A rare correction at Langley
CIA Director John Ratcliffe rescinded or revised 19 intelligence reports after determining they contained political bias and violated basic tradecraft standards.
The President's Intelligence Advisory Board reviewed around 300 reports from the past decade and flagged serious problems: 17 were permanently deleted, two were pulled, revised, and reissued.
A senior CIA official told Just The News that the reports were initially flagged during a review by the President's Intelligence Advisory Board, then reviewed by career agency officials before being retracted, recalled, or revised.
"There is absolutely no room for bias in any kind of the CIA's work," the official said. "So when we find instances where our tradecraft did not reach that high bar of impartiality, we must correct the record. And that's why we're taking steps to reinforce analytic integrity by ordering the public release, substantive revision, or retraction of these products that do not meet CIA's tradecraft standards."
The action stands out because a sweeping internal correction like this rarely occurs; intelligence agencies revise their analyses over time, but mass rescissions tied to political bias seldom occur in public.
Reports that read like activism
One report warned that women embracing traditional motherhood could drift toward violent extremism, with analysts describing motherhood as a white supremacist objective, suggesting that women sharing cooking videos or family values content could aid recruitment networks. The product relied heavily on open-source material rather than on classified intelligence collection.
One was an Oct. 6, 2021, assessment titled “Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment” that waded into “foreign political debates about gender roles rather discussing any actual threats of political violence,” the senior CIA official said.
It had labeled the far-right Canadian YouTuber Lauren Southern as a white racially and ethnically motivated violent extremist and spoke of the dangers such figures pose to societies — in addition to women pursuing traditional roles as mothers.
A July 8, 2020 a CIA report also centered on family planning and the disruptions of condom supply chains worldwide using “unobjective sources of information such as Planned Parenthood,” the official noted.
Another assessment from 2020 warned that birth control shortages during the pandemic would damage economic growth in Egypt, Nigeria, and Pakistan, using sources such as Planned Parenthood, the Guttmacher Institute, and Marie Stopes International.
Another report from 2015 promoted LGBT academic programs in North Africa and the Middle East while criticizing conservative governments.
Intelligence Community Directive 203 requires objectivity, independence, and avoidance of any political slant. Ratcliffe said the flawed reports fell short of the high standards the agency must uphold, stressing there's no room for bias in intelligence analysis.
Directors and oversight
The January 2015 report was issued during the tenure of CIA Director John Brennan; the July 2020 report landed on the desk of CIA Director Gina Haspel; and the October 2021 motherhood report circulated while William Burns served as CIA Director. Each director presided over an agency required to enforce Directive 203's standards of impartiality.
None of the prior directors rescinded large batches of reports over bias concerns. Past intelligence controversies drew scrutiny; the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, produced under George Tenet, later proved deeply flawed.
The 2016 Russia election interference assessment faced criticism over process and sourcing while Brennan was in charge, yet no comparable mass deletion followed those episodes.
The advisory board reviewed only a small sample of the tens of thousands of intelligence products generated over the past 10 years. There's no public accounting of how many additional reports may have similar political framing.
A deeper divide over mission
The rescissions fuel a larger debate about the CIA's mission. Under Brennan, the agency expanded DEI alongside traditional intelligence collection. Haspel continued institutional reforms, and Burns oversaw the agency during a period of heightened domestic political tension.
Critics argue that analysts blurred the line between national security threats and social policy advocacy, while supporters of the deleted reports claim analysts examined emerging cultural movements through a counterterrorism lens.
Ratcliffe rejected that approach and ordered career officials to remove or correct the flagged material.
The move further signals President Donald Trump's return to core tradecraft and disciplined sourcing. Intelligence agencies exist to assess foreign adversaries, criminal networks, and national security risks, not to elevate activist narratives.
What comes next
Working together, Ratcliffe and the President's Intelligence Advisory Board plan additional reviews in the coming weeks. The scale of the initial action raises an uncomfortable question: If 19 politically compromised reports surfaced from a sample of 300, what's going to happen during a broader audit?
Public trust in intelligence institutions has endured for years; restoring credibility requires visible correction, not quiet footnotes. Ratcliffe's decision removed specific documents from circulation and placed responsibility squarely on professional standards rather than political fashion.
This episode underscores a larger lesson: Intelligence wields enormous power to shape policy and public perception. When that power drifts from disciplined analysis toward ideology, correction becomes critical.
Ratcliffe opted for a direct route. Whether deeper reviews uncover more politically tilted material remains to be seen.
Support independent reporting and gain full access to exclusive analysis. Use promo code FIGHT to lock in up to 60% off your VIP membership today.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member