Donald Trump’s New Cabinet Pick Once Called Him a Nasty Word — And Never Deleted The Tweet
President-elect Donald Trump’s decision to appoint Tulsi Gabbard as the next director of national intelligence has sparked quite a bit of controversy, with critics highlighting her lack of qualifications, controversial past statements, and the resurfacing of a 2018 tweet where she implicitly called Trump the B-word. The tweet, posted during the fallout from journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s assassination, remains undeleted. “Hey @realdonaldtrump: being Saudi Arabia’s bit*h is not 'America First.'" she wrote, criticizing Trump’s handling of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s role in Khashoggi’s murder.
Hey @realdonaldtrump: being Saudi Arabia’s bitch is not “America First.”
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) November 21, 2018
The tweet went viral on social media following her nomination as Gabbard transitioned from a Trump critic to his director of national intelligence. On X (formerly Twitter) a user commented, “This aged pretty well, doesn’t it???” Another questioned her sincerity, penning, “Wow, how times have changed. How much are they paying you?” Others slammed Gabbard for switching teams. “Hope you tell him that to his face now that you both are buddies." In agreement, a person quipped, "This lady's values shift like the direction of the wind..."
President-elect Trump tapped Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence.
— MSNBC Reports (@MSNBC_reports) November 14, 2024
She secretly met with Syrian Dictator Bashar Al-Assad in 2017.@RepCharlieDent shares what he told Gabbard about that visit. @SymoneDSanders also joins @jdbalart to react. pic.twitter.com/MwP1bSjU0O
As netizens flocked to chime in, a comment also read, “And now she endorses him. Politicians are a whole different breed of stank." Gabbard, who previously served as a Democratic representative for Hawaii from 2013 to 2021, built a reputation as a staunch progressive. She endorsed politician Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary and served as vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee.
However, Gabbard’s political journey took a sharp turn in 2022 when she left the Democratic Party, citing disillusionment with what she described as an "elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness." In October this year, she formally joined the Republican Party, just months after endorsing Trump’s re-election campaign. Gabbard served in the Hawaii National Guard and was deployed to Iraq in 2005 and Kuwait in 2008. Gabbard will be responsible for implementing the National Intelligence Program and preparing daily security briefings for Trump. However, despite her military background, critics argue that Gabbard lacks the experience needed to oversee the U.S. Intelligence Community due to several factors.
I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are… pic.twitter.com/oAuTnxZldf
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) October 11, 2022
In 2017, she faced backlash for meeting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during a secret trip to Syria, where she argued that peace could only be achieved by engaging with all parties involved, as reported by Forbes. Similarly, during the 2020 presidential race, she refrained from calling Assad a war criminal. Her opposition to U.S. interventionism extends to other conflicts, such as the Iraq War, which she has consistently condemned as unjustified.
As a former CIA case officer, I saw the men and women of the U.S. intelligence community put their lives on the line every day for this country — and I am appalled at the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to lead DNI. (1/3)
— Rep. Abigail Spanberger (@RepSpanberger) November 13, 2024
In addition, The New York Times reported that Gabbard's appointment as director of intelligence signals Trump’s aim to assign foreign policy positions to individuals who are “deeply skeptical of the effectiveness of U.S. military intervention abroad.”