The Senate Intelligence Committee will begin confirmation hearings for Tulsi Gabbard, President-Elect Donald Trump’s pick for Director of National Intelligence, on Thursday, Jan. 30. Gabbard was the U.S. representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district from 2013 to 2021, served as the youngest state legislator in Hawaii from 2002 to 2004, and has been a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve since 2021.
We asked leading experts what questions committee members should ask Gabbard in her confirmation hearing on Jan. 30 at 10:00 a.m. EST. A livestream of the hearing will be available here.
Qualifications for Role
The Intelligence Community is highly complex, consisting of 18 separate elements, 16 of which are nested within larger departments. Nine are part of the Department of Defense. If you are confirmed as Director of National Intelligence, you will need to ensure that the IC operates in an integrated, unified manner. The law only gets you part of the way there. The job has been compared with that of a conductor of an orchestra, and Jane Harmon described it as “50 percent law and 50 percent leadership.”
- If you are confirmed, how will you use both your legal authorities as DNI and your leadership skills to ensure that all 18 elements of the Intelligence Community act as an integrated whole?
- The DNI has a list of legal authorities, but they are limited. Which of the DNI’s authorities do you believe will be most important to your efforts? Which do you feel need to be strengthened by Congress?
- Section 1018 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act provides for the DNI to implement their authorities in a manner that “does not abrogate the statutory responsibilities of the heads of the departments of the United States Government.” This is a significant legal constraint on your ability to ensure the IC operates as a cohesive whole. How do you plan to ensure that the IC-wide initiatives are effectively implemented in light of this section? (Alex Joel)
The President’s daily intelligence brief is arguably one of the most important documents the President reads. You’ve neither led nor coordinated action among organizations anywhere close to as vast as the U.S. intelligence community. What experience do you bring to this role that will allow you to effectively distill the work of 17 competing agencies on such a frequent basis? (Danielle Bria, Joe Spielberger, and Greg Williams)
Russian Influence Operations and Election Interference
In the Feb. 2, 2024 “Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community,” the ODNI described Russia as “a serious foreign influence threat because of its wide-ranging efforts to try to divide Western alliances, undermine U.S. global standing, and sow domestic discord, including among voters inside the United States and U.S. partners around the world.” Do you agree with the ODNI’s assessment that Russia is a “serious foreign influence threat” and is trying “to divide Western alliances”? If not, on what basis do you disagree? (Tom Joscelyn)
In that same Annual Threat Assessment, written prior to the 2024 election, the ODNI also explained that “Moscow views U.S. elections as opportunities and has conducted influence operations for decades and as recently as the U.S. midterm elections in 2022.” Do you agree with the ODNI’s assessment that Moscow has “conducted influence operations” targeting U.S. elections “for decades,” including the 2022 midterm elections? If not, on what basis do you disagree? (Tom Joscelyn)
On Nov. 1, 2024, the ODNI, FBI, and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) released a joint statement on “Russian Election Influence Efforts.” The intelligence community (IC) assessed that “Russian influence actors manufactured a recent video that falsely depicted individuals claiming to be from Haiti and voting illegally in multiple counties in Georgia.” The IC assessed that “Russian influence actors also manufactured a video falsely accusing an individual associated with the Democratic presidential ticket of taking a bribe from a U.S. entertainer.” The IC added that both videos are “part of Moscow’s broader effort to raise unfounded questions about the integrity of the US election and stoke divisions among Americans.” Are you aware of these two videos? Do you agree or disagree with the IC’s assessment that the videos were “manufactured” by “Russian influence actors”? Do you agree or disagree that Moscow aims “to raise unfounded questions” about the “integrity” of America’s election and to “stoke divisions”? (Tom Joscelyn)
Counterintelligence Investigations and Russia
A concern is the prospect that the intelligence community under the Trump administration will significantly downgrade, or even stand down, on counterintelligence investigations and monitoring against certain targets like Russia. Will you commit to informing this Committee in advance of any changes that amount to downgrading any significant counterintelligence investigation? (Asha Rangappa)
Syria “Fact Finding Mission”
In January 2017, you met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on a “fact-finding mission” to Syria. What was the purpose of that visit? Do you still believe it is important to meet with dictators, even at the risk of legitimizing them, in the pursuit of peace? More broadly, do you think there should be any redlines when it comes to engaging with governments which have committed atrocities, human rights abuses, or are state sponsors of terrorism? (Former intelligence officer)
Shortly after the fact-finding mission, in April 2017, at least 89 Syrians–including children–were killed in a chemical weapons attack at Khan Shaykhun. The U.S. Government attributed that attack to the Assad regime and the previous Trump administration responded by conducting airstrikes against Shayrat Airbase. At the time, you expressed skepticism that Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack. You also criticized President Trump’s actions, saying “This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to the death of more civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a possible nuclear war between the United States and Russia.” Do you stand by that view? If confirmed as DNI, what would be your approach to Syria today? (Former intelligence officer)
Whistleblower Protections and Inspectors General
You introduced a bill called the “Protect Brave Whistleblowers Act of 2020” which would have made it more difficult to prosecute leakers by requiring the government to prove that the leaker had the “specific intent” to injure the United States. The bill set up an affirmative defense if “the defendant engaged in the prohibited conduct for the purpose of disclosing to the public … any violation of any law, rule, or regulation.”
