Gabbard, Patel Deny Knowledge of Trump Emergency Election Order Plans
Image: Washington Examiner

Gabbard, Patel Deny Knowledge of Trump Emergency Election Order Plans

18 March, 2026.Iran.1 sources

Key Takeaways

  • Gabbard and Patel denied knowledge of a draft order on emergency election powers.
  • The denial occurred during the Senate Intelligence Committee's worldwide threats hearing.
  • The order reportedly related to President Trump's possible use of emergency authority before midterms.

Patel's Testimony

When Senator Warner specifically asked Director Patel whether he had any knowledge of such a draft executive order, Patel responded with a clear denial.

Image from Washington Examiner
Washington ExaminerWashington Examiner

Patel stated: 'Thank you, vice chairman. I do not, sir.'

This exchange occurred during what appeared to be an investigation into potential plans for emergency measures related to elections.

Patel was serving as a witness during the hearing and was directly questioned about his awareness of any such draft orders.

Questioning of Gabbard

Following Patel's testimony, Senator Warner then turned his questioning to Gabbard.

Warner asked whether Gabbard had any knowledge of the draft executive order plans.

Image from Washington Examiner
Washington ExaminerWashington Examiner

This suggests that both individuals were being questioned as part of the same inquiry.

Gabbard's response is not included in the available source material.

The questioning pattern indicates a systematic approach to investigating potential knowledge.

Hearing Context

Particular focus was on executive orders that might be implemented under emergency powers.

Both Patel and Gabbard were specifically asked about their knowledge of such drafts.

This suggests inquiry into potential contingency planning for election-related emergencies.

The questioning was conducted by Senator Warner, who appeared to be leading this investigation.

Patel's Response Analysis

Director Patel's response was notably direct and unambiguous.

He used formal language appropriate for a congressional setting.

Image from Washington Examiner
Washington ExaminerWashington Examiner

His denial included the formal address 'vice chairman' followed by 'I do not, sir.'

This suggests either genuine lack of knowledge or no willingness to acknowledge it.

The specificity of questioning indicates investigators had reason to believe such drafts existed.

More on Iran