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.

  • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day 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
      2
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours 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

      • Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        You weren’t stating it as opinion, you were stating it as if it’s objective fact.

        Very big difference in wording.

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I think you might be confused. it’s not your fault.

          unless someone provides evidence, it should always be considered an opinion. that’s how the world used to work.

          now everyone just reads all comments as facts instead of using their cognitive ability to read and comprehend. it’s not your fault that the Internet made your brain lazy.

          • Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            You are a child. Or at minimum, very childish.

            I recommend swallowing your extremely overinflated pride/ego, and growing up a bit.

            • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              11 hours ago

              big words coming from someone attacking a “child”.

              because you couldn’t argue against what I said you decided to attack me personally. seems pretty immature to me.

              BTW, that is my opinion. just clarifying so it’s not confused as fact. some people read anything on the Internet and automatically attribute it as fact these days. also an opinion, but I might have some proof around here that could sustain it as a strong theory.

              😉

      • aeshna_cyanea@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The question of whether someone works for a government is not really a matter of opinion

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          I’ll give you a legitimate response since I’ve got the time while taking the Browns to the Super Bowl.

          opinions are varied and limitless as the ideas that feed them. One can have opinions on opinions!

          so, when the neurons in your brain were firing on all cylinders to come up with your question, did you actually think that one couldn’t have an opinion on something as menial and useless as, “whether someone works for a government”?

          I have many opinions, some are rather good, others not so much.

          for example, my opinion of you isn’t very good.

      • Exatron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        22 hours ago

        It’s not unreasonable to ask someone to elaborate or justify their opinion, kiddo.

            • ɔiƚoxɘup@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              12 hours ago

              I haven’t given it any though till this moment, but the fact that he

              • leaked US government secrets, then
              • went to Russia and
              • isn’t dead from being windowed

              To me implies a certain level of Russian collaboration. Purely speculative, granted, but I bet he’s not about to go speaking up for Ukraine or anything.

              He sought and received protection from an adversary and I can’t believe that Putin didn’t put a price on that, and feel confident that he had the “currency” to pay.

              I believe what he did, he did with good intentions, but after that I think he had to start making some practical decisions in order to save his and his families’ lives.

              Would I make those same decisions? Let’s just say, I probably wouldn’t have the courage to blow the whistle in the first place, so it’s kinda a moot point.

              Suffice it to say, he paid for his ability to stay in Russia. Who’s to say the cost to US security?