Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence (DNI), is a serial violator of a cardinal sin: she has refused to submit to the Washington establishment on matters of national security.
For this ‘sin’ – and her extraordinary set of qualifications – Gabbard is perhaps uniquely qualified to be the next DNI.
And to the war-loving branch of the establishment, her sins cannot go unpunished. Many of their most senior members have been working overtime to sabotage her nomination since Trump made the announcement last November. Mere weeks after her nomination was made public, NBC News reported that 100 national security officials published a letter warning they were all “alarmed” at the prospect of her elevation to DNI.
Justification for this alarm, the officials claimed, was that several of “Ms. Gabbard’s past actions call into question her ability to deliver unbiased intelligence briefings to the President, Congress, and to the entire national security apparatus.” A serious claim, as the DNI is the official charged with preparing the vital President’s Daily Brief, outlining each day’s most important intelligence assessments.
As evidence, the official’s letter cited the example of a 2017 trip to Syria in which “Ms. Gabbard aligned herself with Russian and Syrian officials.” This claim – as well as other claims made by senior intelligence and establishment figures – is flatly untrue, and anyone with the ability to google can expose it as such.
Time to End the Tulsi Gabbard-Assad Smear
In January 2017, then-Congresswoman Gabbard, as a member of the House Foreign Affairs member, broke with convention and traveled to Syria to meet with people there to find out what they thought the United States could do to help end the war. While there, an unplanned opportunity arose when Assad offered to meet with her.
In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper upon her return, Gabbard said she met with Assad because she “felt that it’s important that if we profess to truly care about the Syrian people, about their suffering, then we’ve got to be able to meet with anyone that we need to if there is a possibility that we can achieve peace.” Tapper pressed Gabbard and asked if she had reservations talking to a murderous dictatory.
“In order for any peace agreement,” she replied, “in order for any possibility of a viable peace agreement to occur there has to be a conversation with him. My commitment is on ending this war that has caused so much suffering to the Syrian people.” There was nothing in that interview and nothing that emerged since to suggest the slightest evidence that Gabbard “aligned herself” with Assad or Russia (which wasn’t even in the conversation.”
On the contrary, she risked her political career to find a way to end an unnecessary and destructive war to end the suffering of the most vulnerable population and bring peace.
Accusations such as those made by the 100 former intel officials are a knowing attempt to deceive the American people into believing a lie about Gabbard. It wasn’t to be the last attempt.
Or the most emphatic.
The Attack Tulsi Gabbard Machine Won’t Stop
Two of the biggest pro-war advocates in America, Nikki Haley – whom Vivek Ramaswamy said was “actively pro-war” – and John Bolton, have come out with strong vitriol against Gabbard’s nomination. While Haley jumped on the bandwagon condemning Gabbard for talking to Assad, Bolton sought a new line of attack.
The former ambassador had especially strong vitriol for Gabbard, claiming she was the worst cabinet-level pick “in history.” He even questioned her “moral characteristics” to effectively do the job. As evidence, he claimed Gabbard said “some of the most incredible things, including as I recall, a reference to the real cause of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine being chemical weapons plants in the Ukraine that were joint US/Ukrainian efforts.”
Bolton’s assertions were an intentional distortion of what Gabbard said in order to cause people to have outrage that any American would say such a thing. She didn’t. But what she did say is evidence she is exactly the kind of person Trump needs as DNI.
Early in the war, Gabbard made a video alerting people to the presence of numerous American-funded biolabs scattered throughout Ukraine, many of which were in the combat zone. In the video, she warned that there were scores of US-funded biolabs in Ukraine which could be compromised by the ongoing fighting.
“To protect the American people” from the deadly pathogens in the labs, she argued, “these labs need to be shut down immediately.” She then called for an immediate ceasefire in the war until the labs could be secured “and these pathogens are destroyed.”
At no time did she even address anything Russia said regarding the labs. Instead, her overriding concern was for the health, benefit, and safety of the American people. The presence of 45 US-funded Ukrainian bio labs, perhaps unbeknownst to Bolton, were confirmed by the Department of Defense on March 22, 2022.
A Battle for the Foreign Policy Soul of America
To people like the 100 former intelligence officials and war hawks like Haley and Bolton, Gabbard’s unpardonable ‘sin’ is that she is not sufficiently pro-war. Establishment figures don’t want someone in that key position to convey intelligence to the president faithfully. They desire someone who can be counted on to cherry-pick intelligence to give the impression that a military solution is always the correct answer.
Gabbard, however, will enter office, if confirmed, as having one key, overriding imperative: present the truth to the President, so that he will have the best, most accurate, and ground-truth information upon which to base his decisions. Fortunately, there are a large number of people – and growing larger by the day – that recognize the danger of getting an establishment figure into such a key position and the benefit of getting someone of Gabbard’s character and qualifications into that office.
Tulsi Gabbard. Image Credit: YouTube Screenshot.
Fox News reported on Tuesday that scores of former high ranking intelligence and government officials published a letter endorsing Gabbard on the eve of her confirmation hearing. She was, the letter pointed out, “more than qualified” to be DNI, as evidenced by her two decades of service as a military officer in the Army, her combat deployment, and service as a U.S. Congresswoman.
They argued that she needed to be confirmed because her tenure “as DNI will begin undoing the gross politicization that has come to characterize intelligence bureaucracies, which has been to the great detriment of the freedom and security of the United States and its citizens.” And they are right.
Tulsi Gabbard Should Be Confirmed
Gabbard’s hearing is set to begin tomorrow. If the Senate votes on the evidence, looks honestly at the full range of her qualifications and is interested in getting a highly qualified person as the DNI, they will confirm her nomination for the good of the country. There may be no one better suited.
About the Author: Daniel L. Davis
Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow & Military Expert for Defense Priorities and host of the Daniel Davis Deep Dive show on YouTube. Davis is a 19FortyFive Contributing Editor.
