CIA Scandal Erupts: Haspel Under Fire

Magnifying glass over Central Intelligence Agency webpage

Peter Schweizer’s demand for a full investigation into former CIA Director Gina Haspel’s role in the Russia collusion saga is shaking up Washington, reopening the wounds of the intelligence community’s most controversial chapter and igniting outrage among Americans still reeling from years of politicized government excess.

At a Glance

Peter Schweizer calls for investigation into Gina Haspel’s actions as CIA London station chief and later as Director during the Russia collusion probe.
Haspel’s unusual reassignment to London placed her at the epicenter of intelligence flows fueling the Russia narrative.
Much of the disputed intelligence, including the infamous Steele dossier, originated from London during Haspel’s tenure.
Despite calls for accountability, no formal investigation has commenced as of July 28, 2025.

Schweizer Demands Accountability for Intelligence Failures

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute, has set Washington abuzz by publicly urging a thorough probe into Gina Haspel’s actions both as CIA London station chief and later as Director. Schweizer’s statement, delivered on July 27, 2025, points to Haspel’s unique access to information and her proximity to the origins of the most damaging intelligence scandal in modern American history. He questions why Haspel, reassigned to London by then-CIA Director John Brennan in 2014—a move described as “highly unusual”—was in place during the period when the now-debunked Steele dossier and other questionable intel about supposed Trump-Russia ties were funneled to U.S. agencies. Schweizer’s view: “What role did she play in creating this? And also, what role did she play in suppressing it when she was CIA director and she was supposed to be serving Donald Trump rather than the CIA establishment?”

Schweizer: Former CIA Director Gina Haspel Should Be Investigated https://t.co/Uhzg0rlUr6 via @BreitbartNews

— whiteaglesoring (@whiteaglesoarng) July 28, 2025

Schweizer’s frustration echoes that of everyday Americans who’ve watched the intelligence community repeatedly dodge meaningful oversight. The CIA, once a pillar of American strength, has become a punchline for bureaucratic overreach and partisan meddling. The very idea that a senior official like Haspel could skate through the storm untouched is exactly the kind of Beltway double standard that infuriates voters who demand the rule of law over rule by insiders.

London’s Role: The Epicenter of Collusion Claims

The facts are clear: London became the hub for intelligence related to the Russia collusion story. As CIA station chief there from 2014, Haspel was positioned at the crossroads of information flows that would later justify surveillance of Trump associates and fuel years of political chaos. The Steele dossier, authored by ex-British spy Christopher Steele, was among the most notorious pieces of evidence—later discredited, yet used to trigger FBI investigations, FISA warrants, and endless media hysteria. Haspel’s presence in London during the creation and dissemination of these materials raises questions about her role in vetting, transmitting, and possibly amplifying information that proved to be deeply flawed. Critics say the lack of transparency is staggering, and the absence of consequences for those at the top is an insult to every American who values honest government.

The timeline tells the story: Haspel was reassigned to London in 2014, the Steele dossier emerged in 2016, and Trump—ironically—appointed her CIA Director in 2018. She then oversaw the agency as the Russia investigation morphed from intelligence operation into a political circus. By 2020, evidence surfaced that CIA leadership, including Haspel, was informed of efforts to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story, fueling suspicions that partisan calculation was par for the course at Langley. Yet, as of now, no formal investigation into Haspel’s actions has begun, and the silence from official Washington is deafening.

Lingering Damage: Trust in Intelligence at Historic Lows

The implications of this controversy are severe. In the short term, renewed scrutiny of intelligence leadership is inevitable. Lawmakers on oversight committees are under mounting pressure to deliver real answers, not more whitewashed reviews. In the long term, the CIA’s reputation as a nonpartisan defender of the nation’s interests is in tatters, with critics on both sides now convinced that agency brass bend to political winds rather than stand for the truth. The American people—who pay the bills and bear the consequences—are left wondering if anyone at the top will ever be held accountable for years of manufactured hysteria and wasted resources.

Schweizer and his supporters argue that this case is emblematic of a broader rot in Washington: agency heads who operate above the law, shielded by layers of bureaucratic protection and a compliant media. Defenders of Haspel, pointing to her long service, insist that intelligence work is complex and that critics lack full context. But for millions, the details are less important than the principle—if government officials are never investigated, much less punished, for grave errors and partisan abuses, then the constitutional order is a sham and the swamp remains as murky as ever.

Expert Views Highlight Need for Oversight and Reform

Expert analysis from inside and outside government points to the urgent need for robust congressional oversight. Schweizer’s argument centers on Haspel’s unique positions of authority and the extraordinary circumstances of her London posting. Intelligence veterans acknowledge the difficulty of untangling personal responsibility from institutional inertia, but emphasize that sunlight is the only antidote to secrecy gone awry. Academic observers warn against hasty conclusions, noting that the complexity of intelligence work can obscure lines of accountability—but they also stress that public trust cannot survive endless stonewalling and institutional self-protection.

The path forward is uncertain. Calls for investigation may finally force Congress to confront the unanswered questions swirling around Haspel and the CIA. Whether anything changes, or whether the establishment continues to circle the wagons, will be a test of whether Washington’s culture of impunity can be broken. For a nation that demands answers, the time for transparency and accountability is long overdue.