WASHINGTON —  Tulsi Gabbard, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to supervise the nation’s 18 intelligence companies, is a lady of sturdy views, vigorously expressed.

A former Bernie Sanders Democrat, she now says the Democratic Social gathering is managed by “an elitist cabal of warmongers” that features “rogue intelligence and regulation enforcement brokers.” President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, she wrote not too long ago, are merely puppets of that cabal.

A staunch anti-interventionist who opposes virtually any use of U.S. army drive, the previous congresswoman from Hawaii blames Biden — not Vladimir Putin — for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

All of which echoes Trump’s views, particularly his conviction that the FBI, CIA and different nationwide safety companies have plotted ceaselessly towards him.

However, throughout Trump’s first time period within the White Home, she additionally complained that he was too powerful on Iran and denounced him for appearing like “Saudi Arabia’s bitch.”

This yr, although, she rallied to his facet and endorsed him for promising to hunt a thaw with Russia. She was a frequent, telegenic surrogate for his marketing campaign on Fox Information. No marvel Trump determined she was the proper alternative to protect the nation’s secrets and techniques as director of nationwide intelligence.

Nationwide safety veterans from each events usually are not solely unimpressed; they’re alarmed.

“We usually search for demonstrated competence in a nominee,” stated Gregory F. Treverton, a former high intelligence official throughout the Obama administration who now teaches at USC. “This can be a case of demonstrated incompetence. … She was clearly chosen solely as a result of she’s loyal to Trump.”

“I feel she’s a critical risk to our nationwide safety,” John Bolton, who served as Trump’s nationwide safety advisor throughout his first time period, stated in a tv interview. “Her judgment is nonexistent.”

Amongst Republicans within the Senate, Gabbard’s nomination elicited a couple of glowing endorsements — however a powerful listing of noncommittal statements.

“That’s a nominee that illustrates the significance of a full background test,” stated Susan Collins of Maine, one of many GOP senators who helped sink the nomination of former Rep. Matt Gaetz for legal professional normal final month.

Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma stated he “may have quite a lot of questions.” “It’s actually necessary that we now have management there that’s capable of assist” the intelligence companies, he added.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, previously the GOP’s second-ranking Senate chief, gave a speech praising most of Trump’s nationwide safety nominees by title — however left Gabbard conspicuously off the listing. A Cornyn aide declined to say whether or not the omission was deliberate.

To Senate-watchers, the which means of all that terseness was clear: If any of Trump’s nominees are in peril, Gabbard is on the high of the listing.

Her lengthy file as a overseas coverage dissident beneath each Democratic and Republican presidents will give Senate hawks loads to scrutinize — and, maybe, to excoriate.

She not solely blamed Biden for Russia’s conflict on Ukraine (she claims he didn’t acknowledge Putin’s “official safety issues” and demanded america minimize off army support to Kyiv. She additionally charged that the U.S. was funding harmful organic laboratories in Ukraine — “parroting faux Russian propaganda,” Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah complained.

On the Syrian civil conflict, Gabbard opposed U.S. support to the rebels combating the brutal regime of Bashar Assad, met with the authoritarian chief and defended him towards the allegations that he used chemical weapons on his personal individuals. Assad, who’s propped up by army support from Iran and Russia, “is just not the enemy of america,” she stated.

She defended Edward Snowden and Julian Assange, who had been indicted for masterminding two of the most important leaks of intelligence secrets and techniques in U.S. historical past — a place unlikely to endear her to intelligence group professionals or hawks within the Senate.

Gabbard additionally criticized Trump throughout his first time period for army intervention, together with for bombing Syrian authorities forces in 2017 in retaliation for Assad’s use of chemical weapons towards civilians.

She condemned Trump for ordering the assassination of Iran’s Gen. Qassem Soleimani in 2020, and for imposing harsh financial sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. She additionally excoriated Trump for supporting Saudi Arabia’s authoritarian regime in alternate for army purchases — the rationale she known as him “Saudi Arabia’s bitch.”

Trump doesn’t seem to have held any of that towards her — particularly after she started campaigning for him. And, after all, he shares Gabbard’s view of the CIA as a rogue company that must be dropped at heel.

That’s the core of the issue along with her nomination, Treverton argues.

“She’s going to be at conflict with the intelligence group,” he stated. “She’ll politicize it in methods which are apparent and never apparent.”

Intelligence, he added, is an space wherein political loyalty is just not at all times a cardinal advantage.

“If the president surrounds himself with yes-men and yes-women, that’s harmful,” he stated. “You might want to encourage intelligence officers to return ahead with unhealthy information, as a substitute of telling leaders solely what they need to hear.”

Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the previous Senate chief, has stated he plans to make use of his remaining time within the Senate to oppose the rising isolationism in his social gathering.

He has criticized Trump’s overseas coverage slogan, “America First,” as much like “the language they used within the ‘20s and ‘30s.” He has stated pushing again towards Putin and his allies, particularly in Ukraine, should be a high precedence — it doesn’t matter what Trump and Gabbard suppose.

There are at the very least a dozen nationwide safety Republicans within the Senate — “Reagan Republicans,” in McConnell’s phrases — who share that view. With the GOP holding a 53-47 majority, it might take solely 4 to sink a nomination.

Will McConnell and different Russia hawks have the braveness of their convictions? This nomination could be a very good place to begin.