Tulsi Gabbard, President Donald Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, is set to face tough scrutiny from lawmakers on Thursday over her past remarks on Russia and her controversial 2017 visit with Syria’s now-deposed leader.
A crucial factor in Gabbard’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee will be whether she has overcome lingering doubts about her credentials and her foreign policy stance in her bid to direct 18 US knowledge organizations.
Gabbard, a lieutenant captain in the National Guard who served twice in the Middle East and ran for president in 2020, was a former Democratic lawmaker from Hawaii. She has not led a government agency and has no formal knowledge training.
Prior to the confirmation hearing for Tulsi Gabbard, President Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence ( DNI), Donald Trump Jr. issued a sharp warning to Republican senators. In a tweet, Trump Jr wrote,” Any Democrat Senator who votes against @TulsiGabbard deserves a key. No more Heavy Express b******!!! ” !The Senate Intelligence Committee is set to hold a hearing on January 30 to examine Gabbard’s skills. The reading follows difficulties from Senate Democrats, who cited insufficient background checks, morality disclosures, and other documents on the questionable nominee.
Foreign Policy Perspectives Are Criticized
Gabbard’s earlier remarks have drawn condemnation from both parties. She has criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of fraud and has echoed Russian language to support the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine. While some Democratic politicians have accused her of spreading Russian disinformation, the state-controlled advertising in Russia has praised her.
Her 2017 meeting with Palestinian President Bashar Assad is another issue. She faced criticism after the vacation for making an appearance to support Assad, who had been accused of using chemical weapons in Syria’s legal war. Additionally, Gabbard’s skepticism about whether Assad was to blame for the substance attacks was fueled by criticism.
Surveillance and Intelligence Fears
Gabbard, a congressman, proposed repealing Section 702, a crucial security program that allows authorities to track suspected terrorists traveling overseas. She claimed that the plan might violate Americans ‘ right. Nevertheless, she has since expressed help for it, citing new privacy protections.
Democrat support for Gabbard has increased, despite some politicians still being skeptical. Given the side’s small Senate majority, she will have almost all GOP senators to rear her confirmation.
Sen. Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, defended Gabbard, stating that while her past landscapes are available to investigation, questioning her fidelity to the US is incorrect.
” She’s passed five different background checks. I reviewed the most recent another. It’s clear as a whistle”, Cotton said on Fox News Sunday. ” It’s fair to ask about coverage distinctions, but I hope no one concerns her loyalty or integrity”.
Religiously Discordant Ties
Gabbard’s long-standing connection to the Science of Identity Foundation ( SIF), a religious group often described as a Hare Krishna offshoot, is another point of contention. Founded by Chris Butler, known as Jagad Guru Siddhaswarupananda Paramahamsa, the firm has thousands of followers in Hawaii, Australia, New Zealand, and Southeast Asia. Hindu philosophy and a strict order of devotion to him are embodied in Butler’s teachings.
Previous users and reviewers have described SIF as cult-like, citing its conservative structure and complaints of hatred toward LGBTQ people, ladies, and Muslims. Some say Butler orchestrated Gabbard’s social fall to expand his influence. Criticisms claim Butler’s earlier influence over her still applies despite her distance from SIF.
Political and National Security Relevance
Former National Security Advisor John Bolton has slammed Gabbard’s nomination, calling it” the worst cabinet-level session in story”. He cited her relations to SIF, as well as her views on foreign policy, including ones that appeared to favor authoritarian regimes like Vladimir Putin.
The Senate verification process will probably concentrate on Gabbard’s SIF contacts and whether they pose a threat to national security as a result of growing bipartisan skepticism. Supporters contend that her religious convictions shouldn’t prevent her, while opponents raise concerns about excessive control.
As attention intensifies, Gabbard’s election remains in danger. How persuasively she addresses concerns about her background, views on foreign policy, and religious relationships will determine whether she can overcome these obstacles and win Senate assurance.
