A whistleblower filing against Tulsi Gabbard, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, has sparked debate in Washington over how classified material referencing Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, was managed within the intelligence community.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the dispute centers on an intercepted exchange between two foreign nationals who discussed Kushner. The conversation was gathered by a foreign intelligence service and subsequently shared with the National Security Agency. The material reportedly referenced Kushner’s influence on U.S. foreign policy, particularly in matters related to Iran.

The intercepted discussion, which occurred last year, included commentary about Kushner’s role in Middle East peace negotiations and Iran policy. However, U.S. officials from the Trump administration characterized the claims as largely unsubstantiated and dismissed them as inaccurate.

The whistleblower alleges that Gabbard’s office limited access to the intelligence assessment and delayed its circulation for several months. According to the Journal, the complaint contends that Gabbard narrowed the group permitted to review the report after a meeting with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. Some officials involved reportedly believe that broader distribution might have led to the material being quickly deemed insignificant. The whistleblower, however, maintains that relevant agencies should have received the information and suggests that the restriction was politically driven.

Gabbard’s office has rejected the accusations, stating that the material was handled appropriately and in accordance with national security protocols. Still, the timing of the report’s limited release has prompted questions from members of Congress. A heavily redacted version of the complaint was eventually provided to select lawmakers, and several Democrats have called for additional scrutiny into why the complaint was not addressed sooner. The Journal noted that Gabbard’s team has defended her conduct, asserting that she adhered to established legal and procedural requirements.

The New York Times reported additional details about the contents of the intercepted conversation. According to the newspaper, the intelligence, which originated with a foreign partner, primarily focused on Iran but also mentioned Kushner, whose name was initially redacted in the report. The individuals in the conversation reportedly speculated about Kushner’s sway over U.S. policy during a period when his involvement in Middle East diplomacy was increasing. U.S. officials familiar with the intelligence said portions of the discussion amounted to unverified gossip, including claims that were demonstrably false.

The Times also pointed out that the reference to Kushner drew attention because U.S. officials, particularly those connected to the Trump administration, are typically masked in such intercepts. While Gabbard’s office restricted wider distribution of the material, some officials believe the move reflected caution, given the risk that disclosure could expose sensitive intelligence sources and methods.

Although the allegations tied to Kushner were speculative and unsupported by corroborating intelligence, the decision to limit access to the report has fueled controversy. Critics argue that Gabbard may have sought to shield an ally of President Trump from political fallout, while others contend that her approach was a pragmatic effort to avoid unnecessary controversy over dubious information.

The complaint and related inquiries remain classified. However, some lawmakers, including Senator Mark Warner, have called for comprehensive access to the underlying intelligence, which has not yet been fully disclosed.