Tulsi Gabrield, the nominee for director of national intelligence, has been criticized by Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee over her views about former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden’s theft of more than a million classified files.
Republican senators asked Gabbard to call Snowden a traitor and acknowledge that he had “harmed” U.S. security. Gabbard refused, causing alarm among Republicans, who will vote on her nomination within the next few weeks.
One Republican senator, who asked to remain anonymous to speak candidly about Gabbard’s chances in the Senate, said: “People are keeping their cards close to their chests but that nomination is not going to make it.”
There has been “a lot” of discussion among GOP legislators about Gabbard’s suitability to lead the country’s intelligence agency, according to a second Republican senator.
The senator stated that “there’s been much discussion on this”.
Gabbard would, if confirmed as the nation’s top intelligence official be responsible for preparing Trump’s daily briefing on intelligence.
A pivotal moment occurred during the hearing on Thursday when Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., asked Gabbard if she viewed Snowden as a “traitor”, advising that members of Intelligence would feel much better about her nominee if Gabbard did so.
Gabbard, instead, avoided two questions on whether Snowden had betrayed the country, saying that she was “focused on the present and how we can avoid something like this happening again,” about Snowden’s thefts of secret documents.
Lankford said that after the hearing he was surprised by Gabbard’s response. He had earlier in the month stated that he would be supporting Gabbard.
“I was surprised because it didn’t seem to be a difficult question. Lankford clarified that the question was not meant to be tricked.
Oklahoma Senator said that it would have been “an easy question” to state it is “universally acknowledged when you steal one million pages of top secret documents and give it to the Russians. That’s a treasonous act.”
Todd Young (R – Indiana) appeared to be irritated by Gabbard’s comments. She refused to state that Snowden’s actions were harmful to national security, even though she is a member of the Intelligence Panel who has remained publicly undecided.
Young asked: “Do you want to respond to the findings of the House Intel Committee that Snowden has caused great damage to the national security of America, including military, defense, and intelligence programs that are of interest to our adversaries?”
Gabbard repeated that Snowden had “broken the law” throughout the hearing on Thursday, before quickly shifting to “my focus for the future.”
She said: “I believe we all agree that another Snowden-type of leak is inevitable, and if I am confirmed as DNI, I have laid out specific steps to take to achieve this.”
Young called it “notable that Gabbard did not acknowledge Snowden’s harm to national intelligence.
The Indiana senator asked Gabbard about the past support she had for Snowden’s pardon and the legislation that was introduced with former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida calling for the charges against Snowden to be dropped.
“We are right to punish Americans who, as private citizens, contractors, or uniformed staff, share sensitive plans or designs about military technology with a foreign government. Snowden did exactly that. “Yet you have argued that he should pardoned many times,” Young said in frustration at Gabbard’s response.
He probably endangered American lives with his actions. How do you believe you would be perceived as the leader of the Intelligence Community on past actions that you have taken to support, or even pardon Snowden? Young was curious about how the rank-and-file intelligence analysts would react if she were to become the next Director of National Intelligence.
Young asked if Snowden had betrayed the trust of the American people. He pointed out that Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines a traitor as someone who has betrayed their trust.
The Indiana senator refused to speak to reporters after taking part in a round-up of Gabbard’s questions during a closed portion of the confirmation hearing.
John Thune, Senate Majority leader (R-S.D.), was briefed on the hearing. He said that Gabbard did well. Later, after being briefed about the hearing, Thune said that Gabbard performed well. However, he did not say whether or not he was confident of getting her through to the Intelligence Committee, let alone confirmed in the Senate.
He said, “I think the majority of people were happy with how things went.”
He acknowledged that Young and Lankford didn’t seem to be happy with her Snowden answers.
Everyone will come to their conclusions. She had issues to address. “We’ll see what happens,” he said.
When asked if he felt confident in her confirmation, Thune replied: “I have said before, let them go through the process and you will see what happens.”
It would only take the resignation of one Republican senator from the Intelligence Committee, where Republicans hold a majority. This is enough to stymie Gabbard’s nomination.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who has said he would vote for Trump’s Cabinet nominees if there were no extraordinary circumstances at the time, gave Gabbard a “OK” rating on her hearing.
He said, “Umm… I thought she did okay.”
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, another key vote in the Intelligence Committee that is undecided about Gabbard asked her directly if she would support Snowden’s pardon or any other form of clemency.
She said that Snowden’s disclosure of sensitive sources and methods had “gravely harmed our national security”, putting agents on the ground in danger.
Gabbard replied that, if confirmed she would not advocate any action related to Snowden.
Collins said that she is “happy” about her answers.
She said, “I am happy with the answers she gave to my questions. I was particularly pleased when she answered that she would not recommend Edward Snowden be pardoned.
Collins stated last week that she was still concerned about Gabbard’s position on Section 702 Foreign Intelligence Act which allows for expanded surveillance powers and is responsible for approximately 60 percent of intelligence provided to the president in his daily briefing.
Collins thought Gabbard’s answers were “hedged”, while some Republican senators felt she had changed her mind about the expanded powers of Section 702 in the past.
A Democratic senator who has good relations with Republicans in the Intelligence Committee said that some of his GOP co-workers have significant issues with Gabbard.
“If you are on the Intelligence Committee or have any respect for it, you are a Republican. And you now have someone before you who cannot denounce Snowden’s status as a traitor of the United States, but who has actively promoted Section 702 against the law. “It’s obvious from the Republican questions that they don’t trust her,” said the lawmaker.