Tulsi Gabbard Has Her Own Warnings on Iran War Thrown Back in Her Face

National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard had her past quotes against war on Iran broadcast at a House intelligence hearing—and was asked why they contradict her current statements.

Democratic Representative Ami Bera put Gabbard in the hot seat when he highlighted her warning on the House floor following Trump’s killing of Iranian military officer Qassem Soleimani in 2020.

At the time, Gabbard had decried President Trump’s killing of Soleimani as an “illegal and unconstitutional act of war that President Trump took,” and said that it would make brutal U.S. forever wars in Iraq and Afghanistan “look like a picnic.”

“Director Gabbard, do you still believe that strikes against Iran that don’t have congressional authorization constitute an illegal and unconstitutional act of war?” Bera asked.

“The cost of war weighs very heavily upon me and my colleagues here.... My own personal and political views, as I mentioned earlier—I was asked and required by Congress and by the president in this role as the director of national intelligence to check those views at the door to ensure that the intelligence assessments are not colored by my personal views,” Gabbard replied.

“Do you still believe that war with Iran would be so costly and devastating that it would ‘make our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a picnic’?” Bera asked, quoting Gabbard again.

“Once again, in this role, it is essential that I do not allow any of my personal views on any issues to color or bias the intelligence reporting that we deliver to you and to the president.”

Gabbard spent much of the hearing trying to separate herself from her past statements, while refusing to criticize Trump’s war directly.

“Director Gabbard … there is no imminent threat of nuclear breakout,” Bera pointed out earlier in the hearing. “Did you deliver that assessment to the president?”

“I have delivered the intelligence community’s assessments to the president,” she replied, refusing to elaborate further.

It’s obvious that Gabbard believes we should not be at war with Iran right now. If that’s the case, she should make like her colleague Joe Kent and write that resignation letter.

In response to skyrocketing oil prices as a result of the war with Iran, the Trump administration is considering lifting sanctions on the country it is currently bombing.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox Business Thursday morning that “we had a break-the-glass plan across the administration, and at Treasury we unsanctioned Russian oil.”

“In the coming days, we may un-sanction the Iranian oil that’s on the water,” Bessent added, claiming that their oil would amount to about “10 days to two weeks of supply that the Iranians had been pushing out that would have all gone to China.”

Iranian oil has been sanctioned in some form since 1979, and the idea that the Trump administration would consider easing sanctions while starting a war with Iran seems counterintuitive, giving the country an economic lifeline. On Wednesday, the Trump administration lifted sanctions on Venezuelan oil, and last week, it eased sanctions on Russian oil despite the country’s ongoing war with Ukraine.

Does the White House have any long-term plans for its war with Iran? Trump was clearly caught off guard by Iran’s closure and mining of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical choke point in the Persian Gulf where much of the world’s oil flows, and by Iran’s decision to attack oil facilities of U.S. allies in the region.

Last year, the Trump administration chose to decommission several of its anti-mine ships, and also fired oil and gas experts from the State Department. Both moves have backfired, as the ships would be critical to help clear the strait and the experts could have helped prepare for this current oil crisis. Now the White House has been left scrambling to avert an economic crisis.

This story has been updated.

Senator Markwayne Mullin has secured the votes he needed to advance to a final floor vote in the upper chamber, all thanks to Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman.

Fetterman differed from his colleagues in the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Thursday, voting alongside Republicans to advance Mullin’s nomination to the Senate floor.

The final committee tally was 8–7. Meanwhile, Republican Senator Rand Paul joined Democrats in rejecting Mullin’s appointment.

Fetterman has displayed a penchant for Trumpian politics since he moved to Washington, despite the fact that he ran on the progressive ticket. Since Fetterman entered office in 2023, he has sided with Republicans dozens of times, frequently leveraging his position to advance Donald Trump’s agenda. He also voted to confirm several of Trump’s Cabinet selections, including the last DHS chief, Kristi Noem, who was transferred to work in an unknown section of the government following a string of embarrassing scandals.

