Tulsi Gabbard is on her way out as President Trump’s director of national intelligence, and the question swirling in pro-transparency circles is simple.
Does she have one more move left?
Gabbard announced she is resigning effective June 30, 2026, citing her husband’s rare bone cancer. That timeline has conservatives watching closely, because two live transparency fights are still open inside the building she is leaving.
One involves the 2020 election. The other involves records tied to alleged directed-energy attacks affecting American officials and civilians.
The social-media spark came from MJTruthUltra, who tied John Solomon’s reporting to Executive Order 13848 and framed Gabbard’s departure as a possible final push to blow up the official story.
KABOOM‼️ EO 13848 is in play..
🚨 John Solomon reports — Tulsi Gabbard is gonna go out in a BLAZE OF GLORY
“She will Systematically Destroy the Narrative that the 2020 Election was the most secure election in American history”
• Extraordinary evidence of foreign interference… https://t.co/ioY5Eth5M7 pic.twitter.com/4tT5l6TP8O
— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) May 29, 2026
That post says EO 13848 is back in play and that Gabbard could, in the account’s words, systematically destroy the narrative that 2020 was the most secure election in American history. The wording belongs to the X post, not to a confirmed government release.
The underlying reporting is more grounded.
Just the News tied the online reaction to memos and evidence reviewed by John Solomon’s team involving Gabbard, election vulnerabilities, and alleged intelligence-community suppression.
Gabbard’s team first encountered much of the material during work by the now-disbanded Director’s Initiative Group, then referred it to Intelligence Community Inspector General Christopher Fox. The memos describe allegations that some officials concealed or softened evidence involving Chinese election activity, voter-registration vulnerabilities, and concerns involving Venezuela-linked election infrastructure.
The documents also describe concerns that President Trump and Congress were not given the full picture. One central allegation is that China may have accessed voter-registration databases in 12 to 18 states during the 2020 cycle, while earlier intelligence warned that hostile foreign actors had the capability to compromise U.S. election infrastructure.
That does not mean a court has ruled on the allegations, or that every claim has been publicly proven. It means the records reviewed by Just the News point to a much larger fight over what the intelligence community knew, what it buried, and what may still be declassified.
That last point matters for keeping this honest. Nobody is claiming a court has ruled on any of it.
What is being reported is that the evidence exists in memo form, that it was referred to a watchdog, and that a referral can lead to declassified versions reaching the public.
Which brings the conversation back to EO 13848.
President Trump signed that order in 2018 to build a formal process for assessing foreign election interference. The text is laid out at Cornell Law.
EO 13848 directs the Director of National Intelligence to assess information indicating that a foreign government, or someone acting for one, interfered in a U.S. election. That assessment is supposed to identify, as far as possible, the nature of the interference, the methods used, the people involved, and the foreign government or governments behind it.
The DNI then sends the assessment and supporting information to the President, the attorney general, the secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, and Homeland Security.
The order also gives the attorney general and homeland security secretary a follow-up role. They evaluate whether foreign interference materially affected election infrastructure, vote tabulation, the timely transmission of results, or campaign and candidate infrastructure.
If new information emerges after the required reports are sent, the order allows amended reports. That amendment language is why the current Gabbard reporting is getting attention: if new records fit the EO framework, the process already has a place for them.
Read that amendment clause again. It means new evidence does not have to vanish just because the original reporting window closed.
If Gabbard’s team uncovered material that fits, the legal hook to act on it already exists.
The second lane is the one that gets less attention and may be just as explosive. A Telegram post from Candles In The Night, mirroring MJTruth, said Gabbard’s resignation could accelerate the public release of declassified records related to alleged directed-energy attacks on U.S. government officials and civilians.
That post pointed readers to a Catherine Herridge report. To be clear, no confirmed release of those records has happened, and the claim is that her exit could trigger it.
This fits a pattern that has been building for months.
Axios has traced the resignation story alongside the deeper fight between Gabbard’s ODNI and the CIA.
Gabbard’s exit is scheduled for June 30, and her public explanation is personal: her husband, Abraham Williams, has been diagnosed with an extremely rare form of bone cancer. Aaron Lukas, the principal deputy director of national intelligence, is expected to step in as acting DNI after she leaves.
The same resignation story included the intelligence-community feud that matters here. A CIA insider who worked with Gabbard’s Director’s Initiative Group testified that the agency obstructed ODNI efforts involving JFK files, COVID origins, and anomalous health incidents, the umbrella term often used for Havana Syndrome.
The CIA disputed that testimony, saying it had not impeded ODNI. Still, the dispute had already spilled into a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing, which gives the directed-energy/Havana Syndrome records question a real institutional setting instead of leaving it as a loose online theory.
The timing is the pressure point. Gabbard’s clock is running, but the records fights attached to her office are not finished, especially if final reviews, watchdog referrals, or declassification decisions are still moving before June 30.
So the picture is an outgoing DNI who spent her tenure prying open locked vaults, against pushback from the agency she was supposed to oversee.
The broader Solomon declassification lane runs alongside this. The same account that flagged EO 13848 has been pushing a string of related claims about the Biden-era Justice Department.
KABOOM‼️
John Solomon Reports: A SMOKING GUN was just discovered the Biden Admin knew the raid on Mar-A-Lago was illegal — which could now be considered “an overt act in a conspiracy case where President Trump’s civil liberties were violated.”
One of Merrick Garlands top… pic.twitter.com/3bU69UMP1n
— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) May 27, 2026
The Senate has been moving on parallel tracks. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said Chairman Rand Paul convened a May 13, 2026 hearing with CIA officer Jim Erdman III on alleged COVID-origin cover-up issues, and Paul thanked Trump administration officials including Gabbard for their transparency and cooperation.
That is the part the intelligence bureaucracy never wants on the record. A sitting committee chairman publicly crediting the DNI for opening doors instead of guarding them.
None of this means a single document has been stamped declassified and posted online. It means the machinery to release it is in place, the evidence is reportedly sitting in memos and referrals, and the clock on Gabbard’s tenure runs out June 30.
Whether she walks out quietly or hands the public something on the way is the question every transparency advocate is asking right now. The next five weeks will answer it.
Join the conversation!
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!