Some Republicans had questioned Gabbard sharply during her confirmation hearing last week on her views on Edward Snowden and the contentious surveillance program he assisted in exposing. The interrogation stoked conjecture on Gabbard’s chances of gaining the committee’s support, where Republicans hold a 9–8 majority.
At the hearing, Gabbard retracted her earlier calls for Snowden’s amnesty, declaring that she would not pursue clemency or a pardon for the former NSA contractor who was charged with espionage. Additionally, she stated that she saw the government’s monitoring powers under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence monitoring Act as a valuable instrument, softening her stance on the matter.
Two Republican senators who had been considered as possible no votes on the committee made it known that they would support Gabbard before to the vote, which took place in a closed-door session.
Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, declared on Monday that she would vote for Gabbard because she had allayed her worries about Snowden. Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., declared he would support Gabbard on Tuesday, just hours before the vote, after she made promises that would improve our national security.
In 2013, Snowden was working as a National Security Agency contractor when he released a mountain of classified material that revealed specifics of US monitoring activities across the world. Snowden has been charged with espionage after fleeing the country and relocating to Russia.
During her confirmation hearing, Gabbard, a former congresswoman from Hawaii who previously competed for the Democratic presidential nomination before defecting from the party and supporting Trump, had avoided answering some questions from Republican senators regarding her opinions on the section 702 surveillance program.
If no Democrats support her, Gabbard could afford to lose up to three Republican votes when the full Senate considers her confirmation. The committee vote has been seen as the largest challenge to her nomination, while it is uncertain if four Republicans are willing to vote against it.
In his role as director of national intelligence, which was established in the wake of the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, Gabbard would be in charge of 18 intelligence agencies with a roughly $100 billion budget and act as the president’s primary intelligence advisor.
Gabbard has been accused of echoing propaganda from Russia and the former Assad regime in Syria while running for president, serving in Congress, and commentating on Trump’s campaign. This includes challenging U.S. intelligence reports that the Syrian government had carried out numerous chemical weapons attacks on its own citizens.
During the hearing last week, Gabbard denied accusations that she has taken sides with enemies of the United States and stated that it was ridiculous to doubt her allegiance to the United States considering her political and Army career.
She claims that because she challenges Washington’s national security establishment and opposes U.S. military interventions to overthrow regimes, like as the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, she is being attacked.
Gabbard stated during last week’s session that she was neither Assad’s nor Putin’s or anyone else’s puppet.
“The fact that I refuse to be their puppet is what really agitates my political opponents,” Gabbard stated.
Gabbard, who was assigned to Iraq with a medical unit while serving in the Hawaii Army National Guard, has long attacked American foreign policy as being oppressive and colonial. Additionally, she has previously portrayed Trump as dangerous and harshly criticized him for his Middle East strategy during his first term in office. However, Gabbard claimed to have changed her view and been proven incorrect during her confirmation hearing last week.