- Do you believe that Congress needs to further enhance whistleblower protections?
- As you know, the Intelligence Community Inspector General is part of the ODNI. The ICIG plays a key role in ensuring that IC whistleblower complaints reach Congress as intended. It is the ICIG’s responsibility to protect whistleblowers from retaliation.
- Do you agree that it is essential for whistleblowers to be protected from retaliation?
- Will you commit to supporting the ICIG in the execution of his responsibilities to ensure that whistleblowers in the IC can submit their complaints to Congress in accordance with law, without fear of retaliation?
- Your bill would have also further strengthened the role of Inspectors General in the whistleblowing process. The President has now fired a large number of inspectors general. Inspectors general play important roles in speaking truth to power, and in ensuring that intelligence agencies comply with the law and protect civil liberties as they carry out their intelligence mission. Will you support the work of intelligence oversight officials so that they can carry out their vital oversight work free from interference? (Alex Joel)
You notably spoke out in support of Edward Snowden and his right to blow the whistle about illegality in the intelligence community. If confirmed, what steps will you take to strengthen whistleblower protections for all intelligence community and contractor employees, so they are not similarly retaliated against for the disclosures they bring to light? (Danielle Bria, Joe Spielberger, and Greg Williams)
Your support of whistleblowers like Edward Snowden may not sit well with intelligence veterans within the many different intelligence organizations you will oversee. How will you persuade them that blowing the whistle is sometimes the best way to advance democracy? (Danielle Bria, Joe Spielberger, and Greg Williams)
President Trump has previously called Edward Snowden a “traitor” and a “spy who should be executed.” (Trump subsequently said, during his first term in office, that he would consider pardoning Snowden but ultimately did not.) Do you still disagree with President Trump’s earlier statements about Snowden and what do you say to U.S. intelligence community officials who believe that, even if a small subset of Snowden’s actions involved whistleblowing, many of his actions were clearly criminal, traitorous, and seriously endangered U.S. national security interests? (Ryan Goodman)
Civil Liberties and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB)
In 2015 you introduced a bill called the “Strengthening Privacy, Oversight, and Transparency Act” to clarify and strengthen the authorities of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The President’s firing of three members has raised concerns about the ongoing viability of that body as an effective oversight institution. In light of your prior commitment to strengthening the PCLOB, how will you reassure stakeholders that the PCLOB remains a viable body that provides objective, effective oversight? (Alex Joel)
You have been a vocal and consistent defender of privacy and civil liberties and have spoken out against what you saw as encroachment on Americans’ rights by the Intelligence Community. One of your statutory responsibilities as DNI will be to “ensure compliance with the Constitution and laws of the United States by the Central Intelligence Agency and … by other elements of the intelligence community through the host executive departments.”
- In light of your prior concerns, what are your plans for ensuring the IC complies with important legal safeguards such as those embedded in FISA?
- In addition, within the ODNI is the Civil Liberties Protection Officer, whose statutory responsibilities include to “ensure that the protection of civil liberties and privacy is appropriately incorporated in the policies and procedures” of IC elements. Do you commit to fully supporting the CLPO and other similar officials in the IC who are working on the vital job of protecting privacy and civil liberties? (Alex Joel)
FISA Section 702
You previously called for the dismantling FISA Section 702, or, at a minimum, requiring a warrant for U.S. person queries. You more recently have stated that you support FISA Section 702 given the protections added by the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act.
- Can you explain what specifically in the RISA Act allayed your prior concerns?
- With reauthorization coming up again, the issue of U.S. person queries will likely come up again. Will you commit to being as transparent as possible – while still protecting sources and methods – about how the IC is using this authority and about its compliance record?
