Updated January 30, 2025 at 14:47 PM ET
We're following the confirmation hearings for the incoming Trump administration. See our full politics coverage, and follow NPR's Trump's Terms podcast or sign up for our Politics newsletter to stay up to date.
Who: Tulsi Gabbard
Nominated for: director of national intelligence
You might know her from: A former U.S. representative from Hawaii, Gabbard ran for president as a Democrat in 2020 before shifting right, officially joining the Republican Party and backing President Trump in October 2024.
- She does not have an intelligence background.
- She's a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve, previously serving in the Hawaii Army National Guard and deploying for tours in Iraq and Kuwait. She has generally been critical of U.S. involvement abroad, particularly in the Middle East. While serving on the House Armed Services Committee, she called for a tougher response to global terrorism while urging a U.S. withdrawal from foreign interventions focused on what she defined as "regime change."
- Gabbard has faced criticism since she traveled to Syria in 2017 and met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the recently ousted leader who is believed to be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Syrian civilians.
What this role does: The director of national intelligence leads the intelligence community across 18 agencies and organizations and advises the president on national security issues, including through drafting and delivering the President's Daily Brief. Gabbard would also be involved in managing the intelligence community budget, which was $76.5 billion in 2024.
Here's what happened in the hearing:
Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard told the Senate Intelligence Committee she would "end politicization" of the intelligence committee and "rebuild trust through transparency" if confirmed as director of national intelligence as she seeks to quell wide-ranging concerns about her foreign travels, statements about Russia's war in Ukraine and her past skepticism of U.S. intelligence concerning things like Syria's use of chemical weapons on civilians.
"For too long, faulty, inadequate or weaponized intelligence have led to costly failures and the undermining of our national security," Gabbard said in her opening statement. "President Trump's reelection is a clear mandate from the American people to break this cycle of failure, end the weaponization and politicization of the intelligence community and begin to restore trust in those who have been charged with the critical task of securing our nation."
But senators of both parties questioned Gabbard, one of Trump's most embattled cabinet picks, on her history of defending Russian President Vladimir Putin, her past praise of National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden and legislation she introduced to repeal a program that allows the U.S. intelligence community to collect foreign communications without a warrant.
Gabbard has echoed misleading Kremlin talking points justifying the invasion of Ukraine, while the U.S. intelligence community has been unequivocal about the threat that Russia poses to global stability and key U.S. security interests.
"Repeatedly, you have excused our adversaries' worst actions, and instead blamed the United States and our allies for them," ranking member Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., said in his opening statement. "It raises serious questions about your judgment. It also leads me to question whether you have what it takes to build and develop the trust relationships necessary to give our allies confidence that they can share their most sensitive intelligence with us."
She has also criticized then-President Joe Biden's support of Ukraine in its war against Russia, a conflict that has provided a lot of key intelligence about Russia's hybrid warfare to the U.S. and its allies. The committee has been split on supporting increased U.S. military aid to Ukraine but has constantly urged ongoing intelligence-sharing relationships with Kyiv.
In the hearing Thursday, Gabbard told senators that she is not "Putin's puppet" and pledged to "do my very best to find the truth, no matter where it leads."
Republican Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., pressed Gabbard on the issue, telling her, "I want to make certain that in no way does Russia get a pass in either your mind or your heart, or in any policy recommendation you might make or not make."
Gabbard replied that she was "offended by the question, because my sole focus, commitment and responsibility is about our own nation, our own security and the interests of the American people."
"No country, group or individual will get a pass in fulfilling the responsibility of providing that full intelligence picture so that you all can make the best informed policy decisions for the safety, security and freedom of the American people," she continued.
Gabbard's Record on FISA 702
Gabbard introduced legislation in 2020 that would repeal Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a program that allows the U.S. intelligence community to collect foreign communications without a warrant. U.S. officials have said the authority is vital for getting sensitive insights into threats ranging from cyberattacks to terrorist plotting, while privacy advocates have urged lawmakers to reform the law and add additional protections.
Gabbard has since committed in public statements to preserving the intelligence-gathering program while protecting Americans' Fourth Amendment rights.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has previously called Section 702 "invaluable." During his questioning Thursday, he asked Gabbard if she was aware of court rulings that "the Fourth Amendment is not implicated by search of lawfully collected intelligence."
