The Elitist Media, which insist on advancing a narrative of an administration in disarray, has chosen to do so tonight via selective omission. In this case, a key omission designed to undermine Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
Here is how ABC’s Mary Bruce, at her Mary Bruciest, characterized Gabbard’s statements:
There’s a reason I’ve long said ABC’s @MaryKBruce is the biggest liberal partisan hack in network news.
Here she is completely butchering @DNIGabbard‘s remarks to flailing Democrat Senator Ossoff, purposefully leaving out this key line: “The Intelligence Community assessed that… pic.twitter.com/uglwyVDqOz
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) March 18, 2026
JON OSSOFF: Was it the intelligence community’s assessment that nevertheless despite this obliteration there was a, quote, “imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime”, yes or no?
TULSI GABBARD: It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what and is not an imminent threat. That is up to the President, based on a volume of information…
OSSOFF: Okay. Here’s- here is the problem…No, it is… it is precisely —
GABBARD: …and intelligence that he receives.
OSSOFF: It is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States. (VIDEO SWIPE) You are here to represent the IC’s assessment of threats. That’s a quote from your own opening statement.
BRUCE: Despite what Trump has said, Gabbard told Congress that Iran had actually made no effort to rebuild its nuclear capability.
OSSOFF: And the opening statement you submitted to the committee last night also stated, quote, “there has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability,” end quote. Correct?
GABBARD: That’s right.
OSSOFF: And that’s the assessment of the intelligence community.
GABBARD: Yes.
The report intends to make Gabbard appear to be incompetent and dishonest. But it omitted this sentence from Gabbard:
A key part of this exchange reporters are intentionally leaving out. @DNIGabbard: “The Intelligence Community assessed that Iran maintained the intention to rebuild and to continue to
grow their nuclear enrichment capability.” https://t.co/BPJwltMK0g pic.twitter.com/mSPSMdTq7i— Alexa Henning (@alexahenning) March 18, 2026
GABBARD: The Intelligence Community assessed that Iran maintained the intention to rebuild and to continue to grow their nuclear enrichment capability.
That intent, despite the success of Operation Midnight Hammer, is in and of itself an imminent threat. Especially so when combined with Special Envoy Steve Witkoff’s reports on his negotiations with Iran, and with assessments of Iran’s near-future conventional weapons capabilities.But none of these things were mentioned in any of the stories, which uniformly sought to cast Gabbard in a negative light.
ABC’s was the worst among these reports, which singularly focused on Ossoff’s questioning of Gabbard. This is often the case as ABC remains the most Trump-deranged of the broadcast network newscasts.
CBS’s report on the hearing echoed familiar themes, but included this exchange between CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX):
CAITLIN HUEY-BURNS: Texas Republican John Cornyn asked CIA director John Ratcliffe whether there was any indication Iran wasn’t an imminent threat.
JOHN RATCLIFFE: Senator, no. In fact, intelligence reflects the contrary.
JOHN CORNYN: So you disagree with Mr. Kent?
RATCLIFFE: I do.
So imminence does not seem far-fetched. NBC clears this up by running the same Cornyn-Ratcliffe exchange, but with a little more added to it:
GABE GUTIERREZ: Though he did not give a time line. Still, Radcliffe pushing back on high-ranking counterterrorism official Joe Kent, who resigned in protest over the war with Iran, arguing there had been no imminent threat to the U.S.
JOHN RATCLIFFE: In fact, intelligence reflects the contrary.
JOHN CORNYN: So you disagree with Mr. Kent?
RATCLIFFE: I do. (VIDEO SWIPE) Iran has been a constant threat to the United States for an extended period of time, and posed an immediate threat at this time.
“Constant threat for an extended period of time” doesn’t bolster narrative, so it didn’t make it into the other newscasts.
What we continue to see here is an Elitist Media, drunk with Trump Derangement Syndrome, trying to muddy the waters of public opinion as much as possible as pertains to the ongoing operation in Iran. Even if that means willfully omitting an intelligence assessment from the evening news.
