Tulsi Gabbard, President Donald Trump’s pick to become intelligence chief, fought back against what she called “smears,” declaring she is nobody’s “puppet” at her confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
She told senators her opponents accuse her “of being Trump’s puppet, Putin’s puppet, Assad’s puppet, a guru’s puppet, Modi’s puppet, not recognizing the absurdity of simultaneously being the puppet of five different puppet masters.”
The former Hawaii congresswoman referenced the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant illegally used to spy on the Trump campaign and the 51 intelligence community officials who vowed that the Hunter Biden laptop scandal had the hallmarks of Russian intelligence, and she claimed she was put on a secret domestic terrorist watch list after criticizing former Vice President Kamala Harris.
“The American people elected Donald Trump as their president, not once, but twice, and yet, the FBI and intelligence agencies were politicized by his opponents to undermine his presidency and falsely portray him as a puppet of Putin,” she added.
WATCH LIVE: KASH PATEL, TULSI GABBARD, AND RFK JR. FACE SENATE GRILLING
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, began the hearing by mentioning the immense media attention that Gabbard’s nomination to be the director of national intelligence has captured.
“It’s fair to say that Ms. Gabbard’s nomination has generated a bit more interest and attention than do most nominees before this committee, but I want to stress that Ms. Gabbard has been and will be treated with the exact same respect, consideration, and professionalism that we extended through every nominee, no more, no less, no better, no worse,” Cotton said in his opening statement.
The Arkansas senator acknowledged Gabbard has some “unconventional views,” mentioning her critiques of former President Barack Obama’s foreign policy decisions but pointing out similarities to his own views.
“No doubt she has some unconventional views, like her criticism of Barack Obama’s regime change interventions in Egypt and Libya. But guess what? I opposed the disastrous interventions in Egypt and Libya as well,” Cotton said during his opening statement.
The highest-ranking Democrat on the committee, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), also raised Gabbard’s “unconventional” viewpoints and said he had “significant concerns about [her] judgment.”
“For example, you blamed NATO for Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. You rejected the conclusion that Assad used chemical weapons in Syria despite it being the unanimous assessment of the Trump administration DOD, State Department, and IC, as well as the assessment of our European allies,” Warner said. “Instead, you blamed the United States for supporting terrorist groups in Syria.”
The Virginia Democrat immediately pointed to her previous support for National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, which lawmakers on both sides of the aisle view as having damaged U.S. national security.
“You have been publicly outspoken in your praise and defense of Edward Snowden — someone who betrayed the trust and jeopardized the security of our nation,” Warner said. “Furthermore, when given the opportunity to clarify your position in the committee’s pre-hearing questions, you declined … and instead you expressed that, and I quote, ‘The DNI … has no role in determining whether or not Edward Snowden is a lawful whistleblower.’”
The director of national intelligence leads 18 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community.
Gabbard repeatedly challenged over Edward Snowden
Much of the questioning surrounding Gabbard was focused on whether, if confirmed, she would support or recommend a pardon or any kind of clemency for Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor who was charged with leaking classified information that revealed U.S. surveillance programs and fled prosecution to Russia. Notably, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), a key swing vote, was one of several senators to ask such a question.
In a lengthy response, Gabbard agreed she would not support a pardon or clemency.
“If confirmed as the Director of National Intelligence, our responsibility would be to ensure the security of our nation’s secrets, and would not take actions to advocate for any actions related to Snowden,” Gabbard said, before stating directly that she would not recommend a pardon.
When Gabbard served in the House of Representatives, she introduced a resolution with former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) that called for all charges to be dropped against Snowden, and she urged Trump at the end of his first term to pardon Snowden and others who “exposed the deception and criminality of those in the deep state.”
Gabbard posted support for Snowden on social media as recently as 2020, when she said “brave whistleblowers exposing lies & illegal actions in our government must be protected and that Snowden “should be pardoned.”
When asked by ranking member Warner about her previous support for Snowden, she said “Edward Snowden broke the law. I do not agree with or support all the information and intelligence that he released, nor the way in which he did it.”
Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told Gabbard the Intelligence Community wants to hear her say Snowden is a traitor.
“This is a big deal to everybody here because it’s a big deal for everybody who you will oversee as well,” he said.
She continued to repeat the line she gave in previous questions that Snowden “broke the law” but refused to answer the question directly while also repeating that he also exposed “illegal and unconstitutional programs” and refused to call him a traitor.
In the most fiery exchange, Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) followed up on Lankford’s question, pressing Gabbard directly if Snowden is a traitor, but she yet again refused to answer the question and stopped short of doing so.
“This is when the rubber hits the road. This is not a moment for social media. It’s not a moment to propagate conspiracy theories,” Bennet said, raising his voice. “This is when you need to answer questions of the people whose votes you’re asking for.”
Sen. Todd Young (R-IN), a critical swing vote, appeared to be dissatisfied with Gabbard’s answers on Snowden. He attempted to follow up on the question asking “did he betray a duty, the trust of the American people? That’s the definition of a traitor.”
“Edward Snowden broke the law and released this information in a way that he should not have,” Gabbard responded, repeating the same prepared line.
When asked further whether Snowden damaged national security, Gabbard repeated her same talking points.
“Okay, but it’s notable that you didn’t say yes, He clearly hurt in various ways our national security,” Young said.
Young then showed Gabbard a message Snowden posted early Thursday on X in which he encouraged her to tell the panel that he “harmed national security.”
“For what it’s worth, Mr. Snowden is watching these proceedings. He’s posted on social media indicating that Tulsi Gabbard should indicate that [he] ‘harmed national security’. This may be the rare instance in which I agree with Mr. Snowden,” Young added.
“I think it would befit you and be helpful to the way you were perceived by members of the intelligence community, if you would at least acknowledge… that he harmed national security by breaking the law,” he said.
Sen. Angus King (I-ME) noted Snowden was in Hawaii at one time before he fled to Hong Kong and then onto Russia. He asked if she had ever met or spoken with him.
“No senator, not at any time have I had contact with Edward Snowden,” Gabbard said.
702 support
Gabbard reiterated her newfound support for Section 702 in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which grants the U.S. the authority to conduct warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens located abroad.
This authority is of great significance for how the intelligence community uncovers and pursues intelligence, though she voted against its reauthorization multiple times during her time in Congress.
She called 702 “a unique security tool and capability that is essential for our national security,” adding, “it also must exist next to having safeguards in place to ensure Americans’ civil liberties are protected.”
Warner said that roughly 60% of the intelligence contained in the president’s daily briefing is acquired via 702 authorization.
Her position is a major reversal following her past votes in Congress in which she did not support reauthorizing the program, citing privacy concerns. In defending her congressional record, Gabbard pointed out that, “I will just note that my actions in legislation in Congress were done to draw attention to the egregious civil liberties violations that were occurring at that time.”
