Former Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard faces scrutiny as she prepares for her confirmation hearing as Director of National Intelligence nominee.
According to the New York Post, Gabbard has reversed her stance on the controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's Section 702 authority, which she previously opposed during her time in Congress.
The 43-year-old intelligence chief designate issued a statement defending the surveillance program ahead of next week's confirmation hearing. Her position shift comes as she seeks to lead all 17 intelligence agencies under the incoming Trump administration. The move has sparked debate among lawmakers and raised questions about her commitment to civil liberties protection.
Gabbard's statement emphasized the unique importance of Section 702 for gathering foreign intelligence on non-U.S. persons abroad. She addressed her previous opposition by citing recent FISA reforms that she claims have improved civil liberties protections. The intelligence nominee specifically highlighted the program's role in national security while promising to maintain Fourth Amendment protections for American citizens.
One Republican aide, speaking to the New York Post, characterized Gabbard's new position as resembling "a hostage statement." The aide questioned whether Gabbard genuinely believes in the effectiveness of recent FISA reforms or is simply attempting to appease intelligence hawks during the confirmation process. This skepticism reflects broader concerns about her sudden shift in perspective.
Sen. Tom Cotton, who chairs the Intelligence Committee, confirmed that Gabbard has assured him of her support for FISA reauthorization. The Hawaiian politician's confirmation prospects now depend on maintaining support from the Republican majority, as she can only afford to lose four GOP votes in the 53-47 Senate.
Democratic lawmakers have demonstrated hesitation about Gabbard's nomination. Sen. Mark Warner's response after meeting with her was particularly telling. As Warner stated: "I had questions going in. I have questions coming out."
The confirmation process has faced additional complications due to Democratic scrutiny. Sen. Markwayne Mullin revealed that Democrats have submitted 197 additional questions to Gabbard, which he views as a deliberate delay tactic. The Oklahoma senator expressed concern about these delays potentially creating national security risks by preventing the president-elect from having his full team in place on day one.
The situation is further complicated by Gabbard's political evolution. After leaving the Democratic Party in 2022 and launching an unsuccessful presidential bid, she notably endorsed Trump just weeks before the 2024 election. This political transformation has added another layer of complexity to her confirmation process.
The upcoming confirmation hearing represents a critical juncture for Gabbard and U.S. intelligence oversight. Her previous legislative efforts included a bill requiring the destruction of Americans' information collected under FISA and repealing the PATRIOT Act. These past positions stand in stark contrast to her current support for Section 702.
The FBI's documented misuse of Section 702 remains a significant concern. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has highlighted how the bureau wrongfully accessed information at least 278,000 times in 2021 alone. These incidents included improper surveillance of both Black Lives Matter protesters and Trump supporters connected to the January 6 Capitol riot.
Scrutiny of Gabbard's nomination continues as the Senate Intelligence Committee prepares for its first hearing of the 119th Congress, scheduled for January 15, which will focus on John Ratcliffe's CIA nomination.
Tulsi Gabbard's nomination as Director of National Intelligence represents a significant shift in both her personal stance on surveillance powers and her political allegiance. Her defense of FISA Section 702, despite previously opposing it, has become a central issue in her confirmation process. As the Senate prepares to consider her nomination after Trump's inauguration, the outcome will significantly impact the future direction of American intelligence operations and civil liberties protections.
