Tulsi Gabrield, the nominee for Director of National Intelligence, has been a source of controversy with Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee over her views on Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor who stole more than one million classified documents.

Republican senators asked Gabbard to call Snowden a traitor and acknowledge that he had “harmed” U.S. security. Gabbard refused, raising alarm with Republican Senators who will vote on her nomination within the next few weeks.

One Republican senator who asked to remain anonymous to speak candidly about Gabbard’s chances in the Senate said: “People are keeping their cards close to the chest but that nomination is not going to be easy.”

There has been “a lot” of discussion among GOP legislators about Gabbard’s suitability to lead the country’s intelligence agency, according to a second Republican senator.

The senator stated that “there’s been much discussion on this”.

Gabbard would, if she were confirmed, be the nation’s top intelligence official and in charge of preparing Trump’s daily briefing on intelligence.

On Thursday, Sen. James Lankford asked Gabbard if she viewed Snowden as “a traitor,” telling her that the Intelligence Committee would be much happier with her nomination if Gabbard did so.

Gabbard, instead, avoided two questions on whether Snowden had betrayed the country, saying that she was “focused on the present and how we can avoid something like this happening again.” She was referring to Snowden stealing secret documents.

Lankford said that after the hearing he was surprised by Gabbard’s response. He had earlier in the month stated that he would be supporting Gabbard.

“I was surprised, because it didn’t seem to be a difficult question. Lankford clarified that the question was not meant to be tricked.

Oklahoma Senator said that it would have been “easy” to answer the question of whether it is “universally accepted” when you “steal a million pages top-secret documents, and then give it to Russians. That’s a treasonous act.”

Todd Young (R – Indiana) appeared to be irritated by Gabbard’s comments. She refused to state that Snowden’s actions were harmful to national security, despite the fact that she is a member of the Intelligence Panel who has remained publicly undecided.

Young asked: “Do you want to respond to the findings of the House Intel Committee, which were bipartisan, and stated that Snowden had caused great damage to national safety, including military, defense, and intelligence programs of interest to America’s enemies?”

Gabbard repeated that Snowden had “broken the law” throughout the hearing on Thursday, before quickly shifting to “my focus for the future.”

She said: “I believe we all agree that another Snowden-type of leak is inevitable, and I have laid out specific steps if confirmed to be DNI in order to accomplish this.”

Young called it “notable”, that Gabbard did not acknowledge Snowden’s harm to national intelligence.

The Indiana senator asked Gabbard if she had ever supported pardoning Snowden. This included introducing legislation with former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., calling for the charges against Snowden be dropped.

“When we discover that Americans, be they private citizens, contractors, or uniformed staff, have shared sensitive plans or designs regarding military technology with a foreign government, we will rightfully bring them to justice.” Snowden did exactly that. “Yet you have argued that he should pardoned many times,” Young said in frustration at Gabbard’s response.

He probably endangered American lives with his actions. How do you believe you would be perceived as the leader of the Intelligence Community on past actions that you have taken to support, or even pardon Snowden? Young was curious about how the rank and file intelligence analysts would react if she were to become the next Director of National Intelligence.

Young asked if Snowden had betrayed trust in the American people. He pointed out that this is the definition of a treason according to the Miriam Webster Dictionary.

The Indiana senator refused to speak to reporters after taking part in a round-up of Gabbard’s questions during a closed portion of the confirmation hearing.

John Thune, Senate Majority leader (R-S.D.), was later briefed on the hearing. He said that Gabbard did well. However, he didn’t say whether he is confident about getting her through the Intelligence Committee or confirmed on floor. Later, after being briefed about the hearing, Thune said that Gabbard performed well. He did not say if he was confident of getting her through to the Intelligence Committee, or to the floor.

He said, “I think the majority of people were happy with how things went.”

He acknowledged that Young and Lankford didn’t seem to be happy with her answer on Snowden.

Everyone will come to their own conclusions. She had issues to address. “We’ll see what happens,” he said.

When asked if he felt confident in her confirmation, Thune replied: “I have said before, let them go through the process and you will see what happens.”

It would only take the resignation of one Republican senator from the Intelligence Committee, where Republicans hold a majority. This is enough to stall Gabbard’s nomination.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who has said he would vote for Trump’s Cabinet nominees if there were no extraordinary circumstances at the time, gave Gabbard a “OK” rating on her hearing.

He said, “I thought she did okay.”

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, another key vote in the Intelligence Committee that is undecided about Gabbard asked Gabbard directly if she would support any kind of pardon or clemency towards Snowden.

She said that Snowden’s disclosure of sensitive sources and methods had “gravely harmed our national security”, putting agents on the ground in danger.

Gabbard replied that, if confirmed, she would not advocate any actions related Snowden.

Collins said that she is “happy” about her answers.

She said, “I am happy with the answers she gave to my questions. I was particularly pleased when she answered that she would not recommend Edward Snowden be pardoned.

Collins told The Hill that, despite her concerns last week, she was still concerned about Gabbard’s position on Section 702 Foreign Intelligence Act. This section authorizes increased surveillance powers and is responsible for approximately 60 percent of intelligence provided to the president in his daily briefing.

Collins thought Gabbard’s answers were “equivocal” on this subject. While some Republican Senators felt Gabbard reversed her previous opposition to Section 702 and its expanded powers, Collins believed the nominee had “hedged her answers”.

Gabbard is not trusted by all of her Republican colleagues, according to a Democratic senator who has good relations with Republicans in the Intelligence Committee.

“If you are on the Intelligence Committee – and have any respect for it – you’re Republican. And you have someone in front you who cannot denounce Snowden’s status as a traitor