Gabbard responded that "my commitment remains to uphold the Constitution and Americans' Fourth Amendment rights." She later said that 702 "provides a unique security tool and capability that is essential for our national security. There are a number of areas that we would be blind from a national security perspective without this capability. It also must exist next to having safeguards in place to ensure Americans civil liberties are protected."
Past praise of Edward Snowden
Many questions today focused on Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor who shared sensitive intelligence about U.S. global intelligence programs with journalists in 2013 before ultimately fleeing to Moscow, where he still resides. As a House lawmaker, Gabbard had proposed dropping charges against Snowden — an unpopular position with senators on the committee tasked with overseeing the U.S. intelligence community.
Warner asked Gabbard about her past statements calling Snowden a "brave whistleblower." Gabbard replied that "Edward Snowden broke the law."
"I do not agree with or support with all of the information and intelligence that he released, nor the way in which he did it," Gabbard said. "The fact is, he also, even as he broke the law, released information that exposed egregious, illegal and unconstitutional programs that are happening within our government that led to serious reforms that Congress undertook."
"If confirmed as director of national intelligence, I will be responsible for protecting our nation's secrets, and I have four immediate steps that I would take to prevent another Snowden-like leak," Gabbard continued.
Republican Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., also pressed Gabbard on Snowden, asking if his actions hurt U.S. national security or if he was "a traitor."
Gabbard again said that "Edward Snowden broke the law and released this information in a way that he should not have."
"Mr. Snowden is watching these proceedings," Young replied. "It would befit you and be helpful to the way you are perceived by members of the intelligence community, if you would at least acknowledge that the 'greatest whistleblower in American history,' so-called, harmed national security by breaking the laws of the land."
Gabbard says she has "no love" for "any dictator"
Gabbard responded to the criticism she faced after her 2017 trip to Syria and meeting with former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. Gabbard has defended that meeting, arguing that U.S. officials should meet with foreign leaders rather than engage in "counterproductive regime change wars."
"I have no love for Assad or any dictator," Gabbard said in her opening statement.
Later, she told the panel that she asked Assad "tough questions about his own regime's actions, the use of chemical weapons, and the brutal tactics that were being used against his own people."
Committee Chairman Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said in his opening statement that Gabbard "saw the problem with regime change interventions."
"The vast number of governments throughout history and still today are not democratic. We may wish it were different, and we can work to improve it, but that's the way the world is," Cotton said. "If we only befriended nations that shared our system of government and our social and cultural sensibilities, well, we wouldn't have many friends."
"No question, stable democracies make the most stable friends. But what matters in the end is less whether a country is democratic or non-democratic, and more whether the country is pro-American or anti-American," Cotton continued. "I'll confess that those views may be somewhat unconventional, but look at where conventional thinking has got us."
Gabbard's path forward
While Gabbard faced tough questions from both parties Thursday, no Republican senator has publicly said they will oppose her nomination.
In a narrowly divided Senate, Gabbard can afford to lose three Republican votes and still win confirmation, assuming all Democrats oppose her. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth won confirmation last week with three Republican defections, after Vice President JD Vance cast a vote to break a 50-50 tie.
Vance urged senators to support Gabbard's nomination Wednesday, writing on social media: "In their own way, both Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. represent parts of the new coalition in our party. To say they're unwelcome in the cabinet is to insult those new voters. To reject their confirmation is to reject the idea that President Trump decides his cabinet."
In their own way, both Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. represent parts of the new coalition in our party.
— JD Vance (@JDVance) January 29, 2025
To say they’re unwelcome in the cabinet is to insult those new voters.
To reject their confirmation is to reject the idea that President Trump decides his cabinet.
During Thursday's hearing, Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., urged his colleagues to exercise to the power to advise and consent.
"We're the Senate, we get to decide whether we're going to confirm this nominee," Bennet said. "Can't we do better than somebody who doesn't believe in 702 ... somebody who can't answer whether Snowden was a traitor five times today, who made excuses for Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine?"
Copyright 2025 NPR
