The New Acting Director of the Office of National Intelligence Has a Track Record of Weaponizing Government
Bill Pulte shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power
Tulsi Gabbard announced her resignation in May as Director of National Intelligence. Like many other high-ranking Trump administration officials, Gabbard’s tenure has been marked by controversy. Not that she’s in new territory there. During her time in Congress, she drew bipartisan criticism for meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and, in later years, became a polarizing figure whose commentary on Russia and Ukraine led critics to accuse her of minimizing or repeating Kremlin talking points.
In July, Gabbard released documents that she claimed showed the Obama administration had “manufactured and politicized intelligence” related to Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. The material released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, however, did not overturn the longstanding intelligence-community assessment that Russia interfered in the election and that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin preferred Trump’s victory.1 She was also present at the raid in Fulton County, Georgia, where federal agents seized physical ballots from the 2020 presidential election. Gabbard facilitated a phone call between agents and Trump after the raid.
Gabbard’s standing inside the administration also appeared to weaken after she presented assessments that differed from the White House’s public messaging. For example, in March 2025, Gabbard told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that Iran wasn’t building a nuclear weapon. When asked by reporters in June about Gabbard’s assessment, presumably representing the view of the intelligence community, Trump said, “I don’t care what she says.” Just days later, Trump would order the bombing of Iranian nuclear sites in coordination with Israel, arguing that Tehran was “weeks away” from developing a nuclear weapon. Gabbard was also left out of the administration’s plans for military action in Venezuela.2
Although Gabbard won’t formally leave the role until June 30, Trump announced on Tuesday that he would put Bill Pulte in charge of ODNI as acting director. There’s little question that Gabbard’s tenure intensified concerns about the politicization of intelligence. If Pulte’s record thus far is any indication, those concerns are unlikely to fade.
Pulte has served as Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While in this role, Pulte targeted some of Trump’s political enemies. He referred New York Attorney General Letitia James to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for a criminal investigation into mortgage fraud.3 DOJ pursued the matter, but the case was ultimately dismissed on procedural grounds, and subsequent efforts to revive it have stalled.
Trump later accused Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) of mortgage fraud,4 citing a Fannie Mae memo to Pulte. Although DOJ has been investigating the matter, a case against Schiff appears to be going nowhere, at least for now. Pulte also accused Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook of mortgage fraud. Initially, Trump demanded that Cook resign, but he would eventually attempt to fire her for cause.5 Cook challenged the attempt to remove her from office, and the Supreme Court should issue a decision in that case sometime in June.
Taken together, these episodes have fueled criticism that Pulte has blurred the line between regulatory authority and political retribution. His actions have led to an investigation by the Government Accountability Office.6 Some congressional Republicans have expressed concern over his tactics. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reportedly threatened to punch Pulte in the face because Pulte had allegedly trash-talked him to Trump.
Pulte, who will continue in his role at FHFA, will now also oversee ODNI until Gabbard’s permanent replacement is chosen. Gabbard’s actions at ODNI were concerning enough. Pulte’s demonstrated pattern of going after Trump’s enemies shows that he shouldn’t be anywhere near the levers of power.
I don’t want to overstate what Pulte can do at ODNI. Still, he doesn’t need direct operational control over intelligence agencies to shape outcomes. The Director of National Intelligence influences what information reaches Trump in the Presidential Daily Brief, what priorities drive collection and analysis, how intelligence is communicated to Congress and the public, and which narratives receive institutional backing. Used politically, the authorities of the office can turn intelligence into something closer to justification than analysis. That’s not a hypothetical concern in an administration that has repeatedly shown hostility toward dissenting voices and independent institutions.
None of this is to definitively say Pulte will abuse the office. It doesn’t mean every intelligence judgment produced under his watch will be political or that career professionals across the intelligence community will simply fall in line. That said, institutions are only as strong as the people leading them.
The concern isn’t that Pulte suddenly gains the ability to order covert operations or personally direct investigations. The concern is that intelligence will become less about informing decisions and more about reinforcing decisions already made. That risk can happen through personnel choices, selective emphasis, declassification decisions, and the quiet understanding of what conclusions are welcome and which ones aren’t.
The ODNI was created after September 11 to improve coordination and help policymakers see threats more clearly. It was never supposed to become a political weapon. If Trump wanted an acting DNI who would challenge assumptions and deliver uncomfortable truths, there were plenty of qualified people available. If what he wanted was someone willing to use institutional power in the service of political priorities, Pulte’s record suggests he may have found exactly what he was looking for.
This does not mean that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. The reports released by former FBI Director Robert Mueller and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found no direct evidence of a conspiracy.
This isn’t intended to be exhaustive.
In 2022, James filed a civil suit against the Trump Organization. The lawsuit was successful. Although the penalties were voided, the Trump Organization was still found liable for fraud.
Schiff is one of the most outspoken Democratic critics of Trump. He was the lead impeachment manager in Trump’s first impeachment. He was also a member of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol.
Trump has consistently expressed frustration at the Federal Reserve, particularly then-Chairman Jerome Powell, for not lowering interest rates. If Cook was forced to resign, Trump would name her successor, potentially placing someone at the Fed who would be more favorable to the White House’s monetary policy demands.
That investigation appears to be ongoing.