Tulsi Gabbard used the same easily cracked password for years for different online accounts, report says
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard used the same password across separate online accounts for years, according to a new report.
Before becoming the head of the intelligence community, Gabbard used the same password for multiple email addresses and online accounts while she served in Congress, including while working on the House Committees for Armed Services and Homeland Security, Wired reported. The revelation suggests Gabbard, who now oversees 18 intelligence organizations, was not adhering to simple online security best practices for years.
The report comes months after it was disclosed that she was one of the Trump officials involved in the so-called Signalgate group chat in which U.S. military strikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen were discussed. Signal is not approved by the Pentagon for discussion of sensitive information.
The Independent has reached out to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for comment.
Gabbard served as a Democratic congresswoman of Hawaii from 2013 through 2021. She appeared to have used the same password from 2012 through 2018 for her Gmail, MyFitnessPal, LinkedIn and other personal accounts, tranches of breached records published within the period show, Wired reported. This password does not appear to have been used with her government accounts.
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency recommends using long, random and unique passwords on all personal and business accounts, stressing that each password should be 'used for one and only one account.'
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard reportedly used the same password for her personal accounts for years while she served in Congress (AP)
The password includes the word 'shraddha' – a term that has come up in previous reporting related to Gabbard's alleged involvement with a cult: the Science of Identity Foundation, an off-shoot of the Hare Krishna movement in which Gabbard was raised, the Wall Street Journal reported in January.
Former Science of Identity followers told the Journal they believed that Gabbard had been initiated and given the name 'Shraddha Dasi.'
After the Journal reported Gabbard's link to the group, her team accused the newspaper of spreading 'Hinduphobic smears and other lies.' But this week, Gabbard spokesperson Oliva Coleman denied the association with the Science of Identity and noted that any data breaches occurred ages ago.
'The data breaches you're referring to occurred almost 10 years ago, and the passwords have changed multiple times since,' Coleman told Wired.
'As our deputy chief of staff has already made clear on a number of occasions, the DNI has never and doesn't have affiliation with that organization. Attempting to smear the DNI as being in a cult is bigoted behavior,' she added.
Gabbard's chief of staff also doubled down on the denial of her association with the group, telling the outlet: 'Your bigoted lies and smears of a cabinet member and your story fomenting hinduphobia is noted.'
When grilled by Congress about her participation in the Signal group chat, she refused to say whether she used the app on her personal phone.
'I won't speak to this because it's under review by the National Security Council,' Gabbard said. She insisted that no classified material was shared in the chat.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
17 minutes ago
- CBS News
GOP leaders cite L.A. immigration protests to push for quick passage of Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
Washington — The White House and Republican leaders in Congress are urging lawmakers to quickly get behind the centerpiece of President Trump's legislative agenda, saying the ongoing immigration protests in Los Angeles adds urgency to the push to secure additional resources for border security. House Speaker Mike Johnson said on X on Monday that the legislation, which addresses Mr. Trump's tax, energy and immigration priorities, "provides the ESSENTIAL funding needed to secure our nation[']s borders." Republicans call the legislation the "one big, beautiful bill." "The lawlessness happening in LA is ANOTHER reason why we need to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill IMMEDIATELY," Johnson said, pledging that Congress will support Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who he said are "fighting to keep Americans safe against illegal aliens AND the radical left." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt shared a similar message earlier Monday, saying the scenes unfolding in some areas of Los Angeles "prove that we desperately need more immigration enforcement personnel and resources." "America must reverse the invasion unleashed by Joe Biden of millions of unvetted illegal aliens into our country," Leavitt said in a post on X. "That's why President Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill funds at least one million annual removals and hires 10,000 new ICE personnel, 5,000 new customs officers, and 3,000 new Border Patrol agents." Speaker of the House Mike Johnson holds a press conference after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Trump's agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025, in Washington, legislation is now in the hands of the Senate after the House narrowly approved it last month following weeks of intraparty disagreement over its components. Though the bulk of the funding allocated in the legislation goes toward tax cuts, it also includes resources aimed at bolstering border security and defense. It provides $46.5 billion for the border wall, $4.1 billion to hire Border Patrol agents and other personnel and more than $2 billion for signing and retention bonuses for agents. It also imposes an additional $1,000 fee for people who are filing for asylum in the U.S. The disagreement among Republicans over the bill has largely centered on cuts meant to offset the bill's spending, including restrictions to Medicaid. In the House's razor-thin GOP majority, the disagreements threatened to tank the bill's progress at every stage. And as the bill moved to the Senate for consideration last week, Johnson warned the upper chamber against making significant changes that would throw off the delicate balance. Senate Republicans initially voiced support for separating the complicated tax components and border security provisions into two separate bills to deliver Mr. Trump a victory on immigration early on in his tenure. But House Republicans opposed the approach, expressing doubts that the president's agenda could pass through the narrow GOP majority in the lower chamber in separate parts. Senate Republicans are now seeking to amend the House-passed bill, sending it back to the House for approval with a goal of getting the legislation to the president's desk by the July 4 holiday. And with a 53-seat majority, the upper chamber can afford to lose just three Republicans. Last week, opposition from Elon Musk threatened to throw a wrench into the legislation's progress, after he stoked concerns by fiscal hawks about the bill's impact on the deficit. The episode, which began with Musk calling the bill "a disgusting abomination," erupted into a dramatic and public feud between Musk and the president last week. But the dispute did not appear to spark significant new opposition the the bill in Congress. The urgency expressed Monday surrounding securing additional border resources comes as Mr. Trump called for the National Guard to enforce order in the L.A. area amid protests over activity by ICE, prompting a clash with California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Newsom warned that the move would inflame the situation, while urging that there is no shortage of law enforcement. The governor indicated late Sunday that his office plans to sue the Trump administration over Mr. Trump's move. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the president's move on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" Sunday, claiming Newsom "has proven that he makes bad decisions." "The president knows that [Newsom] makes bad decisions, and that's why the president chose the safety of this community over waiting for Gov. Newsom to get some sanity," Noem added.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
MN House, Senate convene for special session to pass state budget
Minnesota lawmakers returned to the Capitol Monday morning to complete the state's next two-year budget as agencies prepared to warn thousands of government employees of a potential government shutdown next month. Most of the state government only has funding through the end of June after the Legislature failed to pass the majority of the bills that form the roughly $66 billion state budget by the end of the regular legislative session on May 19. Gov. Tim Walz called a special session so lawmakers can finish their work. State leaders finalized the details in a series of mostly closed meetings over the last few weeks. The Senate and House went into session at 10 a.m. and are expected to finish their work by Tuesday morning. However, there's no guarantee that will happen. Democratic-Farmer-Labor and Republican legislative leaders and the governor may have signed an agreement to finish up the special session by 7 a.m. Tuesday, but nothing can stop other state senators and representatives from introducing amendments and engaging in lengthy debate on controversial bills. Some bills that are part of the budget deal between Walz, the tied House and DFL majority Senate may pass on thin margins. A proposal to end state-funded health insurance for adults in the U.S. without legal immigration status is opposed by many DFLers and may only pass with the support of Republicans and the DFL leaders who signed the agreement. Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, and House DFL Leader Melissa Hortman, of Brooklyn Park, have said they agreed to remove coverage for adults to avert a government shutdown, which would interrupt services on a much larger scale. The immigrant care proposal was the first bill the House took up Monday morning, and representatives continued to debate the matter as noon approached. If the measure passes both chambers, Walz would have a tough time vetoing it. Republicans managed to get DFLers to agree to tie the activation of health care spending to ending MinnesotaCare for around 17,000 adults in the state who came to the U.S. illegally. Meanwhile, GOP lawmakers have expressed reservations about the tax and transportation bills. The tax bill includes an increase to the sales tax on cannabis, and Republican leadership had initially said it wouldn't support any new taxes, and some members may stick to that pledge. There were also questions on Friday about whether a proposal to shift $93 million in sales tax revenue from metro counties to the Metropolitan Council would survive floor votes, as members of both parties might turn on shifting money from local governments to a central planning agency. This is a developing story that will update throughout the day. Letters: It's unfortunate that we can't have certain conversations Gov. Tim Walz calls for special session for Legislature Monday Timeline for Minnesota special session blurry as budget talks continue MN government return to office order kicks in as shutdown layoffs loom Ramsey County: Economic Development Authority to allow flexibility on housing projects
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Trump Could Use The Insurrection Act To Deploy Troops In LA
As protests continue to flare in Los Angeles over the Trump administration carrying out immigration raids and deploying National Guard troops to the area, President Donald Trump has floated the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act over objections from California's governor and the mayor of LA. Invoking the Insurrection Act, which generally gives the president the authority to quell rebellion or unrest by deploying the military, would be an escalation of the administration's actions so far in California. On Saturday, Trump deployed at least 300 National Guard troops to downtown Los Angeles after thousands of protesters took to the streets. They largely concentrated themselves in the city's garment district, where federal agents had started conducting raids for undocumented workers on Friday. According to the Department of Homeland Security, rioters assaulted multiple ICE officers, 'slashed tires, defaced buildings and taxpayer funded property,' the agency said in a statement on Saturday. (The agency also singled out several Democratic lawmakers, accusing them of 'villainizing and demonizing' ICE agents.) Local news station KTLA reported Monday that at least five LAPD officers have been injured, requiring medical care. Six other officers experienced minor injuries that did require hospitalization. Many protesters were not violent nor particularly destructive, but some individuals lobbed rocks and fireworks at police, or set driverless cars on fire. Los Angeles police made roughly 150 arrests on Sunday, according to The New York Times. Law enforcement used flash-bangs and rubber bullets against protesters. During a live broadcast on Sunday, police hit a journalist in the leg with a rubber bullet. Trump signed a proclamation late Saturday that mobilized the Guard to respond to protests against the raids, claiming the demonstrations interfered with the 'faithful execution of federal immigration laws.' As tensions escalated on Sunday, the Pentagon said it was prepared to send in at least 500 active U.S. Marines to Los Angeles. Trump's proclamation is not an invocation of the Insurrection Act but instead relies on Title 10, or 10 USC 12406, a federal code that allows him to wield his authority as president to federalize the National Guard but only under very limited circumstances. Those circumstances include: an actual foreign invasion or the threat of a foreign invasion, an actual or threatened rebellion against 'the authority of the government of the United States,' or when the president is unable to executive the nation's laws with 'regular forces.' Before boarding Air Force One on Sunday, Trump was asked by reporters whether he intended to invoke the Insurrection Act outright. 'Depends on whether or not there's an insurrection,' he said, adding that he wouldn't let protesters 'get away with it.' 'We're not going to let them get away with it. We're going to have troops everywhere, we're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart,' Trump said. California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass have objected to the White House's use of the National Guard, and Newsom has said he intends to sue the administration. Newsom called the move by Trump to federalize California's National Guard 'purposefully inflammatory.' Typically, it is a state's governor who has control over that state's Guard, not the federal government. And notably, within Trump's proclamation is language that appears to clarify this. Under Title 10, the president is allowed to call the Guard into federal service in any state but 'orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.' The Insurrection Act of 1807 — which is a bit of a misnomer since it is actually a combination of several statutes enacted by Congress from 1792 to 1871 — is a federal law that gives the president the power to deploy the military or National Guard to put down domestic rebellions, uprisings or other fits of civil unrest. The act uses Congress' constitutional authority to 'provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.' When the Insurrection Act is invoked, it suspends the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the military from getting involved in local or state law enforcement. Invoking the law is rare; it has occurred just 30 times in history. The last time was in 1992 as riots gripped Los Angeles following the acquittal of police officers accused of viciously beating Rodney King and California's governor called on then-President George H.W. Bush for help. Trump floated the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act in 2020 after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis sparked a wave of nationwide protests, most of which were peaceful. Martial law and the Insurrection Act are not one and the same. The Insurrection Act is invoked, typically, to have the military assist civilian law enforcement. Martial law refers to when the military becomes enforcers of local and state laws. The Supreme Court has never ruled on whether the president can unilaterally declare martial law or whether he would need Congress to approve the declaration. A president can use the Insurrection Act in a number of ways. For example, its provisions state that troops can be deployed under the act regardless of whether a state asks for them to be sent there. And the law cites various reasons presidents may send them. Troops can be deployed to quell violent unrest or to simply enforce federal law in a given locality. (The latest president to invoke the Insurrection Act against a state's will was Lyndon Johnson when he federalized the Alabama National Guard to protect civil rights protesters that marched from Selma to Montgomery.) The president does not need congressional approval to invoke the Insurrection Act, though he is required to at least issue a proclamation first that demands anyone causing unrest leave that area before troops are sent in. Many provisions built into the Insurrection Act are vague. One statute gives the president the right to suppress rebellion, domestic violence or some 'unlawful combination or conspiracy' in any state impeding U.S. law. Conspiracy is not defined in this Insurrection Act statute, meaning, as the Brennan Center for Justice notes, this provision under the Insurrection Act umbrella could be interpreted to mean that the president can use military force against any two people he thinks are conspiring to break the law. Trump Sets National Guard On Los Angeles As Protesters Counter Immigration Raids: Live Updates California Governor Plans To File Lawsuit Against Trump Over National Guard Deployment To Protests 'Arrest Me, Let's Go': Newsom Punches Back At Trump Border Czar Kamala Harris Torches Trump Over 'Cruel, Calculated' Move Targeting Los Angeles Trump Deploys National Guard As Los Angeles Protests Against Immigration Agents Continue
