Tulsi Gabbard, President Donald Trump’s nominee to serve as the director of national intelligence, faced tough questions from United States lawmakers during her Senate confirmation hearing on January 30, 2025, where her past support for whistleblower Edward Snowden, her foreign policy positions, and her lack of political allegiance sparked considerable debate.
The former Democratic congresswoman, now aligned with the Republican Party, found herself under scrutiny from both Republicans and Democrats during the Senate Intelligence Committee session. Gabbard’s views on national security, particularly stemming from her comments on Snowden and her 2017 visit to Syria, made her one of the more contentious nominees Trump has put forward.
“Edward Snowden broke the law. I do not agree with or support all the information or intelligence which he released, nor the way he did it,” Gabbard stated emphatically, but her insistence to not label Snowden as a traitor agitated many senators, particularly Democrats like Michael Bennet of Colorado.
Bennet, during the hearing, repeatedly pressed Gabbard to clarify her stance, asking, “Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America?” This line of questioning showcased the tension, with Bennet insisting, “This is where the rubber meets the road. This is not a moment for social media.” Gabbard, attempting to navigate the minefield of congressional expectations, replied, “I’m focused on the future and how we can prevent something like this from happening again.”
Her history of labeling Snowden as “brave” raised eyebrows across party lines. Gabbard’s efforts to reclaim her stance seemed to do little to quell concerns, as senators expressed skepticism about her ability to lead the nation’s intelligence community effectively.
The discussion swiftly shifted to another point of contention: Gabbard’s direct engagement with then-President Bashar al-Assad during her 2017 Syria visit. Critics saw the meeting as legitimizing Assad’s regime amid accusations of chemical weapon attacks against his own citizens. When Senator Mark Warner, the committee’s senior Democrat, pressed her on this alleged validation, Gabbard maintained, “I asked him tough questions about his own regime’s actions.”
Despite the gravity of the hearings, Gabbard appeared unfazed, reiteratively defending her past moves as beneficial for candid engagement with foreign leaders. “I believe leaders—whether you be in Congress or the president of the United States—can benefit greatly by going and engaging boots on the ground, learning and listening and meeting directly with people, whether they be adversaries or friends,” she asserted.
Gabbard’s political evolution, including her recent shift from opposing former surveillance policies like Section 702 to embracing them, faced skepticism from the committee. “I don’t find your change of heart credible,” remarked Warner, underscoring doubts about her reliability across various stances.
Snowden himself entered the fray indirectly, tweeting, “Tulsi Gabbard will be required to disown all prior support for whistleblowers as a condition of confirmation.