Summary
Republican senators are privately pushing to review Tulsi Gabbard’s FBI file amid concerns about her alignment with Russian interests following her nomination as Trump’s director of national intelligence.
Gabbard’s past support for Edward Snowden, who leaked U.S. state secrets, has drawn particular scrutiny, as has her history of echoing Russian talking points on Ukraine and Syria.
While GOP senators are publicly deferring to Trump’s pick, some, including Sens. Mike Rounds and Susan Collins, emphasize the importance of full background checks and hearings to address potential security risks.
Gabbard’s past support for Edward Snowden
Yeah, Republicans WOULD be upset about her only correct stance, even if it’s a past one 🤦
Whether or not you agree with notorious intelligence leaks, and I’m not saying I don’t, it’s not a great look for the Director of National Intelligence to support the leaking of sensitive intelligence documents.
Well, the sensitive intelligence documents showed that the NSA was interpreting the law in a way that goes way beyond what Congress allowed.
Having someone at the top that agrees that their department has limits regarding the US constitution is prepared to enforce those limits does NOT sound like a bad thing.
Sure, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was a breach of security.
It’s like applying for bank security after praising Pretty Boy Floyd.
it was a breach of security.
Agreed, and that’s on the NSA and it’s processes that need fixing. Not Snowden.
Also, in this case it’s like praising Pretty Boy Floyd for reporting to it’s customers that a bank was lying about how much gold it had in its vaults.
Sure, still wouldn’t get you a job at the bank
If you thank the person for telling the world that the bank is crooked, why can’t you then be responsible for ensuring that the bank stops being crooked?
Because your boss will never be sure if you can be trusted if you happen to think the next breach is also justified.
face it man, Snowden is a Russian asset at this point.
he didn’t start out that way be given the options of tea, window, or sabotage he chose sabotage.
He’s a survivor.
What would you have done differently than him? Die?
What would you have done differently
Traveled under a fake ID. People do it in films and TV all the time. Not sure how practical that is in reality though.
Real life is not like TV. High quality counterfeit papers that stand up to scrutiny are very hard to get. The only way to get ones that are guaranteed to work is by having someone at the state department who can issue them or buying them from someone with those kind of connections. And the odds are good that the fads have honeypots set up to catch people trying to get fake documents.
I wouldn’t have done anything differently.
Just pointing it out because so many have a fetish to make him a hero even after he’s helped the guy who wants to destroy our nation.
He did the right thing at the cost of his own safety and wellbeing. If that’s not a hero I don’t know what is.
At the same time he basically had to cooperate with the Russians because they tend to torture and kill those who don’t.
And his routes out of Russia were blocked
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident
Are you thinking of Assange?
no. Assange cares only for Assange.
Snowden cared about Americans once, but was abandoned by his nation to a corrupt government.
he’s an unwilling Russian asset now, think of it like indentured servitude for his life.
Are you able to point to actions that Snowden has taken to negatively impact the interests of the US people or to materially aid Russia?
no, and I don’t have to.
It is my opinion after all.
we’re allowed to share those on here still, right?
edit: did I hurt all the snowbunnie feewings?
You weren’t stating it as opinion, you were stating it as if it’s objective fact.
Very big difference in wording.
I think you might be confused. it’s not your fault.
unless someone provides evidence, it should always be considered an opinion. that’s how the world used to work.
now everyone just reads all comments as facts instead of using their cognitive ability to read and comprehend. it’s not your fault that the Internet made your brain lazy.
It’s not unreasonable to ask someone to elaborate or justify their opinion, kiddo.
and it’s not unreasonable for someone to refuse.
The question of whether someone works for a government is not really a matter of opinion
I’ll give you a legitimate response since I’ve got the time while taking the Browns to the Super Bowl.
opinions are varied and limitless as the ideas that feed them. One can have opinions on opinions!
so, when the neurons in your brain were firing on all cylinders to come up with your question, did you actually think that one couldn’t have an opinion on something as menial and useless as, “whether someone works for a government”?
I have many opinions, some are rather good, others not so much.
for example, my opinion of you isn’t very good.
Not triggered in the slightest - I thought there might be something to learn. Thanks for clarifying that it was nothing more than the baseless opinion of a fragile moron.
if you were a firearm you would be decommissioned for premature firing.
Your trigger is so loose, a stiff breeze sets it off.
So are Trump and the Republican Party.
yes. they are.
Being an American liability doesn’t make you a Russian asset.
it heavily implies it if a genocidal dictator shelters you.
If your passport is cancelled and transport is blocked then you don’t get much choice over who shelters you.
that’s besides the point. he’s there and it’s death or sell out national secrets.
I get it, doesn’t make him any less of a Russian asset.
