Tulsi Gabbard may be heading for the exit, but she apparently decided not to leave quietly.
The outgoing Director of National Intelligence lobbed one last grenade into Washington’s already chaotic political landscape this week, releasing material she says shows decades of U.S. government funding for more than 120 biological research laboratories spread across over 30 countries — including facilities in Ukraine.
Today, I’m releasing never before seen intelligence revealing new evidence of past US government funding for more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including Ukraine.
In support of President Trump‘s Executive Order to end federal funding of dangerous gain of function… pic.twitter.com/RkPHnAbka9
— DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) June 12, 2026
And right on cue, the foreign-policy establishment reacted as if someone had pulled the fire alarm at a cocktail party.
In a video posted online, Gabbard argued that Americans were misled for years about the scope of U.S.-backed biological research programs overseas. “Today, I’m releasing new evidence of long-standing U.S. Government funding of more than 120 bio labs in over 30 countries. Now, these bio labs include labs in places like Ukraine, which could be at risk of compromise due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. In fact, the intelligence community had previously warned that a U.S.-funded bio lab in Ukraine likely housed dangerous pathogens and remained vulnerable to long-standing threats of Russian attack, seizure, or damage.”
Gabbard then escalated the attack, accusing political leaders and public-health figures of obscuring the truth. “Despite the obvious potential for catastrophic global impact research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have, politicians, so-called health professionals like Dr. Fauci, and entities within the Biden administration’s national security team lied to the American people about the existence of U.S.-funded and supported biolabs, and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth.”
For years, discussion of U.S.-supported laboratories in Ukraine was aggressively dismissed as misinformation, even though American-funded biological research facilities in the region were never exactly a state secret. U.S. officials have long acknowledged partnerships focused on disease surveillance, pathogen security, and biosafety efforts in former Soviet states. The real dispute has always been over what risks those programs create and how transparent government officials have been when discussing them.
Gabbard’s remarks reignited that long-simmering argument — and sent critics into overdrive.
Among the loudest was veteran Russia critic Garry Kasparov, who fired off a blistering response: “Loyal to the end. To Putin.”
Others accused Gabbard of giving fresh ammunition to Russian narratives that emerged after Moscow’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin and other Kremlin officials repeatedly cited alleged biological threats as part of their justification for military action, claims that Western governments and most independent experts rejected.
The backlash spread quickly across media and national-security circles. Financial Times correspondent Christopher Miller blasted Gabbard for “perpetuat[ing]” what he described as a favored Russian conspiracy theory and accused her of twisting facts to benefit the Kremlin.
Biological-weapons expert Josh Segal expressed confusion over why the intelligence chief would revisit a narrative that many in the national-security community consider thoroughly debunked. “I am really confused as to why the DNI released something giving new life to a misleading narrative the entire intel community has known for decades to be a Russian trope and that the Trump administration worked hard to crush in its first term,” Segal said.
He also emphasized that the facilities themselves were not secret. “Their labs are not now and were never secret, and do zero questionable work. Cooperation with the US started as a highly publicized effort to convert former Soviet research facilities that may have been connected to the USSR’s covert BW program and involved Russian participation until a decade ago.” Segal added that those efforts helped eliminate dangerous biological materials left behind after the Soviet era.
Democrats piled on as well.
Rep. Mike Levin dismissed Gabbard’s claims as little more than recycled Kremlin talking points, arguing that the facilities and associated programs had long been publicly documented through U.S. government channels. “Russia invented the ‘secret bioweapons’ spin in 2022 to help justify invading Ukraine,” Levin argued, adding that American intelligence agencies had previously characterized such claims as disinformation.
Yet even some figures on the political right expressed discomfort.
The spectacle highlighted a growing divide inside the America First movement itself. One faction sees Gabbard’s disclosures as a long-overdue challenge to government secrecy and institutional narratives. Another worries that legitimate questions about transparency can be exploited by foreign adversaries eager to sow confusion.
Lost beneath the shouting, however, is a question Washington rarely enjoys answering: If these programs were completely benign, fully transparent and widely understood, why does every discussion about them immediately trigger accusations of treason, Russian loyalty and disinformation?
That reaction alone is unlikely to convince skeptics that the public has been getting the full story.
Gabbard’s critics insist she is reviving a thoroughly discredited narrative. Her supporters argue she is exposing information powerful people would rather keep buried under layers of bureaucratic jargon and media fact-checks.
