Follow us on social

google cta
Sen.Cotton on Tulsi: Don't 'impugn her patriotism or integrity'

Sen.Cotton on Tulsi: Don't 'impugn her patriotism or integrity'

Gabbard gets a boost ahead of tumultuous hearing on Thursday

Analysis | Latest
google cta
google cta

The confirmation prospects for Tulsi Gabbard, President Donald Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, look slightly better after this weekend.

In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” this past Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) revealed that former Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) will introduce Gabbard at her hearing on Thursday. Burr, a former chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is highly regarded by incumbent Senate Republicans and has some credibility across the aisle as well (he was one of seven Republican senators who voted to convict Trump during his second impeachment trial).

His assistance will be critical for Gabbard, who must first win the support of the Senate Intelligence Committee before advancing to a full senate vote. Committee members Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) are reportedly undecided on whether they will support her. Losing support from either would put Gabbard’s nomination in serious peril.

Gabbard received additional support on Sunday from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), one of the party’s most pro-war voices, who is also chairman of the Intelligence Committee. “It’s fine for people to have policy differences and ask questions about those differences. But I hope no one would impugn Ms. Gabbard’s patriotism or her integrity,” Cotton said Sunday, referencing Gabbard’s military service background.

“You know, Hillary Clinton has basically called her a traitor in the past,” he added. “This is a woman who served more than 20 years in our nation’s army.”

Still, senators from both parties have a long list of concerns about the nominee. Her 2017 trip to Syria, vocal support for Edward Snowden, past opposition to the surveillance tool FISA Section 702 (which she walked back earlier this month), her 2022 comments about Ukrainian bio labs (which she immediately clarified as not weapons labs), and support for ending the war in Ukraine (which has been interpreted as pro-Russia) will all surely be raised in upcoming hearings.

Gabbard has also alienated the national security establishment with less publicized views, including her openness to a more cooperative relationship with China and her caution against going to war with Iran.

Regardless of how Gabbard explains this record, most if not all Democrats will vote against her, making Republicans key to her survival. The Intelligence Committee is 9-8 in favor of the GOP. If she loses one Republican, her nomination may not advance to the Senate floor. That is why some Trump-aligned members are now imploring Chairman Cotton to make it an open roll call vote, to pressure the Republicans who may be on the fence, according to Politico this morning.

Supporters say the opposition from the Washington foreign policy and intelligence community reflects her threat to the status quo, and that she is one of the few voices of reform and restraint that Trump has nominated to top positions in his new administration.


“Sadly, if Gabbard is voted down,” wrote Jacobin correspondent Branko Marcetic, recently for RS, “her most likely replacement would not be someone with more consistent anti-war views than her — it would be someone with much more hawkish bonefides and much less likely to buck the system.”


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's nominee to be Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard arrives for a service at St. John's Church on Inauguration Day of Donald Trump's second presidential term in Washington, U.S. January 20, 2025. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

google cta
Analysis | Latest
Von Der Leyen Zelensky
Top image credit: paparazzza / Shutterstock.com
The collapse of Europe's Ukraine policy has sparked a blame game

They are calling fast-track Ukraine EU bid 'nonsense.' So why dangle it?

Europe

Trying to accelerate Ukraine’s entry into the European Union makes sense as part of the U.S.-sponsored efforts to end the war with Russia. But there are two big obstacles to this happening by 2027: Ukraine isn’t ready, and Europe can’t afford it.

As part of ongoing talks to end the war in Ukraine, the Trump administration had advanced the idea that Ukraine be admitted into the European Union by 2027. On the surface, this appears a practical compromise, given Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s concession that Ukraine will drop its aspiration to join NATO.

keep readingShow less
World War II Normandy
Top photo credit: American soldiers march a group of German prisoners along a beachhead in Northern France after which they will be sent to England. June 6, 1944. (U.S. Army Signal Corps Photographic Files/public domain)

Marines know we don't kill unarmed survivors for a reason

Military Industrial Complex

As the Trump Administration continues to kill so-called Venezuelan "narco terrorists" through "non-international armed conflict" (whatever that means), it is clear it is doing so without Congressional authorization and in defiance of international law.

Perhaps worse, through these actions, the administration is demonstrating wanton disregard for centuries of Western battlefield precedent, customs, and traditions that righteously seek to preserve as many lives during war as possible.

keep readingShow less
Amanda Sloat
Top photo credit: Amanda Sloat, with Department of State, in 2015. (VOA photo/Wikimedia Commons)

Pranked Biden official exposes lie that Ukraine war was inevitable

Europe

When it comes to the Ukraine war, there have long been two realities. One is propagated by former Biden administration officials in speeches and media interviews, in which Russian President Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion had nothing to do with NATO’s U.S.-led expansion into the now shattered country, there was nothing that could have been done to prevent what was an inevitable imperialist land-grab, and that negotiations once the war started to try to end the killing were not only impossible, but morally wrong.

Then there is the other, polar opposite reality that occasionally slips through when officials think few people are listening, and which was recently summed up by former Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Europe at the National Security Council Amanda Sloat, in an interview with Russian pranksters whom she believed were aides to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.