First Noem and Bondi, Now Tulsi Gabbard? Another Trump Female Official Trends As Unverified 'Firing' Claims Spread

Unverified claims that US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard had been fired began spreading rapidly across social media on 6 April 2026, drawing hundreds of thousands of views despite no official confirmation from the White House or any established news outlet. Posts on X, formerly Twitter, declared the news as 'breaking,' with one verified account — Cape Town mayoral candidate Mehmet Vefa Dag — posting that Gabbard had been dismissed from her post as the United States' top intelligence official. The claim garnered over 200,000 views within hours before being amplified further by accounts with no sourcing to back it up.

The claims arrived amid recent Trump administration changes that had primed social media for similar speculation.

Two Real Firings Set the Stage

The pattern began on 5 March 2026, when Trump announced he was removing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, after months of controversy, including the fatal shootings of two US citizens by federal officers in Minneapolis and lawmakers' questions over a $220 million advertising contract. Trump named Oklahoma Senator Markwayne Mullin as her replacement. Noem became the first Cabinet secretary to leave her post in Trump's second term, capping a tumultuous year in which she oversaw his increasingly unpopular mass deportation agenda.

On 2 April 2026, Trump dismissed Attorney General Pam Bondi amid fallout over her handling of Department of Justice files on sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to serve as acting attorney general. In a Truth Social post, Trump described Bondi as a 'great American patriot and loyal friend', stating she would transition to a new role in the private sector; sources indicated Trump had expressed unhappiness with her performance over several months.

The Rumour About Gabbard

Trump had reportedly asked cabinet members in recent weeks whether he should replace Gabbard, with frustration over her refusal to publicly condemn Joe Kent—the former Director of the National Counterterrorism Centre. Kent resigned abruptly, criticising the administration's rationale for action in Iran; in his resignation letter, he wrote that 'Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby'.

White House communications director Steven Cheung stated that Trump retains 'total confidence' in Gabbard, describing contrary suggestions as 'totally fake news'. A spokesperson for Gabbard affirmed her ongoing commitment, stating: 'Over the past two weeks, President Trump said both that he has confidence in the DNI and that she did well at her hearings before Congress. She remains committed to fulfilling the responsibilities the president placed in her.' Gabbard continues to serve as the eighth Director of National Intelligence, a position held since February 2025.

Why the Rumours Keep Spreading

A spokesperson for Gabbard confirmed her continued commitment to the role, stating: 'Over the past two weeks, President Trump said both that he has confidence in the DNI and that she did well at her hearings before Congress. She remains committed to fulfilling the responsibilities the president placed in her. That has not stopped the rumour mill. Observers note that Trump publicly backed Bondi in similar terms before ultimately dismissing her — a parallel that has not gone unnoticed online.

Gabbard's tenure has had its share of documented tensions. Reports noted that some White House aides had joked that the acronym of her title, DNI, stood for 'Do Not Invite,' amid accounts that she had been excluded from key strategy sessions. Despite that, she continues to serve in one of the most sensitive intelligence positions in the US government.

The viral spread of unconfirmed claims about a sitting senior official illustrates how real cabinet shake-ups can generate a misinformation slipstream — where rumour fills the gap before facts do. When genuine dismissals occur in rapid succession, social media ecosystems can struggle to distinguish between verified developments and speculation, particularly when posts from accounts with large followings frame unconfirmed claims as breaking news. Readers encountering such claims are advised to look for confirmation from official government sources or credible reporting before sharing.