It was snowy in D.C. when the final numbers finally blinked onto the tally board. Feb. 12, 2025. After weeks of back-and-forth that felt more like a spy thriller than a standard bureaucratic procedure, the Tulsi Gabbard confirmation vote wrapped up with a 52-48 result. She’s now the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), but getting there was a mess.
Honestly, the atmosphere in the Senate leading up to that Wednesday morning was incredibly tense. You had seasoned intel veterans basically having a meltdown over the idea of a former Democrat—who once met with Bashar al-Assad—holding the keys to the kingdom. Then you had the Trump loyalists arguing she was the only one who could actually "clean house." It wasn't just a vote; it was a total vibe shift for how the U.S. handles its secrets.
The 52-48 Breakdown: Who Flipped and Who Fought?
Most people expected a party-line vote, and they mostly got it. But there was one huge outlier that had everyone talking in the cloakrooms. Mitch McConnell. The former GOP leader didn't just quietly dissent; he released a stinging statement saying Gabbard "failed to demonstrate" she was ready for the job.
McConnell wasn't alone in his skepticism, but he was the only Republican who actually hit the "nay" button when it mattered. Other "moderate" Republicans like Susan Collins of Maine and Todd Young of Indiana were the real wildcards. For a minute there, it looked like they might sink the ship. But after some heavy lifting from Tom Cotton and reportedly a few calls from the White House, they fell in line.
- The "Yeas": 52 Republicans.
- The "Nays": 45 Democrats, 2 Independents, and 1 Republican (McConnell).
- The No-Shows: Everyone actually showed up for this one, though a few earlier procedural votes had people missing.
It’s kinda wild to think about. Just a few years ago, Tulsi was running for president as a Democrat. Now, she's sitting at the top of an intelligence community that many in her new party view with deep suspicion.
💡 You might also like: Percentage of Women That Voted for Trump: What Really Happened
The Section 702 Flip-Flop
If there was one thing that almost killed the Tulsi Gabbard confirmation vote, it was Section 702 of FISA. This is the law that lets the government collect communications of foreigners outside the U.S. without a warrant.
Gabbard had spent years blasting this program. She’d basically called it a tool for domestic spying. But then, right as the hearings were getting hot, she did a total 180. She told the Senate Intelligence Committee that the program is actually "essential."
Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the committee, wasn't buying it. He straight-up told her he didn't find her "change of heart" credible. That moment was probably the most awkward part of the entire hearing. You could see the frustration on both sides—Democrats felt she was just saying what she needed to get the job, while Republicans were trying to pivot back to her military record.
Why the Intelligence Community is Rattled
There’s a reason people like Elizabeth Warren were using words like "dangerous mistake." The DNI doesn't just read reports; they coordinate 17 different agencies. That includes the CIA, the NSA, and military intel.
📖 Related: What Category Was Harvey? The Surprising Truth Behind the Number
The concern isn't just about her politics. It’s about "the skip." Usually, a DNI has decades of experience in the "spook" world. Gabbard has a solid military background—she’s a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Reserve—but she’s never run an intelligence agency.
Critics keep pointing to three big things:
- Syria: That 2017 trip to meet Assad still haunts her.
- Russia: Her comments about "legitimate security concerns" regarding Ukraine have made NATO allies very nervous.
- Snowden: She’s been a vocal supporter of Edward Snowden, which is basically heresy in the halls of the NSA.
The "Clean House" Mandate
On the flip side, her supporters think the "lack of experience" is actually her biggest strength. They want a disruptor. The narrative from the Trump camp is that the intelligence community has been "weaponized" against political enemies.
During the floor debate, Senate Majority Leader John Thune called her a "patriot" who would refocus the mission on actual threats rather than politics. Basically, the goal is to stop the "unbiased analysis" from being biased by what they call the "Deep State."
👉 See also: When Does Joe Biden's Term End: What Actually Happened
It's a high-stakes gamble. If she succeeds, she’ll be the one who finally reformed a bloated bureaucracy. If she fails, or if she leaks something sensitive to an adversary, the 52 senators who voted "yea" are going to have a lot of explaining to do.
What Happens Now?
Gabbard was sworn in almost immediately after the vote. She’s already started making moves at the ODNI headquarters in McLean.
One of the first things she has to do is certify the very surveillance programs she used to hate. It’s a bit of a "welcome to the machine" moment. She also has to rebuild trust with foreign intelligence partners like the "Five Eyes" (UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand). Reports are already surfacing that some of these countries are being a bit more "careful" with what they share.
Practical Steps for Following the Fallout
If you're trying to keep track of how this plays out in the real world, watch these three things:
- The FISA Reauthorization: Watch how Gabbard handles the next big debate on Section 702. Will she keep her "new" stance?
- Personnel Changes: Keep an eye on who she brings in as deputies. If she stocks the office with political loyalists rather than career pros, expect more fireworks in the Senate.
- The President's Daily Brief: The DNI is responsible for what the President hears every morning. If the tone of those briefings shifts toward more isolationist foreign policy, you'll know she's exerting her influence.
Basically, the Tulsi Gabbard confirmation vote was just the opening act. The real drama starts now that she actually has the badge.
To stay updated on how the intelligence community is reacting to the new leadership, you should regularly check the public statements from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. They’re the primary body responsible for oversight, and any friction between Gabbard and the career staff will likely surface there first during quarterly briefings.