[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 30, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4880-S4881]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Nomination of Joseph Kent

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the National Counterterrorism Center 
plays a crucial role keeping our country safe. The Agency is 
responsible for collecting and analyzing intelligence to help protect 
our Nation from terrorist threats. It is sober, serious work that 
requires a level head and a commitment to putting the mission before 
politics, which is why I am deeply alarmed that Republicans are 
charging ahead to put it under the thumb of a conspiracy theorist who 
espouses White supremacist views and is patently unqualified for this 
important role in just about every way imaginable.
  You are supposed to pick people with qualifications, but just about 
everything we know about Joe Kent is disqualifying for this role and 
alarming. There is his track record chumming it up with White 
supremacists, from discussing campaign strategy with avowed White 
supremacist Nick Fuentes to giving an interview to a guy who has 
defended Hitler, to rallying with the founder of a far-right 
paramilitary group. And let's not forget the Proud Boy that he hired as 
a consultant.
  And it is not just his connections. There is his own bigoted 
statements, like claiming Islam is ``based on conquest at its core'' 
and pushing racist ``replacement theory'' rhetoric. That is alarming 
stuff. Let's be frank: These are White supremacist views, and they 
should have absolutely no place in our Federal Government.
  And then there is his track record of politicizing intelligence, like 
when he was caught redhanded pushing to change intelligence reports--
facts be damned--so they would agree with Trump and attack Biden.
  Joe Kent also has a track record of peddling conspiracies and 
attacking law enforcement, from saying our country is at war with a 
``leftist cabal'' or calling to completely defund the FBI and ATF, 
Agencies that keep Americans safe from foreign and domestic threats, or 
pushing the offensive and false conspiracy that the January 6 
insurrection was somehow a deep-state plot.
  You want to know who in the Federal Government was behind the 
insurrection? How about we start with the man in the White House who 
promised to march to the Capitol with them. How about we start with the 
President who calls rioters patriots. How about we start with the guy 
who pardoned violent cop beaters en masse.
  If you cannot be honest with the American people about January 6, you 
have no business being trusted with protecting our democracy. It should 
be that simple.
  And let's not forget, Joe Kent was on the infamous Signalgate chat, 
where classified attack plans were discussed with no regard for 
security, for law, not to mention the safety of our servicemembers.
  You know what he had to say about that? He said no classified 
information was discussed. That was the answer he gave at his Senate 
confirmation hearing.
  Now, it is obvious that answer was a complete lie. Last week, the 
Pentagon's watchdog confirmed there was classified information in that 
Signal chat.
  So was Kent being intentionally dishonest or does he not understand 
what classified information is? Either way, it is completely 
disqualifying, which, as I think I made clear, is pretty much the 
pattern here.
  So here is my warning to Republicans. Confirming someone like Joe 
Kent to lead the National Counterterrorism Center makes about as much 
sense as putting Donald Trump in charge of releasing the Epstein files 
after all that we have learned. We have all the evidence we could ever 
need in the public record right now that he is not going to do the 
right thing, and we have no reason to believe he will do this 
important, high-stakes work in a serious, impartial manner, let alone a 
competent one.
  So I am here to urge all my colleagues to join me in doing exactly 
what people back in Washington State have done each time they were 
asked to trust Joe Kent: vote no.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I want to thank my friend from Washington 
State. I want to follow some of her concerns. It is pretty remarkable, 
so I do rise with grave concern to speak in opposition to the 
nomination of Joe Kent to lead the National Counterterrorism Center.
  Others may have already said this, but this is not a nomination we 
should treat lightly. The Director of NCTC plays a central role in 
asserting and integrating intelligence on terrorist threats, both 
foreign and domestic. That person must be trusted to tell the truth and 
to uphold the core principles of the intelligence community: 
objectivity, nonpartisanship, and fidelity to fact. Unfortunately, Mr. 
Kent has shown, time and again, that he cannot meet the standard.
  Now, let me acknowledge at the front end that I respect Mr. Kent 
because he spent much of his adult life in service to this country. He 
enlisted in the U.S. Army at 18. He served for two decades as a Green 
Beret. He deployed overseas 11 times before working as a field 
operative for the CIA. That record of service deserves recognition.
  And I do not question Mr. Kent's devotion to our country. However, 
that service, while admirable, cannot overcome a consistent pattern of 
questionable judgment and false statements, at odds with the 
objectivity he would be expected to uphold as Director of NCTC.
  In May, Congress received clear written evidence that Mr. Kent, while 
serving as Chief of Staff to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi 
Gabbard, sought to manipulate intelligence to match a political 
narrative promoted by President Trump. Specifically, after the National 
Intelligence Council assessed that the Venezuelan Government was not 
directing the movement of Tren de Aragua--the Tren de Aragua gang--into 
the United States, Mr. Kent pressured career analysts to alter that 
conclusion, not because of new intelligence but because he feared the 
report would ``be used against the DNI or POTUS.'' Let me say that 
again. Mr. Kent pressured career nonpartisan intelligence analysts to 
change their conclusions not to reflect the facts but somehow to 
protect Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard.
  The remarkable thing that happened next is that when the analysts 
stood firm, they were fired, sending a chilling message to every 
intelligence officer tasked with protecting this country.
  Let me be crystal clear. Tren de Aragua is a violent and dangerous 
transnational gang, and the Maduro government are pretty bad folks. And 
nobody that I know of--least of all me--is minimizing the threat that 
Tren de Aragua poses or the importance of tracking their ideas and 
their activities in the United States. But our national security 
decisions must be based on facts, not politics.

