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.
Gabbard’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee will be a key test of whether she has alleviated bipartisan concerns about her qualifications—or whether lingering doubts about her background and foreign policy stance will derail her nomination to lead 18 US intelligence agencies.
A former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii, Gabbard is a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard who has deployed twice to the Middle East and ran for president in 2020. However, she lacks formal intelligence experience and has never led a government agency.
Earlier, Donald Trump Jr. issued a stark warning to Republican senators ahead of the confirmation hearing for Tulsi Gabbard, President Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence (DNI). In a tweet, Trump Jr wrote, “Any Republican Senator who votes against @TulsiGabbard deserves a primary. No more Deep State b******!!!!”The Senate Intelligence Committee is set to hold a hearing on January 30 to assess Gabbard’s qualifications. The hearing follows delays from Senate Democrats, who cited incomplete background checks, ethics disclosures, and other paperwork on the controversial nominee.
Foreign Policy Positions Under Fire
Gabbard’s past statements have drawn criticism from both parties. She has echoed Russian rhetoric justifying the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine and has accused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of corruption. Some Republican lawmakers have accused her of spreading Russian disinformation, while Russian state-controlled media have lauded her.
Another sticking point is her 2017 visit with Syrian President Bashar Assad. Following the trip, she faced backlash for appearing to legitimize Assad, who was accused of using chemical weapons in Syria’s civil war. Gabbard also expressed skepticism that Assad was responsible for chemical attacks, further fueling criticism.
Surveillance and Intelligence Concerns
As a congresswoman, Gabbard proposed repealing Section 702, a key surveillance program that allows authorities to monitor suspected terrorists abroad. She argued the program could infringe on Americans’ rights. However, she has since expressed support for it, citing new privacy safeguards.
Though some lawmakers remain wary, Republican support for Gabbard has grown. Given the party’s narrow Senate majority, she will need nearly all GOP senators to back her confirmation.
Sen. Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, defended Gabbard, stating that while her past views are open to scrutiny, questioning her loyalty to the US is inappropriate.
“She’s passed five different background checks. I reviewed the latest one. It’s clean as a whistle,” Cotton said on Fox News Sunday. “It’s fair to ask about policy differences, but I hope no one questions her patriotism or integrity.”
Controversial Religious 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 organization has thousands of followers in Hawaii, Australia, New Zealand, and Southeast Asia. Butler’s teachings combine Hindu philosophy with a strict hierarchy of devotion to him.
Former members and critics have described SIF as cult-like, citing its authoritarian structure and allegations of intolerance toward LGBTQ individuals, women, and Muslims. Some claim Butler orchestrated Gabbard’s political rise to expand his influence. While she has distanced herself from SIF, critics argue that Butler’s past influence over her remains relevant.
Political and National Security Implications
Former National Security Advisor John Bolton has slammed Gabbard’s nomination, calling it “the worst cabinet-level appointment in history.” He cited her ties to SIF and her foreign policy stances, including perceived friendliness toward authoritarian figures like Vladimir Putin.
With bipartisan skepticism growing, the Senate confirmation process will likely focus on Gabbard’s SIF connections and whether they pose a risk to national security. Supporters argue her religious beliefs should not disqualify her, while opponents raise concerns about undue influence.
As scrutiny intensifies, Gabbard’s nomination remains in jeopardy. Whether she can overcome these obstacles and secure Senate confirmation will depend on how convincingly she addresses concerns about her background, foreign policy views, and religious ties.