Click “expand” to view the transcripts of the aforementioned reports, as aired on their respective newscasts on Wednesday, March 18th, 2026:
ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT
3/18/2026
6:36 PM
DAVID MUIR: President Trump meanwhile, late today, attending the dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base honoring six more American service members killed. While today on Capitol Hill the Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was grilled, 24 hours after a top intelligence official resigned claiming there was no imminent threat from Iran. She was pressed today. Was there an imminent threat? And how she answered. Here’s Mary Bruce.
MARY BRUCE: Tonight, The White House releasing these photos. President Trump traveling to Dover Air Force Base to witness the dignified transfer of the remains of six American service members killed in this war. The trip coming 24 hours after one of his top intelligence officials resigned in protest. Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Joe Kent declaring Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation. But Trump insists it did, claiming Iran was trying to rebuild its nuclear program after the U.S. obliterated it last year. Today on Capitol Hill, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard refusing to echo the president’s words.
JON OSSOFF: Was it the intelligence community’s assessment that nevertheless despite this obliteration there was a, quote, “imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime”, yes or no?
TULSI GABBARD: It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what and is not an imminent threat. That is up to the President, based on a volume of information…
OSSOFF: Okay. Here’s- here is the problem…No, it is… it is precisely —
GABBARD: …and intelligence that he receives.
OSSOFF: It is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States. (VIDEO SWIPE) You are here to represent the IC’s assessment of threats. That’s a quote from your own opening statement.
BRUCE: Despite what Trump has said, Gabbard told Congress that Iran had actually made no effort to rebuild its nuclear capability.
OSSOFF: And the opening statement you submitted to the committee last night also stated, quote, “there has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability,” end quote. Correct?
GABBARD: That’s right.
OSSOFF: And that’s the assessment of the intelligence community.
GABBARD: Yes.
BRUCE: And, David, President Trump has said all of Iran’s leaders are dead. But today Tulsi Gabbard told Congress, quote: “the regime in Iran appears to be intact but largely degraded.” David.
MUIR: A lot of eyes on that hearing. Mary Bruce at The White House. Mary, thank you.
CBS EVENING NEWS
3/18/25
6:31 PM
TONY DOKOUPIL: Good evening. The major questions tonight on Capitol Hill: Was Iran an imminent threat to America? Was war the only option to deal with it? And after three weeks and thousands of air strikes, how much longer can the war last? CIA director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard took on those questions and more today, as average U.S. gas prices are up nearly $1 since the fighting began and many Americans say they still need answers. CBS News Congressional Correspondent Caitlin Huey-Burns followed the hearing on Capitol Hill and joins us now. Caitlin, good evening. What did we learn?
HUEY-BURNS: Good evening, Tony. Well, Trump’s Director of National Intelligence told Congress that the Iranian regime remains intact, but largely degraded. This as lawmakers pressed her on the justification for going to war.
Tulsi Gabbard sidestepped questions today about whether Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, as President Trump has claimed.
JON OSSOFF: Was it the intelligence community’s assessment that there was a, quote, “imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime”, yes or no?
TULSI GABBARD: Senator, the only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president, and he made that determination…
OSSOFF: False. This is the Worldwide Threats hearing where you present to Congress national intelligence: timely, objective, and independent of political considerations.
HUEY-BURNS: The testimony from Gabbard, a well-known war skeptic, comes the day after her deputy, top counterterrorism official Joe Kent, resigned in protest over the war, arguing the regime posed no imminent threat to our nation. Texas Republican John Cornyn asked CIA director John Ratcliffe whether there was any indication Iran wasn’t an imminent threat.
JOHN RATCLIFFE: Senator, no. In fact, intelligence reflects the contrary.
JOHN CORNYN: So you disagree with Mr. Kent?
RATCLIFFE: I do.
HUEY-BURNS: At the war’s outset, Trump claimed Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon.
DONALD TRUMP: They attempted to rebuild their nuclear program.
HUEY-BURNS: But in her prepared remarks, Gabbard wrote that after the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites last summer, there have been no efforts by the Iranians to try to rebuild their enrichment capability. A line she left out of her testimony this morning.
