Exit Hoax: Gabbard Boosts Kremlin Biolabs Claim
Welcome to Reality Check, NewsGuard’s nonpartisan newsletter that tracks the false claims and conspiracy theories that shape our world — and who’s behind them. Please support us by becoming a premium member or sharing our work.
Follow us: X | LinkedIn | Instagram | TikTok | Bluesky
Tulsi Gabbard, Departing Soon as Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, Reignites Kremlin’s False Claim about U.S.-Ukrainian Bioweapons
By Alice Lee
What’s happening: As her tenure as U.S. Director of National Intelligence ends, Tulsi Gabbard released a video and declassified documents that Kremlin-linked news sources quickly embraced as proof of a long-debunked claim that the U.S. supported the production of bioweapons in Ukraine.
Context: The supposed presence of dangerous bioweapons labs was a key pretext used by Russia for its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and has remained one of the most persistent Kremlin-backed disinformation narratives of the last five years.
A closer look: Gabbard, who previously announced plans to step down from her position this month, posted a video on X on June 12, 2026, in which she claimed that newly declassified documents revealed “dangerous… research that threatens the health and well-being of the American people and people around the world.” The documents in question were released the same day by Gabbard’s office. Her video gained 37 million views in three days.
Resurgence: Gabbard’s post put the false claim that the U.S. had supported the development of bioweapons in Ukraine back at the top of the agenda of the Kremlin propaganda apparatus.
John Mark Dougan, a Moscow-based fugitive and former Florida deputy sheriff and contributor to the Kremlin-linked Storm-1516 disinformation network, praised Gabbard for her statement, stating in a video posted on X referring to “these laboratories that are set up to kill millions of people.” His post was viewed 369,900 times in two days. This is a long-standing favorite Dougan talking point He pushed the narrative of the U.S. operating bioweapons labs in Ukraine in multiple articles and videos starting on Dec. 10, 2021, citing a supposed leak from a Ukrainian scientist. His pre-positioned videos were then cited as an authoritative source by Kremlin outlets to justify the invasion of Ukraine a few months later.
On June 12, 2026, state-owned Russian broadcaster RT published an article stating that Gabbard’s actions “confirm Russia’s claims that the labs were working with potential bioweapons.”
State-owned Russian network Sputnik published an article the same day titled, “US Intel Warned US-Funded Biolab in Ukraine Likely Housed Dangerous Pathogens — Gabbard.” The final sentence of the article said, “Russia has repeatedly stated that the US has been funding the development of biological weapons and has placed dozens of its biological laboratories in Ukraine in violation of international agreements.”
Actually: The newly released documents do not prove any weapon development. Rather, they show what was already publicly known: The U.S. provided publicly disclosed funding to allow for the safe storage of pathogens left over from the Soviet era. The documents detail the types of pathogens being held, the locations of laboratories in Ukraine, and the names of various institutions and organizations that participated in the program.
The U.S. has provided aid to Ukrainian laboratories since 2005, when the two governments signed an agreement to limit the threat of bioterrorism by putting safeguards on deadly pathogens left over from Soviet-era biological weapons programs. This program has been credited with helping to construct and modernize Ukrainian laboratories.
The claim that the U.S. is helping Ukraine develop bioweapons has been repeatedly refuted by numerous U.S. officials. “We are not, not developing biological or chemical weapons inside Ukraine. It’s not happening,” then-Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said during a March 2022 press conference
In response to Gabbard’s claim, Ukraine said in a June 13, 2026, statement: “The Ukrainian side has never engaged in any activities related to the development, production, or stockpiling of biological weapons.”
Zooming out: Gabbard, a battalion commander in the Army Reserve, represented Hawaii in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2013 to 2021 as a Democrat, where she gained a reputation as a rare pro-Russia voice in Congress. After running unsuccessfully for her party’s presidential nomination in 2020, she became a Republican and endorsed Trump’s presidential bid in 2024. Trump tapped her as intelligence chief in November 2024.
Described in a December 2024 ABC News article as a frequent reader of RT, which may have helped shape her worldview, Gabbard advanced the Kremlin’s bioweapons narrative before. For example, she said in a video posted on X in March 2022 that the labs could “release and spread deadly pathogens.” Her alignment with Russia prompted one Russian state outlet to call her “superwoman.”
Asked about Gabbard’s video and its coverage in pro-Kremlin media, Director of National Intelligence press secretary Olivia Coleman referred NewsGuard in a June 15, 2026, email to a series of X posts by Gabbard’s office. One post from June 13, 2026, stated: “The existence, history, locations and funding of these U.S. funded biolabs was intentionally covered up by powerful people falsely claiming that the labs do not exist and accusing anyone who says otherwise to be foreign assets and traitors to America. Those lies are still being propagated today by the same powerful people and their allies who wish to see this dangerous research continue with little to no oversight.”
Learn more about Reality Check’s Premium Membership here.
Help wanted! Have you seen claims about the Russia-Ukraine war that strike you as fishy? Pass along examples to realitycheck@newsguardtech.com and we’ll investigate. Help us fight the good fight!
In Case You Missed It … Take NewsGuard’s News Quiz on Brand Controversies for a Chance to Win
Burger King. H&M. Lego. Adidas. Some of the world’s biggest brands have recently been criticized for their purported social media posts or actions. But not every viral screenshot of an apparent post by a brand is authentic. We’ve assembled eight viral brand moments. Some are genuine posts that generated genuine controversies (though it’s hard to imagine what these brands’ marketing people were thinking when they posted them). But some are indeed fabrications, harming brand reputations. Can you tell the difference?
Take the quiz here.
This newsletter was edited by Sam Howard and Eric Effron.
You find, we report: Let your fellow Reality Check readers know about false claims you run across online. Our analysts debunk false claims before any others 80% of the time, but we can’t catch everything. If you find what looks like a false claim, let us know. We’ll investigate and report back in Reality Check.
Reality Check is produced by co-CEOs Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz, and the NewsGuard team.
We launched Reality Check to shed light on the false claims spreading online, how they spread, and the forces behind them. Each day, we aim to bring you the story behind your news feed and help you stay informed about the false claims circulating in the news. Support our work by becoming a premium member.
Have feedback? Send us an email: realitycheck@newsguardtech.com.