Trump's Tulsi problem: Wanted a minion, picked a maverick
Tulsi Gabbard
has found that US President
Donald Trump
may pick a maverick when he actually wants a minion. When Gabbard was named Director of National Intelligence by Trump in November 2024, it symbolized one of the most dramatic ideological journeys in recent American politics. A former Democrat who once vocally opposed Trump's foreign policy, Gabbard's trajectory from progressive dissident to a Republican-aligned intelligence chief highlighted not only her political adaptability but also Trump's penchant for tapping unconventional allies.
Yet less than a year into her tenure, the alliance appears to be fraying. Trump's public rebuke of Gabbard on Friday, accusing her of being "wrong" about Iran's nuclear ambitions, has cast doubt on her future in the administration and underscored the volatile dynamics within Trump's camp as he navigates his comeback bid.
What first riled Trump was a video Gabbard posted on X on June 10 in which she warned that "political elite and warmongers" are "carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers," putting the world "on the brink of nuclear annihilation." A person close to the president told Politico that he viewed the video as Gabbard warning him not to greenlight Israel attacking Iran.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
발톱무좀 고민이신분! 제발 이 글 필독하세요!
홈시네라이프
더 알아보기
Undo
Also Read:
Nuclear war! US intel chief warns world is on the edge of annihilation
From DNC pariah to MAGA ally
Live Events
You Might Also Like:
Trump vs Tulsi Gabbard: Is US President planning to fire US spy chief over provocative anti-war video?
Gabbard's departure from the Democratic Party in October 2022 did not come as a shock. Her criticism of the party's 'warmongering elite' and her staunch opposition to interventionist foreign policy had long made her an outsider. Yet few anticipated how quickly she would pivot toward Trump's orbit. By mid-2023, Gabbard was appearing frequently on conservative media, praising Trump-era foreign policy and criticizing President Biden's approach to Ukraine and Iran. Her endorsement of Trump in August 2024 was a significant political moment—particularly as it came while Trump was consolidating his position in the Republican primary.
Gabbard's appeal to Trump was multi-dimensional: her military service lent credibility to Trump's America First messaging; her defection from the Democrats reinforced his narrative of a party in disarray; and her rising profile in conservative circles offered a fresh face to appeal to independent voters. Trump's decision to nominate her as DNI in November 2024 surprised many but aligned with his history of installing loyalists in key positions, often outside traditional establishment picks.
Trump values loyalty but is also attracted to figures who carry an aura of independence, so long as it doesn't directly challenge his authority. Gabbard was useful to Trump because she legitimized his anti-establishment credentials while also appealing to veterans and libertarian-leaning conservatives. Her appointment as DNI was also tactical: Trump sought to shake up the intelligence community, which he has long viewed with suspicion. She, as an outsider with military gravitas and a maverick reputation, fit the bill. Her initial cooperation and alignment with Trump's broad foreign policy themes -- anti-interventionism, skepticism of the intelligence "deep state," and a focus on China -- made her a valuable asset.
But Trump's pattern of burning bridges with appointees who assert independence has a long precedent, and Gabbard may now be next in line.
You Might Also Like:
Trump says Tulsi Gabbard was 'wrong' about Iran, Israeli strikes could be 'very hard to stop'
Is Trump preparing to fire Gabbard?
Earlier, a Politico report had said that Trump had increasingly mused about nixing Gabbard's office completely. Trump thought Gabbard did not add anything to "any conversation", the report said citing insiders. A few days ago, reports claimed that he is relying on a high-profile group of Cabinet picks and not those who are supposed to be advising him by the virtue of their posts: Gabbard and Defense secretary Pete Hegseth.
The rupture had begun with Gabbard's testimony to Congress in March 2025. She stated that the U.S. intelligence community 'continued to assess that Tehran is not currently pursuing a nuclear weapon,' echoing long-standing assessments from both the Biden and previous Trump-era intelligence reports. Trump, however, has taken a harder line in recent months, arguing that Iran is 'weeks away' from acquiring a nuclear bomb -- statements likely influenced by his desire to project strength in the lead-up to the 2026 midterms and potentially 2028. When Gabbard's testimony was raised in a press gaggle on Monday evening, Trump dismissed her comments, saying, 'I don't care what she says.' By Friday, the rebuke was more explicit.
