Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump’s nominee for director of national intelligence, was repeatedly asked to explain why she sought a pardon for Edward Snowden, the former government contractor who leaked thousands of classified documents revealing the scope of the nation’s surveillance programs.
Gabbard — a former Democratic congresswoman turned Trump ally accused of routinely amplifying Russian propaganda and defending Syria’s Bashar al-Assad — also refused to call Snowden a “traitor” during her confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, facing questions from members of both parties about her past praise.
“This is when the rubber meets the road,” Democratic Senator Michael Bennet pressed during a heated round of questions, demanding a yes-or-no answer as to whether she believes Snowden is a “traitor” to the United States.
“This is not a moment for social media, this is not a moment to propagate conspiracy theories or attacks on journalism in the United States,” Bennet said. “Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America? That is not a hard question to answer when the stakes are this high.”
Throughout her testimony, Gabbard insisted she believes Snowden “broke the law” and promised that, if confirmed, she would prevent a “Snowden-like leak” within the arms of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
But she stressed that she believes his leaks “released information that exposed egregious, illegal and unconstitutional programs within our government,” leading to reforms proposed by members of Congress.
“You have celebrated this guy as brave,” intelligence committee ranking member Mark Warner said. “I cannot imagine a director of national intelligence that would say that kind of behavior is OK.”
“Why is he being treated as a folk hero by you instead of the traitor he was?” Bennet said in a final round of questions.
In Congress, Gabbard introduced a bill that would provide whistle-blower protections for people like Snowden who are accused of violating the Espionage Act, and she proposed legislation to drop federal charges against him.
“Would you support or recommend a pardon or any kind of clemency for Edward Snowden?” asked Republican Senator Susan Collins.
“My responsibility would be to ensure the security of our nation’s secrets and would not advocate for any actions related to Snowden,” Gabbard replied.
Republican Senator Todd Young asked Gabbard if Snowden “betrayed the trust of the American people.”
“He released this information in a way he should not have,” Gabbard said.
Before the hearing, Snowden — who now lives in Russia after fleeing the United States — posted to X that Gabbard “will be required to disown all prior support for whistleblowers as a condition of confirmation.”
“I encourage her to do so,” he wrote. “Tell them I harmed national security and the sweet, soft feelings of staff. In D.C., that’s what passes for the pledge of allegiance.”
“This may be the rare instance when I agree with Mr. Snowden,” Young said.
Throughout the three-hour hearing, Gabbard was asked by members of both parties to explain her past statements and sympathetic comments about Russia and Bashar Al-Assad’s regime in Syria, including her skepticism of U.S. intelligence assessments surrounding chemical weapons attacks and her 2017 trip to Syria to meet with then-President Assad.
“I have no love for Assad or any dictator. I just hate al-Qaeda,” she said in her opening remarks, claiming that Syria is now run by a former al-Qaeda leader who “danced in the streets on 9/11” before leading uprisings against the Assad regime.
Republicans repeatedly emphasized her military service, characterizing her experience as a former National Guard and Army Reserves service member who was deployed to Iraq as unimpeachable evidence of the necessary commitment, trust and experience for the role.
Warner said he had “serious questions” about her judgment, including past comments in which she appeared to blame NATO and Joe Biden’s administration for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
He also questioned whether Gabbard can be trusted by U.S. allies to share intelligence.
“If they stop … the United States will be less safe,” he said.
“I want to make certain that in no way does Russia get a pass in either your mind or your heart, or in any policy recommendation you might make,” Republican Senator Jerry Moran said.
“I’m offended by the question,” Gabbard replied. “No country or group or individual will get a pass”
Asked point blank by Democratic Senator Martin Heinrich “who was responsible for the war in Ukraine,” Gabbard replied: “Putin.”
Last year, Gabbard told podcaster Joe Rogan that “the United States and some of these European NATO countries are fueling this war” and “need to provide the leadership to bring about a negotiated outcome.”
“That is what needs to happen here to prevent the destruction of the planet and life as we know it,” she said.
“This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO, which would mean US/NATO forces right on Russia’s border,” she wrote in 2022.
Gabbard also faced questions about her recent opposition to a warrantless electronic surveillance program that allows U.S. intelligence agencies to collect communications from foreigners outside the country.
The broad scope of that program, authorized under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also allows law enforcement to search through data that could include information from Americans.
She sought the repeal of the program when she was a Democratic congresswoman, and criticized warrantless surveillance as a “blatant” and unconstitutional attack.
But she recently called it a “vital national security tool,” aligning with national security hawks and distancing herself from positions held by progressive members of Congress.
“I don’t find your change of heart credible,” Warner said.
Gabbard told the committee that “the national security capability that is provided … that enables foreign surveillance over non-U.S. persons overseas is critical, period.”
Republican Senator John Cornyn asked her what criteria should determine warrantless searches.
“Senator, that’s not for me to say,” said Gabbard, saying that it would be up to Congress.
“That would be for you to decide and for the attorney general to weigh in on,” Cornyn fired back.
If confirmed, Gabbard will oversee the 18 divisions within the nation’s intelligence community, including the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency.
Republicans hold only a 9-8 majority on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and she will need the votes of virtually every Republican on the panel.
The full Senate could also move to confirm her if her nomination fails in committee, but that would require a 60-vote majority — a politically unlikely scenario in a chamber where Democrats and independents who caucus with them hold 47 seats.
