Chris Krebs, the former director of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA), ain’t goin’ out like that. He intends to fight a federal civil rights investigation that was ordered by President Donald Trump. In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Krebs devotedly and rightfully fended off those claims. He promised to defend himself against accusations that he “falsely and baselessly denied the integrity of the 2020 election.”
Trump’s appointee in 2018, Chris Krebs, took over CISA with that same vision. His leadership was instrumental in protecting our federal cybersecurity posture and securing our elections. In November 2020, Trump fired him, cutting his tenure short dramatically. This occurred after Krebs went out on a limb to publicly debunk the president’s baseless claims of widespread voting irregularities. Since his ignorant and dangerous dismissal, Krebs has been one of the most visible critics of these claims and the administration’s war on dissent.
The chilling impact of the federal investigation that Trump launched against Krebs cannot be understated, especially since it costs Krebs his security clearance. Krebs today announced his resignation from SentinelOne, a cybersecurity firm. Now he is banking on beating the investigation. This reaction from Cohen puts him in line with a growing list of former government officials and legal advocates. Together, they are pushing back against what they view as the overreach of executive power in order to intimidate critics and dissenters.
Krebs articulated his concerns about the investigation, stating, “It’s about the government pulling its levers to punish dissent, to go after corporate interests and corporate relationships.”
As a former top official, Krebs’ situation underscores the ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and those who have disagreed with its narrative regarding election integrity. His commitment to defend himself resonates with others in similar positions who have faced scrutiny for standing up against the administration’s claims.
Yet this investigation paints a troubling portrait of political accountability. It’s a story that illustrates the peril that anyone willing to go against the prevailing wisdom in Washington faces. Either way, Krebs has decided to publicly dispute these allegations. This is a huge and exciting step forward in the heated national conversation around election security and protecting the integrity of our democratic processes.
Leave a Reply