Fact check: What is the history of the feud between Tulsi Gabbard and Nancy Pelosi?

1. How a congressional procedural spat became a public rivalry

The earliest recurring flashpoint recorded here centers on impeachment and floor procedure, where Gabbard publicly opposed Pelosi’s choices on how to handle impeachment timing and votes, arguing the House leadership was “making up rules as you go along.” Gabbard’s high-profile “present” vote and accompanying censure resolution against President Trump framed her as both critical of party leadership and seeking a middle-ground accountability posture, producing public tension with Pelosi’s management of the caucus and messaging ^{[1] [4]}. The dispute over the timing and delivery of impeachment articles in 2023 further reinforced a narrative of procedural disagreement, with Gabbard accusing Pelosi of perpetuating partisanship by delaying processes. Those procedural criticisms moved the feud from internal caucus disagreement to public contention, with both policy implications and political signaling for independents and primary constituencies.

2. Personal incidents that escalated the narrative

A separate thread that deepened hostilities involved Gabbard’s public rebuke of Pelosi over a reported refusal to grant an active-duty Marine access to a swearing-in; Gabbard framed the episode as evidence of Pelosi’s insensitivity and inconsistent rule application during COVID restrictions. That incident was seized upon by Gabbard’s supporters and by media outlets keen to illustrate a contrast between Pelosi’s leadership decisions and the experiences of rank-and-file members or constituents. The episode is notable because it shifted some of the feud’s framing from abstract procedure to a concrete personal anecdote that could be easily communicated and emotionally resonant. The reporting on that clash dates to early 2021 and was used by Gabbard to bolster claims of leadership overreach and unfairness ^[2].

3. Conflict over ethics and family finances — a lasting accusation

A sustained and salient dimension of the feud is Gabbard’s repeated allegations about potential conflicts of interest tied to Pelosi’s husband’s stock trading, which she framed as symptomatic of broader congressional corruption. These critiques, voiced publicly in late 2022 and beyond, moved the dispute into ethics territory and brought in outside actors and outlets that amplified the claims. Gabbard used the issue to advocate for tighter investment rules for members of Congress, casting Pelosi as emblematic of a system that allows lawmakers to benefit financially from policy — a framing that attracted both supporters calling for reform and critics who saw the focus as personal attack rather than systemic solution. The ethics angle sustained media cycles and polarized reactions across partisan and institutional lines ^[3].

4. Post-congressional environment and national-security flashpoints

After leaving Congress and as Gabbard sought roles in national-security discussions, the feud’s tones shifted. By 2025, clashes included institutional resistance to proposals that would enhance Gabbard’s role on counterintelligence, with the FBI publicly opposing legislative moves that she supported or that would elevate her influence in intelligence matters. Reporting in late October 2025 shows the FBI warning that proposals tied to Gabbard could create confusion and national-security risks, illustrating how the rivalry now intersects with interagency and legislative debates far beyond the original intra-party conflicts. This evolution indicates the feud’s transformation from personal and procedural disputes to broader institutional controversy involving national-security stakeholders ^{[5] [6] [7]}.

5. What the record shows and what it omits — mapping motives and audiences

The assembled reporting paints a multifaceted feud rooted in procedural fights, personal grievances and policy disagreements, repeatedly amplified by media outlets and political actors pursuing different narratives. What the sources document clearly are Gabbard’s public criticisms of Pelosi on impeachment handling, a swearing-in incident, and ethical attacks around family stock trading, plus later institutional resistance to Gabbard’s national-security ambitions ^{[1] [2] [3] [5]}. What the record does not fully resolve are private caucus dynamics, the full factual matrix behind some allegations, and how much partisan media framing versus substantive policy difference drove public escalation. Multiple motives can be inferred: Gabbard’s desire to carve an independent national profile, Pelosi’s leadership imperative to manage caucus unity, and third-party actors’ incentives to amplify conflict for political gain. ^{[4] [6]}