“In January, I called on the president to fire Noem—and he did,” Fetterman wrote in an X post Thursday, addressing his vote. “I truly approached the confirmation of my colleague and friend, Senator Mullin, with an open-mind.

“We need a leader at DHS. We must reopen DHS,” he continued. “My AYE is rooted in a strong committed, constructive working relationship with Senator Mullin for our nation’s security.”

Mullin has had his own tumultuous history in the Senate. In 2023, the Oklahoma Republican tried to brawl with International Brotherhood of Teamsters President Sean O’Brien. The hostile exchange was halted by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, but the fallout continued in the days after as Mullin refused to back down from the violence he started. Speaking with podcasters and broadcasters, Mullin invariably escalated the conflict, claiming he would “100 percent” bite and even duel the union boss.

He’s also promoted violence against and attacked his colleagues, spurring accusations that Mullin suffers from severe anger issues.

In a fiery exchange during his committee confirmation hearing Wednesday, Paul raked up Mullin’s reaction to a November 2017 incident in which the Kentucky lawmaker was attacked by his neighbor, leaving him with several broken ribs.

Paul charged that Mullin “went on to brag” that he had “completely understood and approved of the assault,” prompting Mullin to “explain to the American public why they should trust a man with anger issues to set the proper example for ICE and border patrol agents.”

Mullin’s response was that he was simply a blunt person and that he has had to “really pray about my attitude,” chalking his beef with Paul up to “political differences.”

Mullin also stood by a previous comment that he “understood” where Paul’s neighbor was coming from.

This story has been updated.

Per the families’ requests, media access was reportedly restricted during a dignified transfer of six killed service members at Dover Air Force Base Wednesday. But that didn’t stop the White House from turning the ceremony into content for the internet.

The White House shared several photographs across social media, touting Donald Trump’s attendance at the proceedings with all the esteem an American flag and prayer-hands emoji can provide. “Their courage will never be forgotten,” read another post, with a second American flag emoji.

On TikTok, the White House posted a slideshow of photographs with a piano rendition of “Amazing Grace” playing over top. “The service and sacrifice of the six American heroes will never be forgotten,” the caption read, sounding copy-pasted from ChatGPT.

The images included one of Trump saluting a travel case draped with an American flag. The White House also uploaded a batch of 12 photographs to its Flickr account that showed Trump standing beside House Speaker Mike Johnson and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The ceremony was held to honor six service members who served aboard a KC-135 refueling aircraft that crashed last week in Iraq, while supporting operations in Iran. The U.S. death toll of Operation Epic Fury has risen to 13 service members.

This was the second dignified transfer Trump has attended since launching his war in Iran. But this is the third transfer ceremony of the war so far: Trump skipped the second after he received immense backlash for wearing his own merchandise during the first proceeding.

This time, he left his gaudy $55, gold-embroidered “USA” baseball cap at home. The White House also previously used a photograph from a dignified transfer earlier this month to illustrate a fundraising email that offered to sell “private national security briefings.”

The White House’s flagrant flouting of the families’ plea for privacy demonstrates that it hasn’t learned anything. Trump is continuing to use dignified transfers for his own political purposes. If not for ads, then for propaganda.

Iran has not gotten anywhere close to developing nuclear weapons over the last year, according to ex-counterterrorism director Joe Kent.

Kent blindsided the Trump administration earlier this week when he suddenly resigned from his post as the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, citing the war with Iran—and his assessment that Iran “posed no imminent threat” to the U.S.—as the primary cause for his departure.

In a sit-down interview Wednesday night with Tucker Carlson, Kent explained that Iran’s nuclear program was basically defunct.

“Was Iran on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon?” asked Carlson.

“No, they weren’t three weeks ago when this started, and they weren’t in June, either,” Kent said. “I mean, the Iranians have had a religious ruling—a fatwa—against actually developing a nuclear weapon since 2004. That’s been in place since 2004. That’s available in the public sphere.

