The left’s long‑simmering anger and increasingly fraught relationship with Democratic Senator John Fetterman boiled over on Thursday, when the Pennsylvania Democrat cast the deciding vote to advance Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin’s nomination for Secretary of Homeland Security out of committee and toward a full confirmation vote.

Democrats have provided numerous reasons why they, unlike Fetterman, oppose Senator Mullin’s nomination. They cite Mullin’s lack of qualifications: he is the only current U.S. Senator without a bachelor’s degree, he has no national security or law enforcement experience — he ran his family’s plumbing business before being elected to Congress in 2012. And they cite his temperament.

The nonpartisan Union of Concerned Scientists called Mullin “uniquely unqualified to lead the third largest federal department with a half a million employees, nine agencies including ICE, FEMA and the Coast Guard among others, and roughly a $100 billion budget.”

READ MORE: ‘I Don’t Think She Survives This’: Gabbard Faces Blowback After ‘Devastating’ Testimony

And the Republican chair of the Homeland Security Committee, Rand Paul, said on Wednesday that Mullin “applauds violence” against his political opponents.

But Senator Fetterman on Thursday had a different perception of Mullin.

Explaining why he voted yes, Fetterman wrote, “I truly approached the confirmation of my colleague and friend, Senator Mullin, with an open-mind.”

Critics noted that he had immediately declared his support as soon as Mullin’s nomination was announced, saying last week, “I will vote for him, of course.”

Fetterman added Thursday that his “AYE” vote is “rooted in a strong committed, constructive working relationship with Senator Mullin for our nation’s security.”

Fox News quickly reposted Fetterman’s remarks.

READ MORE: ‘Is Tulsi Next?’ Questions Swirl About Future of National Intelligence Director

Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts asked, “Can Pennsylvanians sue him for impersonating a Democrat?”

Democratic strategist Jon Cooper commented, “As someone who strongly backed John Fetterman‘s run for the Senate in 2022, I’m sorry to say that he’s an absolute disgrace. I’ll support whoever challenges him in the 2028 primary.”

The Pennsylvania Working Families Party called for Fetterman to be primaried.

Democratic U.S. Rep. Brendan Boyle, after his fellow Pennsylvania lawmaker’s vote to advance Mullin, wrote: “Once again Sen Fetterman shows why he is Trump’s favorite Democrat. He needs to go.”

READ MORE: Trump’s Greenland Obsession Had Denmark Fully Prepping for War Against America: Report

Image via Reuters 

Denmark had been quietly planning strategies to protect Greenland from possible American aggression soon after President Donald Trump was elected, but those plans surged into high gear this January, when U.S. forces attacked Venezuela. Denmark formed an alliance with France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden, flew heavily armed Danish F-35 fighter jets and troops to Greenland with bombs to blow up its own runways if necessary to prevent U.S. aircraft from landing, and prepared for casualties by flying bags of blood to the autonomous territory of roughly 56,000 residents.

Danish public broadcaster DR, via a Google translation, reported that Trump’s early January remarks, when he threatened that the U.S. could acquire Greenland the easy way or the “hard way,” and “whether they like it or not,” accelerated the governments’ plans.

“With the Greenland crisis, Europe realized once and for all that we need to be able to take care of our own security, says a top French official who has played a crucial role in the intense months and critical days of the Greenland crisis,” DR reported.

Citing the DR report, Euronews reported that in January, “several EU nations, including France, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and others, sent troops to Greenland under a Danish-led NATO exercise dubbed ‘Arctic Endurance.’ It was a real deployment and not an exercise, another military source told DR.”

READ MORE: ‘I Don’t Think She Survives This’: Gabbard Faces Blowback After ‘Devastating’ Testimony

“Would you like more soldiers? You could have them,” one French official reportedly told Denmark, DR noted. “Would you like more naval support? You could have that. Would you like more air support? You could have that too.”

One source told DR that their assessment of the threat of an American takeover of Greenland included the fact that the “official machinery of the United States is not working the way it used to.”

“Trump doesn’t have the same level of people around him as before who would talk him out of it. It’s super dangerous.”

And while President Trump may now be more focused on the current quagmire he faces in his war against Iran, Denmark does not believe the danger has passed.

“This is not over. Trump is here for three more years,” one high-ranking source in the Danish security apparatus told DR.

READ MORE: ‘He Was Aware’: Former Top Adviser Refutes Trump’s Denials on Iran Risks

Image via Reuters 

Rumors continue to swirl about Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard‘s future as critics on Wednesday slammed her testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, especially when she declared that it is not the Intelligence Community’s “responsibility” to determine what constitutes an imminent national security threat — a claim that received tremendous blowback.

“Was it the assessment of the Intelligence Community that there was an imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?” asked U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA).

“The Intelligence Community assessed that Iran maintained the intention to rebuild and to continue to grow their nuclear enrichment capability,” Gabbard replied.

“Was it the assessment of the Intelligence Community that there was a, quote, imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime, yes or no?” Ossoff pressed.

“Senator, the only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president,” Gabbard responded.

READ MORE: ‘Reeks of a Coverup’: DOJ Official Accused of Blocking ‘Mysterious’ Epstein Probe Document

“False,” Ossoff replied. “This is the worldwide threats hearing where you present to Congress national intelligence, timely, objective, and independent of political considerations.”

Podcaster Paul Rieckhoff, an Iraq War veteran and founder of a veterans nonprofit, slammed Gabbard’s remarks.

“I don’t think she survives this,” Rieckhoff wrote. “She’s already not trusted in Trump world as a former Democrat. And not trusted by most people period. Sooner or later, Trump is gonna dump her and blame her.”

“But like Noem, Hegseth, and so many others, she shouldn’t have been there in [the] first place,” he added. “And anyone who voted for her is responsible for this mess now. It’s all coming to the fore now. They are all being revealed. That’s what war does. Especially forever war that is now overflowing beyond US control. Our enemies are celebrating yet again. And we are all less safe. More and more by the minute.”

The Steady State, a group of 400 former national security officials, denounced Gabbard’s claim that “the only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president.”

READ MORE: ‘He Was Aware’: Former Top Adviser Refutes Trump’s Denials on Iran Risks

The group called her remark “flatly incompatible with her statutory obligation to provide ‘timely, objective, and independent of political considerations’ national intelligence assessments of threats to Congress.”

Mark Seddon, a former speechwriter for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, called Gabbard’s testimony “devastating.”

“The fact that DNI Tulsi Gabbard does not believe it is the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine if a threat is imminent is disqualifying for her to be the National Intelligence Director,” wrote retired U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer Travis Akers. “That is one, among many, of the primary responsibilities of the IC.”

Ossoff: Was it the assessment of the intelligence community that there was an imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?

Gabbard: The only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president. It is not the intelligence community’s… pic.twitter.com/agcse87TZI

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 18, 2026

READ MORE: ‘Grave Concern’: Democrats Demand DHS Preserve All Corey Lewandowski Records

Image via Reuters