Republicans are cautioning that Tulsi Gabbard’s path to confirmation to lead the U.S. intelligence apparatus is narrowing as she seemingly has trouble winning over key GOP senators. Gabbard, along with Robert F.

Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence disregarded U.S. assessments of chemical weapons attacks and instead looked to contested academic research.

WHEN PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP authorized the full release of federal archives on the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., he made good on a promise near and dear to academic historians and conspiracy theorists alike.

Years before Tulsi Gabbard became Trump’s pick to coordinate U.S. spy agencies, she tried to evade unwanted scrutiny.

Gabbard is set to face the Senate Intelligence Committee in open and closed sessions on Thursday. Typically, aside from certain public hearings, the panel deliberates and votes in private. That includes presidential nominations.

EXCLUSIVE: Dozens of top former intelligence officials are urging members of the Senate to confirm President Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, saying she will “begin undoing the gross politicization that has come to characterize intelligence bureaucracies,

Jan. 26 Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told NBC he is inclined to vote in favor of all of Trump’s nominees, but wants to “see how the hearing goes,” specifically citing Gabbard’s controversial visit to Syria and her previous call for charges to be dropped against National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden.

If she can't get a favorable vote from the Intelligence Committee, senators could report her to the floor with a neutral or unfavorable recommendation.

The confirmation battles over Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will be a test of how much Trump has changed the Republican Party.

A Senate committee will consider Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination to lead the Office of the Director of National Intelligence after she spent weeks working to persuade lawmakers to vote for her.

Does the U.S. want a director of national intelligence who excuses mass leaking of secrets?