For all of Sen. Mark Warner’s political success in the past 15 years, even some of his colleagues weren’t quite sure what to expect from him when he took over as the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

But Warner, a former governor of Virginia who once described himself as a “radical bipartisan centrist,” has emerged as an outspoken voice on national security and an effective organizer of fellow Democrats on hot-button issues like President Donald Trump’s flirtation with resuming torture or the new administration’s reshuffling of the National Security Council.

Warner has been energized above all, however, by the American spy agencies’ assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election, and the need to determine the full extent of the Kremlin-orchestrated hacking and disinformation campaign.

“I can’t think of anything that I’ve been involved in that is more important,” Warner told CQ. "We’re talking about the Russian government trying to undermine the democratic process.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee and its House counterpart are conducting separate investigations into Moscow’s meddling, which puts Warner in the thick of the biggest intelligence drama in the United States in years.

Warner has thrown himself into the fray, colleagues say, skillfully defending Democratic interests while maintaining the committee’s tradition of putting national security ahead of partisan politics.

“He is extremely engaged in it. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him more thoroughly engaged in anything, and I was his lieutenant governor and I’ve been his junior senator for four years,” said Sen. Tim Kaine. “He is deeply immersed in this, and it gives me a great deal of comfort knowing that he’s there.”

Kaine, of course, is no casual observer of the investigation: The Virginia Democrat and old friend of Warner's was Hillary Clinton’s running mate. 

"I’m nervous that there will be an effort by the new administration to stop the investigation or sweep it under the rug,” he said. “But I’m given a great deal of comfort about that, about my own anxiety, knowing that Mark is at the helm of the intelligence committee on the Democratic side.”

'It Changes Your Life'

A leadership position on the intelligence committee is a prestigious post. The chairman and vice chairman are members of the so-called Gang of Eight — the majority and minority leaders in the House and Senate as well as the leaders of the chambers’ intelligence panels — that gets read in on the most sensitive national security operations.

Chairman Sen. Richard M. Burr, R-N.C., said the committee’s leaders also get other exclusive briefings on a regular basis, and meet with visiting dignitaries as often as two or three times a week.

“When you’re chair or vice chair, it changes your life,” Burr told CQ. “There’s a different level of investment that one has to make that’s just natural.”

Warner, 62, served as a rank-and-file member of the panel for five years before replacing California Sen. Dianne Feinstein this year as the top Democrat.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., a longtime committee member, said Warner and Feinstein's perspectives on committee issues are informed by their respective backgrounds. Feinstein, as a former San Francisco mayor, approaches issues from more of a security and law enforcement perspective, while Warner, as an early investor in the cellular telecom industry, comes at things from more of a technology angle.

"Their backgrounds are different, but both of them are practical and smart," Wyden said.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was created in 1976 to oversee the nation’s spy agencies after the Church Committee released its reports on alleged abuses by the intelligence community. The panel has 15 members: eight from the majority and seven from the minority.

The intelligence committee prides itself on leaving partisan concerns at the door to the secure room in the Hart Senate Office Building where panel staffers and lawmakers hold regular closed-door meetings with senior intelligence officials.

While Warner has been aggressive in pursuing what Democrats see as key concerns, he’s also acutely aware of the need to work closely with Republican colleagues on the committee, particularly Burr.

It’s a balancing act, members say, and one that’s become more difficult in the hyper-charged atmosphere coming out of the 2016 election.

“With the environment in this town now, it’s so important to keep this bipartisan, keep it fact-based,” Warner said of the Russia investigation. “You’ve got partisans on both sides who want one result or the other. I think we’re doing this in an orderly process.”

This is where Warner’s tendency to seek common ground—those radical bipartisan centrist roots he sometimes touts—comes into play, helping him navigate the swirling currents around the probe.

“I’ve been really impressed,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., who serves on the panel with Warner. “He’s taken the job very seriously at a time when we’ve got big things on our plate. He’s held the chair accountable when things started to go a little sideways on stuff we had commitments on. I give him a lot of credit, he’s been really solid.”

Russia Probe

The Russia investigation started to slide sideways on Jan. 12 when Burr was quoted as saying the inquiry would not probe possible ties between the Kremlin and U.S. political campaigns.

