Former Department of Justice (DOJ) antitrust chief Gail Slater broke her silence this week, rallying allegations she misrepresented the national security implications of Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s (HPE) Juniper Networks acquisition before departing the DOJ.

Slater resigned last week (February 12) but in a statement to MLex, she vehemently denied claims from “online trolls” over her handling of HPE’s Juniper acquisition, saying: “As an American patriot, I take national security to heart.

“To the fullest extent of my knowledge, no conversations took place between me or the antitrust division and U.S. intelligence agencies during my tenure.”

According to an earlier Axios report, the U.S. intelligence community played a key role in convincing the DOJ that the approval was necessary to counter Chinese competitors following concerns that blocking the deal would empower the likes of Huawei.

In her post-ousting statement to MLex however, Slater said national security concerns were not raised between the DOJ and HPE in its June 2025 settlement, adding: “Neither did HPE raise national security concerns in related court filings.”

Having worked on the team that advised on efforts by President Donald Trump’s first administration to ban Huawei and ZTE network equipment back in 2019, Slater said that prior decision “narrowed the competitor set available to U.S. consumers in networking markets, but it was the right decision from a national security standpoint.”

“I would have welcomed the opportunity to discuss them with administration officials prior to June 27 last year,” she said, pointing to the date when the DOJ approved the deal. “In light of my expertise and my TS/SCI clearance, I was qualified to speak both to the antitrust and the national security aspects of the merger.”

TS/SCI combines both "top secret" and "sensitive compartmented information" clearances, providing those bestowed with comprehensive access to sensitive information.

From ‘good friend’ to ‘good riddance’

Slater secured bipartisan support to serve as Assistant Attorney General for the antitrust division and was confirmed in a 78-19 vote last March. During her confirmation hearings, she said she would act as “an independent thinker and not pushed into her position by President Trump.”

But in the months since, two officials below her, including her deputy Roger Alford, were fired for alleged insubordination concerning the HPE deal. Alford has since come out ringing alarm bells over the deal, claiming a trio hired by HPE to serve as advisors on the acquisition efforts were instead “corrupt lobbyists with no relevant expertise.”

A California District Judge recently ruled that the trio – consisting of lawyers William Levi and Mike Davis, and consultant Arthur Schwartz – must testify under oath. Their testimony is intended “to get a fuller picture of any non-written interaction” concerning the deal's approval.

“Good riddance,” was how Davis responded to Slater’s resignation in a post on social media platform X. A change of tune then, having previously referred to Slater as “my good friend” and stating she would “help make America competitive again.”

The DOJ has moved to rebut Alford’s allegations, describing him in an earlier statement to MLex as “the James Comey of antitrust – pursuing blind self-promotion and ego, while ignoring reality.”

“He was fired from the department, and all should treat his comments for what they are – the delusional musings of a disgruntled ex,” the statement reads. “As the department has reiterated, resolution of the merger was based on the merits of the transaction, including national security concerns raised directly to department leadership by the intelligence community.”

HPE has been reached for comment.