  When intelligence professionals conclude, based on the best available 
information, that the Venezuelan Government is not coordinating with 
that gang, their analysts--analysis--I think, has to be respected, even 
if it contradicts a political talking point.
  Distorting that analysis to score political points not only 
undermines trust in the intelligence community, it risks misdirecting 
resources and attention away from the real threats we face.
  Unfortunately, this incident is part of a much larger pattern, 
underscoring that Mr. Kent lacks the judgment and commitment to truth 
required of such an important position.
  Mr. Kent has openly embraced the lie that the 2020 election was 
``rigged'' and ``stolen,'' a lie that the Senator from Washington 
indicated helped fuel an insurrection against our democracy, and he has 
defended those who violently stormed the Capitol on January 6, 
referring to them as ``political prisoners,'' and falsely claimed that 
the FBI and intelligence community were involved in directing the 
violence that occurred that day.
  I can tell you, I was here that day. That was not directed by the 
FBI.
  He has participated in the Signalgate group chat, where Gabbard, Pete 
Hegseth, and other political appointees discussed classified 
information, carelessly putting our sailors and pilots at risk--and for 
which Mr. Kent, in testimony before my committee on the Senate 
Intelligence Committee, remained thoroughly unrepentant.

[[Page S4881]]

  During his nomination hearing, rather than reassuring the committee 
of his qualifications or judgement, he launched into a diatribe about 
the so-called Russia hoax, dismissing well-documented foreign 
interference in our elections as if it were a partisan invention.
  Down to my last two pages, Mr. President.
  That claim is not just wrong, it is willfully ignorant. The Senate 
Intelligence Committee conducted a comprehensive, five-volume, 
bipartisan investigation of the Russian interference in the 2016 
election.
  Over those five volumes, we detailed how Russia interfered in our 
democratic process, how those efforts were designed to help Donald 
Trump, and how individuals affiliated with his campaign welcomed his 
efforts.
  That is not a hoax. That is a fact. Matter of fact, unanimously 
confirmed by every member of the Senate Intelligence Committee--
Republican and Democrat.
  Mr. Kent's outright dismissal of it speaks volumes about how he views 
the truth, intelligence, and accountability, nor can we ignore his 
troubling associations. Mr. Kent has repeatedly aligned himself with 
far-right extremist groups, employing a member of the Proud Boys, a 
white nationalist organization with a record of political violence and 
extremism, as part of his 2022 campaign for Congress, a campaign for 
which he also solicited help from white nationalist Nick Fuentes.
  At a time when domestic, violent extremism is one of the fastest-
growing threats to the homeland, we are being asked to put someone in 
charge of counterterrorism who has aligned himself with political 
violence, promoted falsehoods that undermine our democracy, and tried 
to twist intelligence to serve a political agenda.
  I urge my colleagues--particularly those who value the credibility of 
our intelligence Agencies--to think carefully about what message it 
sends if Mr. Kent is confirmed. Allowing Mr. Kent to lead the NCTC 
would not just compromise the integrity of our counterterrorism 
efforts, it would embolden those who believe loyalty to one man should 
outweigh loyalty to the truth. It would signal that the politicization 
of intelligence in service of falsehoods is no longer a disqualifier, 
and it would make this country less safe.
  Mr. President, for these reasons, I join others and strongly urge a 
``no'' on this nomination.
  I yield the floor.