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.

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      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?

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 hours ago

        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.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 hours ago

          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.

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            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.

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              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.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Gabbard’s past support for Edward Snowden

    Yeah, Republicans WOULD be upset about her only correct stance, even if it’s a past one 🤦

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

          • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            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.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

            • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 day ago

              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.

              • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                22 hours ago

                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.

                • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  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?

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          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.

          • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            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?

            • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              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?

              Boohoo

              • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                19 hours ago

                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.

                • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  17 hours ago

                  if you were a firearm you would be decommissioned for premature firing.

                  Your trigger is so loose, a stiff breeze sets it off.