WASHINGTON — During a tense confirmation hearing on Thursday, Tulsi Gabbard, nominated by President Donald Trump for the role of director of national intelligence, encountered significant opposition from both Democratic and Republican senators. This scrutiny centered around her previous remarks viewed as sympathetic to Russia, her past meeting with Syria’s recently ousted leader, and her previous support for whistleblower Edward Snowden, who leaked classified information.
At the outset of her hearing, Gabbard expressed the need for substantial reforms to rectify long-standing issues within America’s intelligence community. She emphasized that intelligence reports have often been inaccurate or manipulated for political purposes, resulting in wars and diplomatic failures. Gabbard stated that this troubling pattern persists as the U.S. faces escalating threats from adversaries like Russia and China.
“The key takeaway is that this must be addressed. President Trump’s reelection serves as a clear directive from the American populace to cease this pattern of failure and the political exploitation of the intelligence sector,” Gabbard explained to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Promising to maintain objectivity, she pointed to her military background as a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard, highlighting her commitment to fulfilling the responsibilities that come with the Directorship of National Intelligence, overseeing 18 intelligence agencies.
However, senators raised concerns regarding her judgment and qualifications, making her one of the more controversial nominees in Trump’s Cabinet. Given the slim majority the Republicans hold in the Senate, she will depend heavily on their support for successful confirmation.
Gabbard, previously a Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii and a two-time veteran of the Middle East, lacks direct intelligence experience and has never directed a governmental department. Nonetheless, her past statements have posed significant challenges to her nomination. She has been critiqued for echoing Russian narratives related to Ukraine and for opposing a pivotal U.S. surveillance program in the past.
During an intense exchange, lawmakers from both parties questioned her stance on Snowden, who has become a controversial figure after leaking details about U.S. surveillance initiatives and seeking asylum in Russia. Senators, including Republicans James Lankford and Susan Collins, queried Gabbard on whether she would advocate for a pardon for Snowden, while she notably refrained from labeling him a traitor.
“Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States?” demanded Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado. Gabbard responded with a focus on national security yet was interrupted by Bennet, who expressed skepticism about her understanding of the issues.
While Gabbard acknowledged that Snowden exposed concerns regarding potentially unconstitutional surveillance activities, she also stated clearly: “Edward Snowden broke the law.”
Republican senators have accused her of perpetuating Russian propaganda, with Gabbard receiving coverage from Russian state media. Kansas Senator Jerry Moran directly asked if she would allow Russia to escape scrutiny under her leadership. Gabbard responded with conviction: “I am offended by the question. My sole focus is on our nation and the security of the American people.”
The conversation also turned to her controversial visit to Bashar Assad, the Syrian leader ousted after a violent civil war marred by accusations of chemical weapon usage. After meeting with Assad, Gabbard faced backlash regarding her skepticism about whether he utilized chemical weapons against his people.
“It’s perplexing how you can blame NATO for Putin’s invasion, but not condemn Assad for using chemical weapons,” stated Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the senior Democrat on the committee.
In defense, Gabbard asserted that she had confronted Assad about human rights issues during their meeting, insisting she aimed to ask challenging questions.
Additionally, senators pressed Gabbard on her evolving views on the surveillance program known as Section 702. Initially, she had sponsored legislation to repeal it, expressing concern that it violated Americans’ rights when their communications were inadvertently collected. Now, she states her support for the program, citing new measures designed to guard Americans’ privacy.
Gabbard characterized her shift in perspective as necessary and cautioned that her critics may not support her nomination because of her willingness to challenge norms in Washington. “What truly disturbs my political opponents is my refusal to be a puppet for their agendas,” she said.
As her nomination hangs in the balance, Gabbard faces significant opposition from several key Republican senators, including Todd Young, Susan Collins, and James Lankford, who were some of the most inquisitive during the hearing. It remains uncertain if her responses were satisfactory enough to facilitate a favorable vote in committee, which has yet to be scheduled.
Discussions have emerged surrounding whether the vote on Gabbard’s nomination should take place in public or behind closed doors, with many of Trump’s supporters advocating for a public vote to influence dissenting Republican senators.
Sen. Tom Cotton, the committee’s chairman, showed his support for Gabbard, calling for her to streamline an expanding office that is now larger than the agencies it oversees. “Conventional thinking hasn’t served us well. Washington could benefit from a fresh perspective,” Cotton remarked, adding that Gabbard’s effectiveness would be judged on her ability to realign the Office of the Director of National Intelligence with its original mission.