His internal knowledge of the CIA and NSA gained as a contractor is an American liability.
That doesn’t necessarily make him a Russian Asset.
do you honesty believe that Putin would allow him to live as long as he has in Russia without some form of cooperation? I mean, the guy outlived the “thorn in Americans side” trope about five years ago.
The only logical conclusion I can come to is that he’s selling strategic processes and how Americans think for his safety.
if you disagree why do you think Putin has allowed him to stay alive this long?
The Senate receiving every bit of intelligence on a nominee from every government organization should be a requirement. If there’s a national security issue with disclosure to the general assembly, that information should still go to the committees/Senators that have those clearances, like the Intelligence Committee.
“Although FBI file reviews are standard for presidential cabinet candidates…”
I don’t disagree with you, but this is a non-story. The committee asks for and receives this information as a matter of course
Apart from the fact that the transition team hasn’t signed the required paperwork to actually kick that off, sure.
The fucker won’t sign it either. It will go to inauguration and he will proclaim its not needed by executive decision.
He can’t. It’s the Senate’s choice.
And what if he just ignores the Senate? Who is going to stop him?
Impeachment. They can impeach all of his appointments, and ultimately him. If he continues to ignore them then we’ll get to see him forcibly removed from office.
If everyone ignores Congress then we have a Constitutional Crisis that will likely result in the end of American Democracy. In the Constitution the President has the least amount of authority.
Trump and his supporters have Congress by the short and curlies, unfortunately.
Tulsi Gabbard is literally in a cult. And I don’t mean the GOP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Identity_Foundation
Tulsi is a Kremlin asset and she qualifies as a Russian SVR RF agent!
The call is coming from inside the house…
Well, Senate, technically. But the joke was perfect.
i love that he won’t even be in office for a couple more months and they’re already eating each other
I really hope the infighting completely paralyzes them or at least slows down the fascism
Unfortunately, incompetence and infighting haven’t slowed fascism much in the past. Recklessness fuelled by ignorance actually makes autocrats more dangerous, not less.
For example: Hitler Was Incompetent and Lazy—and His Nazi Government Was an Absolute Clown Show.
The parallels are uncanny.
My thoughts too. I prefer non functional over fascist functional.
Though it looks like people around him this time are expecting to be able to manipulate him and to have a real power.
Another concern is that he likely replace Thomas and Alito with younger ones, basically cementing this corrupted makeup.
What’s to stop them from packing scotus with a ton of con judges
after Gaetz dropped out i told a friend of mine that if I could have only one other person kept from the new administration, it would be Gabbard.
She is absolutely compromised, and it must be very, very deep. Whatever she afraid of, it must be massive.
Either that or she’s actually turned and loves (Soviet) Russia.
She is absolutely compromised
I’m interested where this certainty comes from. Diplomatically worded statements and a dislike of armed conflict doesn’t imply pro-Russia.
What evidence do you expect the background report on tulsi to contain?
In 2017, she visited with Assad, and then she started saying the US was behind terrorist attacks in Syria. In 2022, she accused the US of helping Ukraine develop bioweapons, and that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia was justified.
She has parroted Russian propaganda for years now, and Russia plays clips of her doing so as “evidence” they were accurate.
And there’s the little detail that in the last few years she’s changed from Democratic Presidential primary contender to far-right Kremlin-backing MAGA troll.
At this point her not being compromised by Russia would be a shock.
You should look up exactly what was said, not what others insinuate.
she started saying the US was behind terrorist attacks in Syria
Well, the United States was propping up radical elements with Syria’s anti-Assad rebels. Fighters posed as Free Syrian Army “moderate rebels” to obtain U.S. weapons before promptly defecting to al-Nusra.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/id-take-tulsis-record-in-syria-over-the-cias/
she accused the US of helping Ukraine develop bioweapons
No, she said there are 25 to 30 American-funded biological laboratories in Ukraine. This is true, and public knowledge.
She served in the Army and is now very anti war. War hawks on all sides have a vested interest in painting her as a Russian Asset.
She very heavily implied it was for bioweapons. Why else would having laboratories be justification for war?
She 100% supports letting Russia bulldoze Ukraine.
She’s only anti-war where war is against Russia’s interests.
She very heavily implied it was for bioweapons. Why else would having laboratories be justification for war?
No, she called for an immediate ceasefire at the laboratories as they could spread dangerous pathogens. The World Health Organization made a similar call. Are they all Russian assets too?
She 100% supports letting Russia bulldoze Ukraine.
[Citation needed]
She’s only anti-war where war is against Russia’s interests.
[Citation needed]
It sounds like you are regurgitating propaganda without having confirmed any details yourself.