Two days earlier, Buzzfeed had published a 35-page dossier of salacious and unsubstantiated claims alleging, among other things, that members of the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia in its hacking of Democratic Party institutions and the Clinton campaign. The report was pulled together by a former British intelligence agent at the behest of first Republican and then Democratic donors.

U.S. intelligence chiefs included a two-page addendum of the material in their briefing to then-President Barack Obama and Trump in the spy agencies’ report on Russian hacking.

For Democrats, there was one major problem with Burr’s statement — it contradicted their understanding that the committee would indeed look into any potential links between the campaigns and Russia. Warner had even stated publicly that such ties were something he was focused on uncovering, if they existed.

Burr’s remarks left Warner flummoxed. Warner turned to his Democratic committee colleagues and Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer to decide on a coordinated response.

Wyden was home in Oregon digging out from a blizzard when Warner reached him by phone to discuss how to proceed.

“He’d called two or three times and said ‘I don’t want to bother you, but we’re going to need to make some decisions,’” Wyden recalled. “All through the day we were talking, and I think he did an excellent job.”

Warner got Sen. Joe Manchin III, D-W.Va., on the phone as well.

“He called and basically wanted to feel me out on where we all stood on this thing,” Manchin told CQ.

What Warner and the Democrats wanted were guarantees that the panel would have the authority and scope to investigate all aspects of Russia’s alleged interference, including potential campaign ties.

Despite being in the minority, the Democrats had leverage. They could have dropped their support for the committee probe and instead pushed for an independent commission or a special committee to investigate Russia’s alleged interference in the election, as many Democrats — and a few Republicans — in the House and Senate want. Republican congressional leaders would prefer to keep the investigations in the intelligence committees, where they feel they can exert more control.

Ultimately, Warner and Burr were able to smooth out their differences. They released a joint statement late on Friday, Jan. 13, which said the scope of the investigation would include “concerns related to Russia and the 2016 U.S. election, including any intelligence regarding links between Russia and individuals associated with political campaigns.”

They said the panel’s inquiry would include hearings on Russian intelligence activities, and the probe would hold subpoena power to compel testimony from senior officials from both the Trump and Obama administrations.

"The committee will follow the intelligence wherever it leads. We will conduct this inquiry expeditiously, and we will get it right,” Burr and Warner said.

The statement defused a dispute that could have tanked the high-profile, bipartisan investigation almost before it began. It also won Warner the confidence of the committee’s Democrats.

“I think Sen. Warner did a very good job in handling what was a very difficult issue,” Wyden said. “I thought he was playing a tough hand, and he went at it in a very analytical way. He understood what the challenge was, and got the intersection of politics and policy.”

Manchin put it more simply: “He got those concessions, and I’m very pleased about it.”

Taking on Torture

Warner’s advocacy has not been limited to the Russia investigation. He also has used his post to speak out on other national security issues, such as Trump’s proposal to reinstate torture. 

He led committee Democrats last month in writing a letter to Trump expressing their opposition to torture and urging the president to read the full, classified report the Senate Intelligence Committee completed in 2014 on the CIA’s detention and interrogation program “to avoid making the mistakes of the past.”

Warner followed that up with a letter from ranking members to Secretary of Defense James Mattis and CIA Director Mike Pompeo about the administration’s reported consideration of a return to torture.

“We cannot go back to those practices if we want the United States of America to continue to serve as a beacon of justice, law and human rights for the world,” the letter says. “We remain firmly opposed to changing the law or any policy that could bring back these abhorrent and ineffective practices.”

The letter was signed by Warner as well as Democratic Sens. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Feinstein and Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont.

It was released to the public after a leaked Trump draft order indicated the administration was considering a sweeping review of interrogation policies, including possibly reopening CIA secret prisons overseas and a return to torture, such as waterboarding.

Warner also pushed back against Trump’s executive order that gave Steven Bannon, the president’s chief strategist and former editor of the right-wing Breitbart news organization, a seat on the National Security Council, while downgrading the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Warner, joined by seven Democrats, introduced legislation (S 291) that would place limits on NSC membership, including requiring congressional consent to add a non-Senate confirmed official.

While the legislation is unlikely to get much traction in the Senate, it did draw additional attention to the Trump administration’s shakeup of the NSC.

“I think he has a very important role and I think he’s playing it very well,” Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent and an intelligence committee member, said of Warner. “He’s taking his responsibility very seriously, and I think he’s being very effective in doing so.”