
Tulsi Gabbard steps into the intelligence world not as a career spy bureaucrat, but as a combat veteran who’s spent years blasting what she calls “the permanent war machine.” She has built her brand on two things at once: total skepticism of interventionist foreign policy, and total contempt for what she describes as a corrupt security establishment that lies to the public to protect itself.
Her message is blunt: America should defend itself, not wander around the world creating new enemies and pretending that’s “national security.” She’s argued for years that regime-change wars are sold with moral language but end in chaos, dead civilians, broken soldiers, and trillions burned for nothing except contractor profits and D.C. ego.
As Director of National Intelligence, she frames the job as two fights at once. Outward: protect the country, especially from terrorism, cyber operations, and great-power escalation. Inward: force the intelligence community to stop treating the American public like an adversary that needs to be managed. She talks constantly about transparency, declassification, and ending what she calls “weaponized narratives” pushed through the media.
Gabbard also leans into civil liberties in a way that makes traditional national security types grind their teeth. She warns about surveillance creep, politicized intel leaks, and intel agencies being used to frame domestic dissent as threat behavior. She portrays that as un-American and dangerous.
Critics on both sides say she’s naive about adversaries, too trusting of “America First” rhetoric from strongmen overseas, and too eager to assume U.S. agencies are the villain. Her supporters say that’s exactly why she’s there: to break an intel culture that they argue got used to never being told no.
Populist
Influence / Focus Areas
- Ending “Forever Wars”: Gabbard wants intelligence planning and threat assessment to stop defaulting to regime change, proxy wars, and open-ended deployments that bleed lives and money.
- Narrower National Security Lens: She frames national security as defending U.S. people, borders, and infrastructure — not managing the internal politics of every other country.
- Transparency and Declassification: Gabbard pushes for more declassification, fewer anonymous leaks, and a culture where the intelligence community has to earn public trust instead of demanding it.
- Civil Liberties Protection: She is vocal about surveillance overreach, mission creep in domestic intelligence, and labeling nonviolent dissent as extremism.
- Refocusing Resources: Cyber threats, critical infrastructure, fentanyl pipelines, and great-power escalation sit at the top of her priority list; nation-building projects do not.
Criticism
- Too Soft on Adversaries?: Critics say her skepticism of U.S. intervention can slide into downplaying the ambitions or brutality of foreign strongmen.
- War with the Intel Community: Career officials warn that her “clean it out” rhetoric risks gutting institutional memory and discouraging candid threat assessments.
- Populist Media Style: Opponents accuse her of turning intelligence oversight into a platform for fights on cable news and social media rather than slow, quiet reform. Her allies say sunlight is the reform.
- Domestic Extremism Threshold: She is wary of labeling domestic groups as terror threats without clear, immediate violence. Civil liberties groups see that as a safeguard; some security officials see it as risky.
- “America First” Framing: Supporters call it realism and restraint; detractors call it selective outrage and a blind spot toward authoritarian propaganda overseas.
Top Donors
| Contributor | Total | Individuals | PACs |
|---|---|---|---|
| US Army | $73,627 | $73,627 | $0 |
| US Dept of Defense | $54,884 | $54,884 | $0 |
| State of Hawaii | $54,735 | $54,735 | $0 |
| Boeing Co | $54,248 | $33,248 | $21,000 |
| Mosaic Media Group | $50,400 | $50,400 | $0 |
Totals reflect itemized contributions associated with employers / organizations. They include individual donors listing that employer, plus direct PAC support where noted.
Senate Confirmation Vote
Votes For
- Republicans: 52
- Democrats: 0
- Independents: 0
Votes Against
- Republicans: 1
- Democrats: 46
- Independents: 2
