Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination as Director of National Intelligence is highly controversial due to her history of promoting Russian propaganda and supporting authoritarian regimes. Her past actions, including questioning the source of Syrian airstrikes that injured children and defending Assad’s regime, demonstrate a troubling lack of objectivity and empathy. Experts express concerns about her susceptibility to disinformation and her potential to undermine US intelligence credibility with allies. These concerns, coupled with questions about her meeting the required “extensive national security expertise” for the DNI position, raise serious doubts about her suitability for the role.
Read More
Following President Trump’s nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to lead U.S. intelligence, Democrats raised concerns about her past interactions with Russian and Syrian officials, citing potential conflicts of interest. Republicans strongly defended Gabbard, dismissing Democratic accusations of her being a “compromised” asset as politically motivated attacks stemming from her party switch and alliance with Trump. While some Republicans acknowledged needing further clarification on Gabbard’s past actions, they largely rejected the claims of her being a threat to national security. The controversy highlights partisan divisions over Gabbard’s suitability for the critical intelligence role.
Read More
Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination as Director of National Intelligence is highly controversial due to her history of promoting Russian propaganda and supporting authoritarian regimes. Her past actions, including questioning whether ISIS, not Assad or Russia, bombed Syrian children and subsequently meeting with Assad, demonstrate a pattern of disregarding facts and echoing Kremlin talking points. This has raised concerns amongst both Democrats and Republicans, with experts citing her views as alarming and potentially jeopardizing US intelligence operations and relationships with allies. Gabbard’s apparent susceptibility to misinformation and her lack of the required “extensive national security expertise” further fuel opposition to her confirmation.
Read More
Donald Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was previously on the TSA’s “Quiet Skies” list, prompting additional security screenings due to foreign connections and travel. This is highly unusual for someone assuming such a position. While Gabbard attributes her inclusion to political retaliation, the list’s algorithm-based nature and her controversial meetings with Bashar al-Assad, along with past accusations of spreading Russian propaganda, raise concerns. Trump’s suggestion that some nominees may bypass standard background checks further complicates the situation, leaving questions about the extent of Gabbard’s required disclosures.
Read More
Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the intelligence community, was briefly added to the TSA’s “Quiet Skies” program, triggering additional security screenings due to her international travel and foreign contacts. Gabbard’s subsequent public statements led to her quick removal from the list, despite assertions that her criticism of Kamala Harris was the cause. Security officials note that her past overseas engagements, including a controversial Syria trip, are unusual and raise concerns given the lax standards of the Quiet Skies program. Trump’s potential bypassing of standard background checks for his nominees further complicates the situation, leaving questions about the vetting process for such a sensitive position.
Read More
Republican senators, particularly those on the Senate Intelligence Committee, are privately expressing concerns about Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination as director of national intelligence, driven by her past alignment with Russia and support for Edward Snowden. Their interest in reviewing Gabbard’s FBI file suggests a belief that undisclosed information, potentially related to foreign contacts, may exist. While publicly deferring to President-elect Trump, senators hint at potential future opposition depending on the contents of the file and Gabbard’s testimony. The senators’ concerns center on Gabbard’s past support for Snowden and her stances on the Ukraine and Syrian conflicts, which have echoed Russian narratives.
Read More
On Deadline White House, former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Assistant Director Frank Figliuzzi expressed serious concerns regarding Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination as Director of National Intelligence. Their discussion with Nicolle Wallace centered on the implications for U.S. national security and international alliances. The analysts highlighted alarming new questions surrounding Gabbard’s suitability for the critical role. This discussion took place on November 19, 2024.
Read More
Representative Wasserman Schultz vehemently denounced Donald Trump’s nomination of Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence, asserting that Gabbard is likely a Russian asset. This assessment stems from Gabbard’s past actions, including clandestine meetings with Syrian President Assad and the propagation of Kremlin-backed disinformation regarding U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine. Wasserman Schultz highlighted Gabbard’s history of meeting with war criminals and violating State Department guidelines as further evidence of her questionable loyalty. The congresswoman expressed grave concern over the potential security risks posed by Gabbard’s access to classified information in such a sensitive role.
Read More
President-elect Trump’s nomination of Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence is facing significant opposition due to resurfaced reports of her ties to the Science of Identity Foundation (SIF), a controversial religious group described as a cult. Gabbard’s connections to SIF, including her husband’s involvement and her own past praise of its leader as a guru, have raised concerns about her suitability for the role. This, coupled with previous accusations of ties to a Russian spy, has led to strong condemnation from figures such as John Bolton, who deemed her the “worst cabinet-level appointment in history.” The Senate confirmation process is now expected to be highly contentious.
Read More
Wasserman Schultz’s assertion that Gabbard is “likely a Russian asset” is a significant claim, sparking a considerable amount of online debate. The statement itself is quite explosive, suggesting a level of collaboration or influence by a foreign power on a prominent American political figure. This naturally raises serious questions about national security and the integrity of the political process.
The gravity of the accusation is undeniable. Accusing someone of being a Russian asset implies a deliberate act of subversion, potentially involving espionage or the dissemination of misinformation to benefit a hostile foreign power. It’s not a casual remark; it’s a serious allegation that carries significant legal and political ramifications.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood