Tulsi Gabbard

For years, Americans were told that the greatest threat to national security was an unelected “deep state” secretly pulling the strings of government.

Then came reports that the nation’s top intelligence official may have spent much of her political career receiving guidance that allegedly originated from a reclusive spiritual guru whose followers regard him as an enlightened authority. Apparently, the deep state was fine. The deep ashram was where the real action was.

According to a lengthy investigation by The Washington Post, thousands of pages of documents and internal communications suggest that policy recommendations, political messaging, legislative ideas, and strategic guidance flowed through networks associated with the Science of Identity Foundation and its founder, Chris Butler, a spiritual leader whom former members have described as cult-like. Gabbard and her supporters dispute the characterization and have accused critics of religious prejudice.

Let’s pause and appreciate how absurd this sounds. Imagine applying for a security clearance.

Question 17: “Do you maintain relationships with any foreign governments?”

“No.”

Question 18: “Do you receive policy guidance through mysterious intermediaries connected to a guru revered by followers as a divine authority?”

“Well, that’s complicated.”

Security clearance granted.

The issue isn’t religion. America has had presidents, senators, judges, generals, and intelligence officials from virtually every major faith tradition. The issue is whether someone entrusted with the nation’s most sensitive secrets is exercising independent judgment. When reports emerge suggesting that political guidance may have originated from a figure operating outside normal democratic accountability, people are entitled to ask questions. Those questions become even more reasonable when the official in question is the Director of National Intelligence.

Yet somehow, this barely registers in a political culture that has become immune to absurdity. The same government that mobilized National Guard troops to protect a malfunctioning reflecting pool and threatened decade-long prison sentences over peeling paint apparently saw nothing unusual about placing vast intelligence authorities in the hands of someone dogged for years by questions about outside spiritual influence. The standards seem to have become remarkably flexible.

Perhaps that is the ultimate lesson of modern politics. We no longer ask whether something is normal. We merely ask whether it is the strangest thing that happened this week. A guru allegedly shaping the political thinking of the nation’s intelligence chief would once have generated months of hearings and front-page coverage. Today it competes for attention with algae blooms, mystery vandals, billion-dollar ballrooms, and peace deals that look suspiciously like the agreements they were supposed to replace.

In another era, Americans might have been alarmed to learn that the nation’s intelligence apparatus could be influenced by a figure operating outside government channels. In 2026, it barely cracks the top ten.

In addition to taking her cues from a flaky spiritual guru, many national security officials and lawmakers were concerned even before she was nominated that Gabbard had become a favorite of Russian state media because of positions she had taken on issues such as the war in Ukraine, NATO expansion, and U.S. foreign policy. Russian television and media outlets frequently amplified her comments when those comments aligned with Kremlin narratives.

Critics cited several issues:

• Her 2017 meeting with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.

• Statements about Ukraine and U.S.-funded biological research facilities that critics said echoed Russian talking points.

• Concerns that allies might become reluctant to share intelligence if they believed the intelligence community was being led by someone perceived as sympathetic to Russian viewpoints.

Trump’s Cabinet is already a traveling circus of sycophants, cranks, conspiracy theorists, and underqualified loyalists. Yet appointing someone this compromised to oversee America’s most sensitive intelligence was so incandescently reckless that it manages to stand out even in a crowd that includes RFK Jr., Pete Hegseth, and whoever is currently investigating algae at the Reflecting Pool.