The Trump transition team has raised concerns over what they allege to be deliberate procedural delays by Senate Democrats in the confirmation process for Tulsi Gabbard, nominated for Director of National Intelligence.

The transition team claims that the delay on Gabbard's process is jeopardizing national security, especially in light of recent terror attacks, while procedural disagreements continue over necessary paperwork, as Fox News reports.

As of now, a hearing for Gabbard's confirmation has not been scheduled. The Trump transition team has accused Senate Democrats of "stonewalling" her nomination, citing that these delays could impact national security.

Transition Team Raises Concerns Over Safety

The transition spokesperson, Alexa Henning, has criticized Senate Democrats, suggesting that political games are taking precedence over national security. She voiced these concerns following recent terrorist incidents on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day, asserting the urgency for a swift confirmation process.

Procedurally, committee rules mandate that all required paperwork must be received at least one week before a hearing can be scheduled. The nomination process currently seems stalled due to various discrepancies over this paperwork.

Vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Mark Warner, has highlighted his stance that Gabbard's prehearing questions, ethics disclosures, and FBI background check have not been received. Meanwhile, Gabbard's team maintains that they have submitted all required documents on time.

Discrepancies Over Paperwork Submission

Gabbard, who possesses a top-secret security clearance from her time in the Army, is expected to undergo an expedited background check. Her spokesperson confirmed that the paperwork due on Dec. 18 was already submitted, and any additional documents due would be completed by the specified deadline.

However, Fox News Digital reported that the FBI has not confirmed the completion of the background check.

The spokesperson further accused Warner of instructing Democrat committee members to delay their meetings with Gabbard until Warner had the chance to meet her himself. This claim, however, has been denied by Warner's office.

Mixed Signals Within Senate

The communication exchanges from Tulsi Gabbard's team and Warner's office reportedly started on Nov. 27, but Warner's office did not respond until Dec. 29. Despite this delay, Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff managed to meet Gabbard prior to receiving instructions otherwise.

After Warner's team reportedly confirmed their meeting with Gabbard, Sens. Mark Kelly and Angus King responded to engage in the process. Warner has met with Gabbard and noted that despite getting some answers, more questions about her qualifications remain.

"This role is crucial, demanding the intelligence community's independence and secure alliances," Warner said, reflecting the seriousness of the position for which Tulsi Gabbard has been nominated.

GOP Push for Prompt Hearing Before Inauguration

With national security in focus, newly appointed Senate Intel panel chairman Tom Cotton is pressing for a hearing before Inauguration Day. According to his spokesperson, the committee, nominees, and transition team aim to work together closely to achieve this goal.

Gabbard, however, has yet to be asked for her written responses to policy-related questions by the committee, a critical part of the confirmation process.

While Warner remains skeptical, asserting the importance of protecting the integrity of intelligence sharing among allies, the transition team continues to urge for Gabbard's immediate confirmation.

Henning emphasized that historically, confirming the president-elect's nominees for national security has often seen bipartisan cooperation, and she is optimistic that Lt. Col. Gabbard's hearing will proceed before Inauguration Day.

Despite the current impasse, Warner's office has continued to prompt committee members to assess Gabbard's credentials independently and meet her to ensure they come to their conclusions about her suitability for the role.

The unfolding of these events highlights the tension between the need for a swift confirmation owing to national security concerns and the procedural requirements designed to ensure a thorough vetting process in the Senate. As the timeline narrows, all parties involved seem to be under pressure to reach a resolution before the transition of powers concludes.