer. Despite the demands, Collins firmly supported the original discovery of the spy agency.
“It's obvious that Collins was laid off just to get the job done,” said a former U.S. intelligence official. “Collins is respected throughout the community and has a long history of hard issues in hard work and highest integrity.”
The people are anonymous, so they can talk more freely about the internal review of the Tren de Aragua assessment.