Trump Administration Again Declares War On Leakers, Which Will Certainly Go As Well As Last Time

This didn’t work last time. But neither did a lot of things the first Trump administration tried. This time, though, the federal government is at war with itself, attacked from all sides by the rabid DOGE in its midst. Given that novel development, the chances of information damaging to the Trump administration being leaked to journalists has increased exponentially.

The last time Trump declared war on leakers, his DOJ focused its attention on the journalists being leaked to, rather than tracking down those doing the leaking. On top of that, the first Trump administration went after more whistleblowers than even the notoriously anti-whistleblower Obama administration. Obama, in his defense, had to deal with perhaps the most notorious leaker in human history: Edward Snowden.

Nothing of that magnitude has happened to either Trump Administration, but being proactive is generally more useful than resigning yourself to reacting.

The DHS, under former South Dakota governor Kristi Noem, has already declared it’s going to do something to limit leaking. This “something” appears to be the polygraph-assisted “interviews” of leak suspects — an effort that’s going to do little more than generate a bunch of false positives and negatives. It’s certainly not going to deter leaking. Nor is it going to help the DHS (and its components) root out the leakers it employs.

The current Director of National Intelligence — yet another MAGA conspiracy theorist who’s been given access to tons of power and extremely sensitive information — has declared herself to be fully on-board with Trump’s anti-leak efforts, as Julian Barnes and David Sanger report for the New York Times.

Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, announced the investigations in a statement on Friday. Among the accusations, she said The Washington Post had published leaked information on Iran and Israel, and NBC had published leaked information on the state of U.S.-Russia relations.

It was not clear that any published information was classified, or that the news organizations had received classified materials. There are tight restrictions on the circumstances under which intelligence officials can provide information to the news media.

“Politically motivated leaks undermine our national security and the trust of the American people, and will not be tolerated,” Ms. Gabbard wrote. “Unfortunately, such leaks have become commonplace with no investigation or accountability. That ends now.”

I know this is the sort of thing government officials are expected to say when offering public statements, but even Gabbard has to know this new effort — whatever it actually entails — will not “end” leaks of government information to journalists. In fact, the harder this administration goes after leakers, the more likely it is to encourage people to leak info to journalists.

This was accompanied by another statement from Gabbard that’s equally unbelievable:

Ms. Gabbard promised to take action against unauthorized disclosures, even while saying she would create better avenues for whistle-blowers to report concerns.

That might mean something if anyone just waiting to be fired en masse by Executive Order or DOGE disorder actually believe this government can be trusted to protect whistleblowers. But the acts most likely to generate leaks are the acts most likely to encounter vindictive treatment if raised internally. Almost no one in any position of power is interested in hearing about the problems they’re causing. The only response they desire is immediate capitulation and, perhaps, some sort of public display of affection by those under their boot heels.

And, finally, let’s just unpack the loaded language being used by DNI Gabbard. “politically motivated leaks.” Leaks involving the government — one headed by a president who represents a single political party — will always be “politically motivated.” It’s inevitable. But it doesn’t mean every leak is motivated solely by political opposition to the party currently in the Oval Office. Most leaks are motivated by government employees being genuinely concerned about the government’s actions, including those they’re being asked to perform themselves. These are acts of people who, for the most part, feel the public show know what’s going on behind the scenes — actions that members of the public are now complicit in simply because they elected people and their tax dollars are being used to pay for them.

This won’t stop leaks. It will certainly deter whistleblowing through proper channels. This government (like many before it) doesn’t want its dirty laundry aired. But it also has little interest in keeping its laundry as clean as possible, preferring to shoot messengers than have to deal with the minor inconveniences of respecting rights, following the law, or otherwise doing what it can to earn the trust and respect of the governed.