MARK WARNER: Was that because the president said there was an imminent threat two weeks…
GABBARD: No, sir, I recognized that the time was running long and I skipped through some of the portions of my oral…
WARNER: You chose to take —
GABBARD: My oral delivered remarks, sir.
WARNER: You chose to omit the remarks that contradict the president.
HUEY-BURNS: Senators also pressed the officials on whether the president was sufficiently briefed on the consequences for the Strait of Hormuz. Gabbard said it was a long-standing assessment that Iran would hold the Strait as leverage, but she declined to detail any of the briefings. Tony.
DOKOUPIL: Caitlin, thank you very much.
NBC NIGHTLY NEWS
3/18/25
6:32 PM
HALLIE JACKSON: We begin tonight with escalations in the Iran war pushing oil and gas prices even higher. And tonight new strikes from both sides on key energy infrastructure. Look at this- a huge fire on an Iranian gas field after it was hit. And across the Gulf States, a relentless Iranian barrage. Missiles and drones apparently targeting energy sites. Look at these two huge fireballs seen earlier in theSaudi capital of Riyadh. And here in Washington, the focus today on the rationale for the U.S. to launch the war in the first place, with top Intel officials facing tough questions about just how imminent the threat from Iran actually was. And the war now ramping up in Lebanon. Images from Beirut, showing this building collapsing, you see it there, after an Israeli strike. Israel had issued an evacuation order before the attack. We’ve got it all covered from D.C. to the Middle East, starting with Gabe Gutierrez at The White House.
GABE GUTIERREZ: Tonight, the devastating wave of U.S. airstrikes in Iran, the Pentagon saying nearly 8,000 regime targets struck so far, more than 120 Iranian vessels sunk. In a phone call with NBC News, President Trump dismissing Iranian retaliation against Israel overnight. Telling me “the attack was nothing compared to what happened to them. They’re going down. They’re losing big.” Meanwhile, a strike on an Iranian gas field, which Iran is blaming on Israel, and an Iranian attack on oil facilities in Qatar causing oil prices to spike. Vice President Vance today calling those prices a temporary blip.
JD VANCE: We’re going to take care of business, we’re going to come back home and when that happens, you’re going to see energy prices come back down to reality.
GUTIERREZ: All as Israel overnight killed Iran’s intelligence minister, who helped launch that recent brutal crackdown on Iranian protesters.
TULSI GABBARD: As of this moment, the regime maintains power within Iran, even though they are vastly degraded on almost every front.
GUTIERREZ: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe testifying on Capitol Hill, describing the threat from Iran before U.S. airstrikes.
JOHN RATCLIFFE: If left unimpeded, yes, Senator, they would have the ability to range missiles to the continental U.S.
GUTIERREZ: Though he did not give a time line. Still, Radcliffe pushing back on high-ranking counterterrorism official Joe Kent, who resigned in protest over the war with Iran, arguing there had been no imminent threat to the U.S.
JOHN RATCLIFFE: In fact, intelligence reflects the contrary.
JOHN CORNYN: So you disagree with Mr. Kent?
RATCLIFFE: I do. (VIDEO SWIPE) Iran has been a constant threat to the United States for an extended period of time, and posed an immediate threat at this time.
GUTIERREZ: Later, Democrats pressing Gabbard, who’d previously been a skeptic of U.S. intervention abroad.
JON OSSOFF: Was it the intelligence community’s assessment that there was a, quote, “imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime”, yes or no?
TULSI GABBARD: Senator, the only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president…
(VIDEO SWIPE)
OSSOFF: You’re evading a question, because to provide a candid response to the Committee would contradict a statement from The White House.
JACKSON: Gabe is joining us now from The White House. Gabe, there’s also a focus on that critical Strait of Hormuz, getting it back open. And you have some new reporting on that tonight?
GUTIERREZ: Yes, Hallie. A U.S. official tells NBC News the military dropped four 5,000-pound deep penetrating bombs, often called bunker busters, that slammed into facilities holding Iran’s anti-ship cruise missiles along the Strait of Hormuz. But it did not wipe out the entire inventory yet. This is the first known time the U.S. military has used these in combat. Hallie.
JACKSON: Gabe Gutierrez. Thank you.
