Transcription
This is one of the most coveted positions in the United States, heading the FBI and the CIA. Basically, the intelligence of the world's leading power. This is what she did for 15 months. Tou Gabar, this protégé of Donald Trump, will resign at the end of the month. She is the subject of an investigation by the Washington Post. Mathieu Mabin. We find you live from Washington. Good morning to you. The investigation is explosive. It reveals the links that Gabar allegedly maintained with a sect. Yes, indeed, you said it, the investigation is explosive because this affair touches both on her credibility, her personal credibility, and her political career. And this, even if it must be specified that her influence has clearly declined since the announcement of her resignation. You recalled it, but it's true that for years, Tou Sigabar has been an atypical figure in Washington. That's the least we can say. First, let's recall that the former director of intelligence is also a former Democratic elected official, a candidate in the 2020 presidential primary, as you remember, a veteran of the American army, which she regularly claims. She ended up breaking spectacularly with her former party, the Democrats, in 2022. In her departure letter at the time, she accused the Democratic leaders of having become, I quote, a disconnected, hostile elite, opposed to dissenting voices and locked in a logic of permanent confrontation. Subsequently, she moved closer to Donald Trump. Obviously, she notably denounced American military interventions, criticized the policy pursued in Ukraine, and above all questioned the management of the Covid pandemic. And little by little, she became one of the most offensive voices against the famous Doctor Anthony Fauci, in particular, whom you remember, of course, and whom she accuses today of having, nothing more, nothing less, concealed or minimized certain elements related to funded research. This is a nascent scandal here in the United States. It is therefore in this context that the revelations about these links, Tou Sigabar's links with the Science of Identity Foundation, are breaking today. A spiritual movement founded in Hawaii by a certain Chris Butler. Let's say it clearly, by French standards at least, we can simply qualify this organization as a sectarian movement. Moreover, even here in the United States, former followers and some observers clearly qualify this organization as a sect because of the central place given to this Butler, and the control he exercised over his disciples. Let's specify that the members of the movement categorically reject this qualification and speak of a completely ordinary Hindu religious community. The accusation is therefore not simply that Touci Gabar grew up in this environment. [grunt] The accusation is in fact much more serious. Testimonies and documents suggest that Chris Butler influenced Tulsy Gabar. With her functions, therein lies the problem. Her supporters, on the contrary, respond that the timing is not innocent. According to them, this controversy mainly targets a personality who has become inconvenient because she has challenged several pillars of the Democratic-Republican Washington consensus, from American foreign policy to the role played by Anthony Fauci during the pandemic. In other words, the debate goes far beyond the religious question. It concerns the credibility of a woman, national security as well, who built her popularity, this [throat clearing] woman, by challenging some of Washington's most established truths. Mathieu, beyond the Gabar case, would you say that the United States is more tolerant than Europe towards the influence of religious movements on political life? Yes. Well, the answer is clearly yes. It's even incomparable. In France, if it were discovered that a minister regularly received advice from a guru, it would probably cause an immediate political crisis and the end of that minister's political career. We are not talking about François Mitterrand consulting or having consulted a clairvoyant. Let's be very clear, it's very different here. But in the United States, the situation is much more nuanced because religion is omnipresent in public and political life. Donald Trump relies on evangelicals, we know that, and he probably wouldn't be in power without them. Certainly not in power without them. Presidents are sworn in on the Bible, which is not problematic in itself when you know American sociology and that the common bond that unites the Constitution both dominates here. Elected officials constantly speak of their faith. The Mormons have produced candidates for the American presidency, we remember that. John Kennedy, in another context, had also had to reassure American opinion in his time about his links with the Catholic Church, which is a minority here. In short, the question is not whether a political official is influenced by their faith, but how far that influence goes. Whether it is a simulated faith or not. Moreover, follow my gaze. This is precisely what makes the Gabar affair worrying. In fact, her detractors do not reproach her for being Hindu. They simply state that a spiritual leader could have intervened in her highly sensitive political activity. For many conservatives, on the other hand, she is now paying the price for this dissent, for this political independence, as much as for her religious background. Ultimately, the real question is not religious. The question is whether Tulsigabar is being attacked today because she was influenced by a guru, or because she has become one of the most iconoclastic and disturbing figures of the contemporary American right. Thank you very much Mathieu Mabin live from Washington as every day. Yeah. [grunt]