“But then also, we had no intelligence to indicate that that fatwa was being disobeyed or it was on the cusp of being lifted,” he noted.

Kent’s resignation sparked a maelstrom across Washington, where top Republicans and Trump officials spent the better part of Tuesday disparaging Kent and his work, branding the Trump appointee as a “crazed egomaniac.” The size and scope of the MAGA reaction was a message to other Trump officials, warning them of the fallout if they publicly criticize the war.

The repercussions continued into Thursday, when Representative Elise Stefanik referred to Kent’s letter as “inappropriate” and National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard told Congress that Kent’s decision to blame Israel for the ongoing war was concerning.

In the same interview with Carlson, Kent claimed that U.S. officials had entered a “complacent mode” when dealing with Israel and its shared intelligence, warning that that intelligence could be shared to influence the U.S. administration just as much as it is shared to inform the administration.

“We trust a lot of what they have to say, not keeping in the back of our mind that they have their own agenda and we have our own agenda at the end of the day,” Kent said, noting that the U.S. and Israel’s missions are frequently aligned, though he did not believe this was the case with regard to the Iran.

“I don’t believe our objective has been clearly defined,” Kent said, citing America’s and Israel’s varied approaches to forced regime change in Iran.

Kent also offered some conspiratorial views on Charlie Kirk’s assassination, suggesting that Israel could have been involved in the political operative’s death since Kirk was a vocal opponent of U.S. involvement in Iran.

It’s worth noting that Kent is a known extremist with neo-Nazi ties. He has had to disavow a past interview with Nazi sympathizer Greyson Arnold and interactions with Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes. Even his resignation letter included “ugly antisemitic tropes” and “really nasty rhetoric,” Emily Horne, a former National Security Council official under Joe Biden, told The New Republic earlier this week.

So far, 13 U.S. soldiers have been killed in the conflict, as have more than 20 Iranian officials, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. More than 1,400 Iranian civilians have been killed, including dozens of children at a girls’ school in the country’s south. Some 3.2 million people have been displaced, as the U.S.-Israeli strikes have damaged more than 42,000 civilian sites—such as homes, hospitals, and schools—across Iran, according to Iranian government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani.

The Trump administration is requesting more than $200 billion to fund the war with Iran, and Democrats are outraged.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday night that the Department of Defense had asked the White House for the hefty sum. Reactions were swift and negative. On X, Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego pointed out the Iraq War of the early 2000s was less expensive.

“At the height of combat the Iraq War cost around $140 Billion per year,” Gallego posted. “If the Pentagon is asking for $200 billion they are asking for a long war. The answer is a simple no.”

Senator Chris Van Hollen was more blunt.

“This should be an absolute nonstarter,” Van Hollen wrote. “The best way to end this war, protect our troops, save civilian lives, and rein in a lawless administration is to cut off funding. I’m a hell no.”

The request would come on top of President Trump’s request to Congress in January, before the war, to boost the defense budget from $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion, a record high.* And the first six days of the Iran war cost taxpayers more than $11.3 billion. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth defended the additional $200 billion to reporters Thursday, saying that it “takes money to kill bad guys.”

“So we’re going back to Congress and our folks there to ensure that we’re properly funded for what’s been done, for what we may have to do in the future, ensure that our ammunition—everything’s refilled, and not just refilled, but above and beyond,” Hegseth said.

This budget request is not going to sail through Congress, especially if the administration deploys ground troops. Since most Democrats in the Senate oppose the additional funding, Republicans would have to use the budget reconciliation process to pass it. We’ll see if any vulnerable Republicans balk.

* This story has been updated with the correct defense budget request.

Multiple House Democrats walked out of a closed-door briefing Wednesday with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, calling it a “fake hearing” and accusing her of a “cover-up.”

The briefing was regarding Bondi’s and the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files, and comes just days after Bondi was subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee to testify over her “possible mismanagement.”

“It’s outrageous, it’s infuriating and it continues this White House cover-up of the Epstein files,” Democratic Representative Robert Garcia said. “We’re not going to take that anymore.”

