Tulsi Gabbard’s controversial history, including her support for national security leakers and promotion of Russian-backed narratives, is facing renewed criticism following President-elect Trump’s decision to nominate her for the top intelligence position in the country.
If confirmed as director of national intelligence (DNI), Gabbard would oversee coordination across all 18 intelligence agencies, a role critical to shaping the president’s daily intelligence briefings and advising on national security issues.
Gabbard’s history with sensitive issues raises doubts over DNI appointment
“The DNI holds access to the entirety of America’s classified intelligence—a role of immense responsibility,” said Rep. Abigail Spanberger, a former CIA officer and member of the House Intelligence Committee, who expressed dismay at Gabbard’s nomination. Many in the national security field voiced concern over her limited experience and history of controversial remarks.
Her nomination drew skepticism due to her past comments, such as blaming President Biden for failing to consider “Russia’s legitimate security concerns” before Ukraine’s invasion. Additionally, she praised Edward Snowden, advocating for his pardon, and met secretly with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, whom she refused to label a war criminal during her 2020 presidential campaign.
Larry Pfeiffer, a former CIA chief of staff, criticized her past remarks, calling them alarmingly aligned with Kremlin rhetoric. He questioned whether she is fit to lead the intelligence community, especially given her history of minimizing Assad’s actions and raising unsubstantiated concerns about U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine.
Gabbard’s track record has prompted worries about her ability to safeguard sensitive information and maintain trust with allied nations, critical in the intelligence sphere. Concerns extend to her qualifications, with critics noting her limited management experience and lack of deep engagement in high-level intelligence issues.
Despite skepticism, some voices, like Sen. Markwayne Mullin, pointed to her military background as a strength, while others, such as Jeh Johnson, suggested a degree of skepticism toward intelligence could be healthy. However, opponents like Spanberger have urged the Senate to carefully consider the risks of confirming Gabbard to such a pivotal role.
