Tulsi Gabbard, President Donald Trump’s intelligence director nominee, walked back some of her past defenses of foreign adversaries and criticism of U.S. government surveillance but repeatedly refused to call CIA leaker Edward Snowden a “traitor” in a combative confirmation hearing on Thursday.
Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman who became a Trump ally in recent years, defended her loyalty to the United States and her military background and vowed that she would speak “truth to power” during her Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
But she also struggled to address ongoing concerns from lawmakers in both parties about her long-stated opposition to warrantless surveillance of foreign targets, her lobbying to pardon Snowden, and her defense of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Gabbard also repeatedly refused to say if Snowden was a “traitor,” leading one Republican, Sen. Todd Young (Ind.), to read the word’s definition from the dictionary.
“Did he betray the trust of the American people? Which is, according to Merriam-Webster, that’s the definition of a traitor,” said Young.
Gabbard responded that Snowden “broke the law, and he released this information in a way that he should not have. He also acknowledged and exposed information that was unconstitutional, which drove a lot of the reforms that this body has made over the years.”
Her answer led to a testy exchange with Sen. Michael Bennet (D., Colo.).
“This is when the rubber hits the road,” said Bennet. “This is when you need to answer the questions of the people whose votes you’re asking for. … Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America? That’s not a hard question to answer.”
The hearing comes amid uncertainty over Gabbard’s path to Senate approval, as she has struggled to win over some GOP lawmakers skeptical of her foreign policy record.
Gabbard will need every Republican vote on the Senate Intelligence Committee in order for her nomination to move forward. While she has the backing of committee chairman Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), at least two members, Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine) and Young, have reportedly raised doubts about her confirmation.
Young indicated that he wasn’t fully satisfied by Gabbard’s response on Snowden.
“I think it would befit you, and be helpful to the first way you are perceived by members of the intelligence community if you would at least acknowledge” that Snowden “harmed national security,” said Young.
Sen. Mark Kelly (D., Ariz.) also questioned Gabbard for expressing skepticism, as recently as this month, that Assad used chemical weapons in an attack in Douma, Syria, in 2018, a fact that intelligence assessments issued during Trump’s first administration confirmed. Gabbard said she relied on counter-research from an MIT professor, who Kelly noted had relied on research from an Assad sympathizer.
“What I have seen makes it clear that at the same time that you were skeptical of our intelligence community’s assessments, you would not apply the same skepticism to information that came from sympathizers of Russia and Assad, and I think that’s something that we should all be concerned about,” said Kelly.
Several senators also expressed concerns about Gabbard’s opposition to a U.S. program that allows warrantless wiretapping of foreign targets. Prior to the hearing, for example, Collins said she was concerned about Gabbard’s attempts in Congress to quash that program. Gabbard said she has come to view the program as a national security tool and would not oppose its continuation.
The public hearing will be followed by another closed-door committee hearing with Gabbard, where senators can address classified information.
If Gabbard can’t win committee approval, there may still be a chance for the Trump administration to move her bid forward. Cotton can send her nomination to the floor for a full Senate vote without a recommendation from the Senate Intelligence Committee. But Republican leaders said they hope to avoid that route, which could highlight internal party divisions.
Gabbard left the Democratic Party in 2022, claiming it was “now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness.” She was a prominent surrogate for the Trump campaign in the 2024 election.
This article was originally published at freebeacon.com