Democrats noted that Bondi was not under oath, gave no opening statement, and did not commit to honoring her subpoena. Representative Yassamin Ansari called it “insane bullshit” and said she’d “fucking had it.”

House Oversight Chair James Comer called the Democratic response a “premeditated” stunt. And one exchange between Representative Summer Lee and Comer became particularly tense, according to CNN’s Kaitlan Collins.

Here’s what happened with Rep. Summer Lee and Chairman James Comer behind closed doors during the briefing with Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche, I’m told:

Lee: “Mr. Chairman, there are no cameras here. You don’t have to perform. We were told this was a briefing.”

Comer: “It’s a briefing!”

Lee: “But she hasn’t offered any information.... This is a hearing. This is a hearing without the cameras. This is a hearing without C-SPAN. And it’s a hearing without the public. So, what I’m asking is ...”

Comer: “You want me to scoot some chairs around and make a circle. Would that make it feel more like a briefing?”

Lee: “I would like C-SPAN. I would like you to bring the transcribers. I would like you to go through with the decorum and with the rules ...”

Comer: “Are you trying to find information, or trying to embarrass the attorney general?”

Lee: “Absolutely not. I think the attorney general is a woman who is completely able to defend herself, and I’m not attacking her. I’m questioning you. You run this place. What I’m asking you is ... will you commit to going as far as ...”

Comer: “I’ve already issued the subpoena ...”

Lee: “And this is not the deposition ...”

Comer: “You’ve wasted three minutes of everyone’s time just kind of, bitching ...”

Lee: “Really? Wow! Bitching?”

Comer later responded on X.

“FACT CHECK: True. I said Democrats were bitching and wasting everyone’s time because Democrats were bitching and wasting everyone’s time,” he wrote.

“Fact check: You said a woman was ‘bitching’ because you’re too basic to answer simple questions without throwing a temper tantrum,” Lee responded. “And you’re too weak to keep Bondi from disrespecting YOU and your [subpoena]. Twice a failure.”

Americans everywhere want Bondi and the people in power to go under oath, on camera, and answer a few questions as to why there are so many delays and discrepancies within the files in what is supposed to be the most “transparent” administration ever.

Donald Trump disavowed Israel’s air strikes against Iran’s South Pars gas field, claiming that the U.S. “knew nothing” about the attack.

The president tried to wash his hands of Israel’s late-night assault, which marked a major escalation in the Iran war. Moments later, however, Trump promised that he, too, would “massively blow up” Iran’s gas field if Tehran did not stop attacking Qatar.

“Israel, out of anger for what has taken place in the Middle East, has violently lashed out at a major facility known as South Pars Gas Field in Iran,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social late Wednesday. “A relatively small section of the whole has been hit. The United States knew nothing about this particular attack, and the country of Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen.”

Trump further claimed that Iran was not aware that Israel was behind the attack, and instead retaliated against Qatar’s energy infrastructure.

The South Pars gas field is one of the largest natural gas reserves in the world. It is located offshore in the Persian Gulf and is shared between Iran and Qatar. The field contains an estimated 1,800 trillion cubic feet of usable gas and supplies countries all over the world. For context, the enormous reserve is estimated to contain enough gas to meet global demand for 13 years.

Israel’s ambush will only serve to add more pressure on the global gas supply. Energy prices soared last week after Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway through the Middle East that funnels approximately one-fifth of all crude oil shipments. The price of Brent crude, a global oil benchmark, surged from a pre-attack low of $106 per barrel to as much as $118 per barrel by Thursday morning.

U.S. diplomats don’t see how Trump could have been left in the dark on Israel’s sudden bombardment. Dan Shapiro, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel posted on X late Wednesday that there was “zero, I mean zero, chance” that Israel would have struck the energy target without giving U.S. Central Command “full visibility.”

Later that evening, reports emerged that both Israeli and American officials had confirmed that the U.S. knew in advance about the attack, but that Trump changed his tune once Iran struck Qatar, according to Axios.

“NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar—In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before,” Trump continued in his post. “I do not want to authorize this level of violence and destruction because of the long term implications that it will have on the future of Iran, but if Qatar’s LNG is again attacked, I will not hesitate to do so.”

Trump told reporters Tuesday that he would withdraw from the war “in the very near future,” but that he wasn’t ready to leave yet. Leaving may not be a feasible option anytime soon, however. The president’s allies noticed a shift in regional power earlier this week, warning that while the early days of the war may have indicated an immediate victory, prolonged U.S. involvement in the conflict has dramatically increased the likelihood of boots on the ground. The changing tide has fueled concern that Trump could draw the country into yet another open-ended Middle East conflict.

Israel’s latest attack has left key Trump officials at a loss for words. At a press conference early Thursday morning, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth couldn’t seem to muster up an explanation for why the U.S. was continuing to fight this unpopular war alongside such a volatile ally.

“Why are we helping Israel prosecute this war if they are pursuing their own objectives?” asked a reporter from the far-right outlet The Gateway Pundit.

“We hold the cards, we have objectives, those objectives are clear,” Hegseth said. “We have allies pursuing objectives as well. The truth speaks for itself.… POTUS has made it clear, very clear.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth whined Thursday that the world should be grateful for President Donald Trump’s disastrous war in Iran.

Speaking during a press briefing, Hegseth turned his cultish rantings on, well, everybody.

“The world, the Middle East, our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press should be saying one thing to President Trump: thank you,” Hegseth said. “Thank you for the courage to stop this terror state from holding the world hostage with missiles while building or attempting to build a nuclear bomb. Thank you for doing the work of the free world.”

The actual content of Hegseth’s request for gratitude was almost as preposterous as the plea itself.

Trump’s war hasn’t prevented Iran from “holding the world hostage with missiles”—in fact, his actions have invited retaliatory attacks on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz that have brought global trade to a screeching halt, and sent energy prices skyrocketing. Should Americans be thanking Trump for sending gas prices close to $4 a gallon, with no hope of bringing them down anytime soon?

Trump’s war hasn’t stopped Iran from building or attempting to build a nuclear bomb. The U.S. intelligence community’s annual global threat assessment found that Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was already “obliterated” and that “there were no efforts since then to try and rebuild their enrichment capability.” Should Americans be thanking Trump for launching an increasingly expensive military campaign against a threat that was not actually imminent?

Hegseth’s childish antagonism of U.S. allies simply underlines how desperate things have become. Those “ungrateful allies” in Europe are the very same ones that Trump is begging to help him clean up his mess in the Strait of Hormuz. And allies in the Middle East are the same ones being targeted by Iran, as Israel strikes energy infrastructure on which Gulf nations rely, with Trump unable to rein them in. Should our allies get on their knees and kiss Trump’s feet for the chaos he’s sown, or his reckless, feckless approach to starting massive global conflict?

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell once again confirmed the obvious—that President Trump’s impulsive tariffs and his war on Iran are responsible for skyrocketing prices.

“If you look at total core inflation, it’s about 3 percent. And some big chunk of that, between a half and three quarters, is actually tariffs,” Powell said at a Wednesday press conference.

Powell also cast blame upon Trump’s war on Iran, which has caused oil and gas prices to rise to their highest national levels in years.

“Near-term measures of inflation expectations have risen in recent weeks, likely reflecting the substantial rise in oil prices caused by the supply disruptions in the Middle East,” he said earlier in the conference.

Powell blamed these policies while announcing the Federal Reserve would leave interest rates unchanged. “The forecast is that we will be making progress on inflation; not as much as we had hoped, but some progress on inflation,” he said.

The Trump campaign can’t blame growing inflation on former President Biden forever, and the issue will persist long after Powell leaves. It’s clear that its president’s policies are responsible for the frustrated cries of millions of Americans who were already struggling financially. Powell’s admission only further cements Trump’s apathy toward affordability issues.