Trump’s ODNI Pick Deserves Scrutiny
- Rick de la Torre
- Jan 30
- 3 min read
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was supposed to fix things. Created in 2005 in the wake of 9/11, it was meant to streamline intelligence coordination, break down bureaucratic silos, and prevent the kind of intelligence failures that left America exposed. Instead, like most Washington inventions, it metastasized into another bloated agency—18 spy agencies reporting to a glorified traffic cop who often serves as a buffer between the intelligence community and real accountability.
Now, Tulsi Gabbard—former congresswoman, former Democrat, and longtime critic of U.S. intelligence operations—is President Trump’s pick to lead this mess. It’s a nomination that should make every serious national security hawk pause. Gabbard’s political journey, from progressive firebrand to self-styled independent to MAGA ally, has been dizzying. But the real concern isn’t her ideological wandering—it’s her record.
Gabbard has repeatedly found herself on the wrong side of key national security debates. Her 2017 meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, the same man responsible for gassing his own people, was a propaganda victory for the regime and a diplomatic humiliation for the U.S. She questioned intelligence assessments that Assad used chemical weapons—a stance that conveniently aligned with Russian disinformation efforts. More troublingly, she was one of the loudest voices calling for pardoning Edward Snowden, the NSA contractor who didn’t just expose domestic surveillance programs but also handed Moscow and Beijing a treasure trove of classified information.
Even her recent reversal on FISA Section 702—a critical surveillance tool Trump himself has criticized—reeks of political expediency. She opposed it for years, introduced legislation to repeal it, and now, facing confirmation, suddenly finds it indispensable. Is this an actual change of heart, or just an opportunistic about-face to appease Senate Republicans?
Then there’s the issue of her past associations. Gabbard’s ties to the Science of Identity Foundation, a cult-like religious sect, and its entanglements with the QI Group, a multinational accused of fraudulent pyramid schemes, raise serious concerns about her judgment and influences. The ODNI job isn’t a political stepping stone—it’s a position that requires unimpeachable integrity and absolute loyalty to America’s security interests. The Senate has an obligation to scrutinize whether Gabbard meets that standard.
To her credit, Gabbard isn’t your typical Beltway operative. Her military service is commendable—she deployed to Iraq and Kuwait as a member of the Hawaii Army National Guard and currently serves as a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve. That experience gives her a level of credibility that career politicians and bureaucrats in the intelligence community lack. She understands, firsthand, what happens when intelligence fails—when bad assessments put American lives on the line. And unlike most Washington politicians, she isn’t afraid to challenge establishment narratives, which is exactly why Trump chose her in the first place.
That said, experience in uniform doesn’t automatically translate to sound intelligence leadership. Gabbard spent her entire political life as a Democrat. She backed Bernie Sanders. She trashed Trump’s Iran policy, opposed his most effective national security measures, and aligned herself with some of the worst foreign policy instincts of the progressive left. Has she truly changed, or is this just another political pivot?
Senate Republicans need to ask the hard questions. This isn’t about party loyalty; it’s about ensuring that the person overseeing the nation’s intelligence apparatus isn’t working against the very agenda she’s supposed to implement. If Gabbard wants this job, she needs to convince the American people that she’s not just another beltway chameleon looking for her next reinvention.
For now, she gets the benefit of the doubt—but not a free pass.
Comments