- A federal district court has ruled that the IC needs to obtain a probable cause warrant prior to conducting a U.S. person query in Section 702 data. This is the position you earlier took in one of your bills. How does that ruling factor into the position you believe the IC should take on U.S. person queries? (Alex Joel)
When you were in Congress, you opposed the reauthorization of FISA Section 702 and introduced legislation that would have repealed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which includes Section 702, based on concerns that the authority allowed intelligence agencies to violate Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights. However, you have recently said that your concerns have been ameliorated by “[s]ignificant FISA reforms . . . enacted since [your] time in Congress to address these issues.” What reforms, specifically, have changed your view on whether Section 702 allows the government to violate Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights? (Noah Chauvin)
As Director of National Intelligence, you would be responsible for consulting with the Attorney General regarding the querying procedures that govern how intelligence agencies can search databases containing information collected under FISA Section 702 for U.S. persons (American citizens, lawful permanent residents, and most U.S.-based companies). Currently, the FBI, CIA, NSA, and National Counterterrorism Center can perform these U.S. person queries. However, in its 2023 report on Section 702, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board noted that “[t]he FBI . . . struggled to provide the Board with affirmative examples of the unique value of U.S. person queries of Section 702 information in criminal investigations, and to date, the government has been unable to identify a single criminal prosecution arising from U.S. person queries.” More recently, Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that U.S. person queries violate the Fourth Amendment unless performed pursuant to a warrant or an exception to the warrant requirement—a decision that could have significant operational impacts on national security investigations and prosecutions. Given the serious questions about the legality and efficacy of the FBI’s U.S. person queries of Section 702 data, would you consider reevaluating whether and under what circumstances Bureau officials should be able to perform these searches? (Noah Chauvin)
Transparency
The DNI has led the IC in enhancing transparency. It published the Principles of Intelligence Transparency for the IC, and has created transparency platforms such as https://www.intel.gov/. Will you commit to continuing to support the Principles and to lead the IC in enhancing transparency? (Alex Joel)
Congressional Oversight
In collaboration with the IC elements, the DNI can issue binding directives to the IC in the form of Intelligence Community Directives. One such directive is ICD 112, Congressional Notification. This is the DNI’s attempt to ensure that IC elements lean forward in keeping Congress fully and currently informed. Will you commit to using your authorities as DNI to ensure that IC elements fulfill their responsibilities to keep Congress fully and currently informed? (Alex Joel)
Analytic Standards and Speaking Truth
In his confirmation hearing, DCIA Ratcliffe affirmed his commitment to speaking truth to power.
- Will you commit to seek the truth; speak truth to power; and obtain, analyze, and provide intelligence objectively?
- DCIA Ratcliffe stated that firing or forcing out career CIA employees because of their perceived political views was something he would “never do.” Can you provide the same assurance?
- You have previously raised concerns about the accuracy and objectivity of intelligence assessments. The ODNI has issued Intelligence Community Directive 203, Analytic Standards. Those standards call for all IC analytic products to be objective, independent of political consideration, timely, and to be based on all available sources of intelligence information. In addition, they call on analytic products to implement analytic tradecraft standards. Do you commit to supporting the Analytic Standards and to ensuring that the IC’s analytic products properly adhere to them? (Alex Joel)
Commercially Available Information
Last year, ODNI released a policy framework for the Intelligence Community’s acquisition of Commercially Available Information (CAI)—information, including information about Americans, that intelligence agencies purchase from commercial data brokers. This data can reveal highly sensitive information, and its acquisition has raised serious legal and policy concerns. Privacy advocates have warned that ODNI’s CAI framework is fundamentally flawed because it “fail[s] to prohibit the purchase of information that would otherwise be subject to statutory or constitutional protections.” As DNI, will you commit to reviewing this framework and reassessing whether it includes adequate protections for Americans’ privacy? (Noah Chauvin)
End-to-End Encryption
As a Member of Congress, you opposed efforts to mandate “backdoors” that would allow government officials to bypass encryption or privacy technologies. End-to-end encryption isn’t just important for protecting Americans’ privacy: It is also necessary to safeguard national security. Indeed, concerns about cyberespionage by the People’s Republic of China recently led the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to advise that individuals “[u]se only end-to-end encrypted communications.” But once a backdoor is created, it can be exploited by anyone, including foreign intelligence services. Do you continue to oppose mandating backdoors into end-to-end encrypted messaging as a threat to both privacy and national security? (Noah Chauvin)