Follow us on social

google cta
Tulsi Gabbard confirmed as Trump’s Director of National Intelligence

Tulsi Gabbard confirmed as Trump’s Director of National Intelligence

This victory over her detractors is seen as a win for restrainers

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

The Senate just confirmed Tulsi Gabbard as President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI), with the Senate giving President Trump and Tulsi this important victory despite her tumultuous nomination fight.

The final vote was 52-48 mostly along party lines, with exactly one Republican — Sen. Mitch McConnell — voting in opposition.

This morning's confirmation came after 30 hours of post-cloture debate, but in the end, she prevailed, ending months of criticism, including attacks from people like Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), who said she was “likely a Russian asset” and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claiming that “she’s the favorite of the Russians.”

After some speculation that key Republicans would break against her, it turned out they provided the unity Gabbard needed to prevail — and it was not necessary, as with DoD Secretary Pete Hesgeth’s vote, to bring Vice President J.D. Vance in for the tie-breaker.

“As she brings independent thinking and necessary oversight to her new role, I am counting on her to ensure the safety and civil liberties of American citizens remain rigorously protected,” said Representative Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), once thought of as wobbly, ahead of Gabbard’s nomination.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) also threw her support behind Gabbard. She was one of the three GOP Senators who voted against Hegseth’s confirmation (along with Murkowski and McConnell (R - Ky). She had previously complained that there were “a lot of obvious issues” with Gabbard’s nomination, including Gabbard’s past statements against section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The law allows the federal government to collect intelligence information from non-Americans without warrant, but the ACLU and other organizations have scrutinized it for its potential to capture Americans’ communications, violating the 4th amendment.

Additionally, some were concerned about Gabbard’s previous support for whistleblower Edward Snowden. She previously sponsored a resolution calling for Snowden’s charges to be dropped and, on Joe Rogan’s podcast, commented that “if it wasn’t for Snowden, the American people would never have learned the NSA was collecting phone records and spying on Americans.”

Notably, during her Senate hearings, Tulsi would not call Snowden a traitor when prompted. However, she said that his actions "harmed our national security" and "revealed illegal and unconstitutional government programs that conducted mass surveillance of millions of Americans' data." She conceded that Snowden should have brought his concerns to the proper channels rather than leaking his findings to the media.

Most Republicans had vocalized support for Gabbard all along. Senator Rand Paul (R - Ky) was outspoken in his endorsement, “It’s time to put the intelligence community on notice: Reform is not just necessary — it’s here. I proudly support Tulsi Gabbard.”


Top Photo: Former Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard attends the Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC 2024, at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland on Feb. 22, 2024. USA TODAY NETWORK via Reuters Connect
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

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.