Trump's public rebuke of Gabbard suggests a brewing frustration with her unwillingness to bend the intelligence narrative to align with his political messaging, a pattern seen in past Trump appointments, from James Comey to John Bolton. The public criticism, particularly over an issue as significant as Iran's nuclear program, is a red flag. For Trump, public disagreements with his appointees often precede dismissal. Gabbard's claim that her March testimony was 'taken out of context' suggests she is attempting damage control, but it may not be enough.
Behind the scenes, Trump loyalists have reportedly grown uneasy with Gabbard's growing media presence and her continued framing of intelligence assessments in ways that don't always align with Trump's messaging. If Trump believes Gabbard is undermining his narrative, especially on a high-profile national security issue, her tenure may be on borrowed time.
A dismissal, however, could come with risks. Firing Gabbard could alienate independent voters and veterans who see her as a voice of reason within the Trump movement. It may also reignite debates over Trump's handling of intelligence during his prior presidency.
If removed, Gabbard has a number of options. Her reputation as a principled non-interventionist still holds sway with a segment of the right—and even some independents. She could pivot to a media career, possibly on platforms like Fox News, Newsmax, or a new independent outlet. Politically, she could mount a Senate run or become a prominent surrogate for another faction within the GOP, possibly even challenging Trumpism from within if his grip on the party begins to loosen. Alternatively, she may bide her time, reemerging post-Trump with renewed relevance in a reshaped Republican landscape.
The Trump-Gabbard saga encapsulates the volatility of MAGA politics. Their alliance was one of strategic convenience more than ideological cohesion. Trump elevated Gabbard because she was useful; now, as she asserts independence on sensitive intelligence matters, she risks becoming expendable.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
28 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Russia makes biggest 24-hour Ukraine advance in over a year
The Russian Army made its biggest 24-hour advance into Ukraine in over a year on Tuesday (August 12, 2025) just ahead of the Trump-Putin summit, according to an AFP analysis of data from the U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War. The Russian Army took or claimed 110 square kilometres (42.5 square miles) on August 12 compared to the previous day. It was the most since late May 2024. In recent months, Moscow has typically taken five or six days to progress at such a pace, although Russian advances have accelerated in recent weeks. The U.S. and Russian presidents, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, are to meet in Alaska on Friday. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged Tuesday that Russian troops had advanced by up to 10 kilometres (six miles) near the eastern coal mining town of Dobropillia, but that Kyiv would soon "destroy them." Russia said Wednesday that it had taken two villages close to Dobropillia. About 70% of Russia's advances in Ukraine so far this year are in the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine, which the Kremlin claimed to have annexed in September 2022. As of August 12, Moscow controlled or claimed to control 79 percent of the region, up from 62 percent a year ago. The Russian Army has also been attempting to seize the mining town of Pokrovsk for more than 18 months, following its capture of Bakhmut in May 2023. The last two major cities held by Kyiv in the region are also at risk. They are Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, which is an important logistical hub for the front. Russian progress in Ukraine has accelerated every month since April. Between August 12, 2024 and August 12, 2025, the Russian army captured more than 6,100 square kilometres, four times more than the previous year, according to the AFP analysis of the institute's data. However, these Russian advances account for less than 1 percent of pre-war Ukraine's territory, including Crimea and Donbass. Russia currently has full or partial control over 19 percent of Ukrainian territory.
The Hindu
28 minutes ago
- The Hindu
U.S. to probe Smithsonian museums to remove 'partisan narratives'
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration said on Tuesday (August 12, 2025) it had ordered a sweeping review of some Smithsonian museums to ensure their exhibitions laud American exceptionalism and "remove divisive or partisan narratives." Mr. Trump has moved to assert control over major American cultural institutions since starting his second term in January, while also slashing arts and humanities funding. The Smithsonian is one of America's most hallowed institutions, with its vast network of museums boasting tens of millions of artifacts for public display. A letter to the institution's secretary Lonnie Bunch, published on the White House website on Tuesday, said the administration would carry out a "comprehensive internal review of selected Smithsonian museums and exhibitions." "This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions," said the letter, signed by three senior White House officials. It will target eight major museums, including the National Museum of American History, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the National Museum of the American Indian, the letter said. The review aims to assess "tone, historical framing, and alignment with American ideals" across exhibitions, educational materials and digital content ahead of the 250th anniversary of the nation's founding next year. The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History removed last month a label referring to Trump's two impeachments, a move its parent institution later denied came under White House pressure. The review requires that the museums submit extensive documentation -- including exhibition plans, wall text, educational materials, grant information and internal guidelines -- within 30 days. The Smithsonian did not respond immediately to AFP's request for comment. It said in a statement to The New York Times that its "work is grounded in a deep commitment to scholarly excellence, rigorous research and the accurate, factual presentation of history." "We are reviewing the letter with this commitment in mind... and will continue to collaborate constructively with the White House, Congress and our governing Board of Regents," it said.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
28 minutes ago
- First Post
Why Trump's tariffs on India are a colossal mistake
As a long-term Donald Trump supporter, it pains me to see the mistakes he is making regarding his treatment of India. Slapping India with 50 per cent tariffs is total madness! Starting August 7, a 25 per cent levy, then another 25 per cent penalty for buying Russian oil—framed as 'secondary tariffs' to squeeze Moscow over Ukraine. But this isn't smart. It's a blunder that alienates a powerhouse ally, hurts America's wallet, and weakens its global clout. In short, it is a colossal mistake, and I fail to understand why he is being so hostile. India, the world's fastest-growing major economy, deserves respect—not bully tactics. Here's why Trump is wrong! STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Strategically, this is a foolish decision. India is America's indispensable shield against China's aggression in the Indo-Pacific. The Quad—US, India, Japan, Australia—hinges on this bond to keep sea lanes free and Beijing in check. Trump risks shattering it. Wiser heads have called it an 'enormous mistake,' warning it will push New Delhi toward Moscow and Beijing after decades of US courtship. Prime Minister Narendra Modi? He's unbowed! He's prioritising India's energy security for 1.4 billion people and refusing to halt Russian imports that stabilise global prices. Back in 2022, America encouraged India to buy Russian crude oil to cool markets post-invasion. Now? Flip-flop betrayal! This idiocy accelerates India's BRICS pivot, ditching dollar dominance and eroding US leverage. India, with its booming tech hubs and military might, won't kneel. Trump's short-sightedness empowers adversaries, turning a vital partner into a reluctant rival. Economically, it is a disaster! China guzzles more Russian oil than anyone—yet no tariffs there? Trump spares Beijing while hammering India, exposing his selective rage. America itself trades $3.5 billion with Russia yearly, despite sanctions. India's 36 per cent reliance on Russian crude? Pure necessity—cheap fuel for growth, averting global spikes above $80/barrel that would slam U.S. consumers too. These tariffs crush India's exports: textiles, gems, autos—sectors employing millions. US supply chains? Disrupted! India powers America's pharma and IT—think life-saving drugs and software. Exports could plummet 40-50 per cent, shaving India's GDP by 0.3 per cent—but the ripple effects hit US jobs in linked industries. Trump killed a potential deal, branding India a 'bad partner'. Yet India's offers—cutting tariffs on US goods, boosting defence buys—were rebuffed. India is not exploiting anyone. It's fuelling about 7 per cent growth, lifting millions from poverty, creating markets for US firms like Apple and Ford. Diplomatically? Trump is isolating America, not Russia. The EU still imports 19 per cent of its LNG from Moscow. Turkey? Same deal. But India, a strategic gem, gets slammed. New Delhi rightly responds by saying: 'Unfair, unjustified!' and vows to safeguard its interests after US hypocrisy on Venezuela sanctions that burned India before. Trump's threats of broader 'secondary sanctions' also ring hollow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What is impressive is India's diplomatic response—no knee-jerk retaliation, but a focus on talks. Trump is prioritising short-term Russia pressure over long-game alliances. But India won't flinch—the economy is resilient, stocks are steady despite threats. Alienating India empowers China. To whose advantage is this? Trump's error here will cost jobs, security, and influence. India will continue to rise regardless—vibrant, innovative, visionary. I hope Trump listens to better voices and changes his antagonistic approach. Making America Great means working with India to make it great too! Trump must now reverse course and work with PM Modi, as this is in the best interests of the world. David Vance is a political commentator and author. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
