Her background is conservative. That’s why I say she comes from the right and should be able to speak to that audience better.
Tulsi Gabbard, Regurgitates Trump's Impeachment Talking Points In Interview With White Nationalist,
- Thread starter Morrison71
- Start date
Tulsi ain't running for re-election. The jig is up. Next stop, fuxk news.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/25/tulsi-gabbard-wont-run-congress-reelection-2020-057222
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/25/tulsi-gabbard-wont-run-congress-reelection-2020-057222
What is she thinking? I now put her in the useful idiot category for going on Hannity and parroting the Matt Gaetz/Steve Scalise talking points.
Reminds me of that DeNiro line from Casino:
Listen, if you didn't know you were being scammed you're too ****in' dumb to keep this job, and if you did know, you were in on it. Either way, YOU'RE OUT! Get out.
Reminds me of that DeNiro line from Casino:
Listen, if you didn't know you were being scammed you're too ****in' dumb to keep this job, and if you did know, you were in on it. Either way, YOU'RE OUT! Get out.
Abandoning her congressional seat disappoints me, to say the least. It's her life, but this gives me mixed feelings.
Going on Hannity to repeat idiotic right-wing talking points doesn't do her any good. And, FTR, repeating idiotic right-wing talking points does not establish her as "thinking for herself".
Yeah... and, now that she's decided to not keep her seat in Congress makes it even more sketchy.
Oh, well. Such is the American political landscape.
In that case, anyone that agrees with either party does not think for themselves. Not!
She was going to get her ass kicked...in a primary...in Hawaii...as a Democrat. Something that is difficult to accomplish.
If you're talking about Wall St fat cats, I'm already out on this board as a Warren supporter.
As a registered Democrat, I supported Hillary as the Democratic nominee in 2016, I don't support her on all things, and I think the corporate and big bank dominance of both parties is a serious issue. Which is probably the biggest reason I'm supporting Warren in the primaries.
As for Gabbard, any alliance by her with Wall St money is a stake in the heart for the contentions of her left supporters here and elsewhere that she is an anti-establishment and unique candidate/politician--which is apparently her main appeal for many of them.
I don't understand why she was being challenged.
I have some close friends who live in Pahoa, on the Big Island. I'm going to get in touch with them and see what they've heard.
Yes, IF Tulsi flips on Big Money, that will be a nail in her coffin with me.
Let me know if that happens.
Very few Dems are pure on this. It's not even clear whether Lizzie will remain pure once the general election starts. We'll see.
Point being, if you are a purist, you may have to set that aside to vote against Trump this go-around. Certainly folks like Biden and Pete are already feeding at the Big Money trough. Probably most of the others, too.
Because she has spent more time in Washington than Hawaii. And her viewpoints, while refreshing to some on HROT, are antithetical to Democrats--such as being cozy to Assad in Syria for example.
Warren has to concede to Big everything. This country has owners, and you do what the owners say. That sounds like a "conspiracy theorist" to die-hard Democrat partisans, or whatever, but, it's just the truth. People who resist the reality of this place being a full-blown, airtight Oligarchy are willfully ignorant. I even allow myself to, occasionally, to think "Well, hey! Here's a ray of light. Here's an example of someone who might challenge the ownership." But, it's quickly made clear.
Quoting moronic talking points that are meant to do absolutely nothing but detract attention away from the impeachment process? That's not "thinking for yourself" no matter how much you wish it were so. Here's the funny part...this process is running exactly as set up AND IMPLEMENTED by the GOP. If they - or Gabbard - had such a problem with it, why didn't they do something about it before now? The DoJ just announced a CRIMINAL investigation of it's own Russia investigation. Where is the f'n outrage - the storming of the DoJ - to find out ANY details about that? Who are they investing? What crime are they investigating? We know absolutely NOTHING about it other than it's occurring. Is Graham going to be whining that the entire Congress isn't being included in it? How about Gabbard? I'm going to bet there will be lots of crickets.
Cozy with Assad? Are you Bari Weiss? Cuz, I can be Joe Rogan, if you want.
This is a prime example of how people just repeat something that they heard, but don't actually know what happened:
That's the cover story.
The real story is that Tulsi's progressive positions have annoyed the corporate Dems, including Hillary. And they have gone after her. That makes her vulnerable. With or without DNC support (probably with), challengers have responded to the DNC call to rid them of this meddlesome
While I share your dismay/depression/angst, I want to think we still have a chance to right the ship of state in the upcoming election.
If the Dem candidate is not Bernie or Lizzie, I'm not sure the occupant of the White House will really try hard enough to point us in the right direction on the most important issues. Even if it is Bernie or Lizzie, I'm not sure if they can have enough success changing course. Maybe, if enough progressives are also elected to Congress. But the DNC doesn't like progressives, so even that is a cause for concern.
Some other Dem candidates may be good enough. Not clear yet. Steyer seems to be focusing on the most important issues in an effective way. Several others might fill the shoes that need filling.
Was the Mueller investigation transparent? It had an initial scope, but it deviated from that scope shortly into it. Nobody knew where it was headed until arrests were made and then it had to become public.
What don't you like about the DOJ's investigation into any wrong doing ahead of the launch of the Russia Collusion investigation? Do you expect it to be televised, unlike the Mueller investigation?
Before you start in on me about what the GOP is saying about the Impeachment Inquiry, I don't care if it's public or not at this point. It will be eventually. And I hope the end result is his removal from office.
There is a "chance" to improve on the human condition. There always is, always has been, always will be. But, using politics to get there is like choosing to walk and then strapping cinder blocks to your feet.
Too many people- educated/smart people- get stuck with the cinder-block feet.
For a woman that only polls 1%, she sure does get a helluva lot of press, discussion, and more threads- and pages of threads- than all the other candidates combined.
If we want to get conspiratorial, we could probably cook up a theory that Hillary attacked her to push her into a third party run to suck votes from disappointed Trump voters who were never going to vote for anyone with a D behind their name. Now Tulsi is positioned as a compromise between Trump and the D nominee.
I like it. I'm not buying it, but it's thoughtful.
I'm still on board with the Hillary payback for Tulsi resigning from the HNC in 2016 and Publicly endorsing Bernie. Hillary is a spiteful person.
If there's a non-violent alternative to politics that can save us, tell us more.
What I don't like about it is that the people in charge have proved they cannot be trusted.
The people who were screaming witch hunt are giving every indication that they are starting a witch hunt.
While I was no Mueller fan, at least he seemed to have integrity. Can't say that about what I've seen so far on this front.
LOL...ok, you didn't get it. As far as I know, the only arrests made as part of the Mueller investigation were those crimes discovered and turned over to other law enforcement organizations to carry forward. The whole premise of an "investigation" is discovery, otherwise the investigation wouldn't - you know - be needed. If other crimes turn up in the course of the initial investigation, don't you think it would be incumbent to follow that trail...or should it just be dismissed?
Regardless, the whole point IS that it was kept under wraps as the investigation continued and nobody stormed the special prosecutor's office to demand the "right" to sit in on every aspect of it. The GOP set up the rules for investigations in the House...THEIR RULES. They followed those rules when they held closed meetings in their multiple investigations of Benghazi. Not one single Dem stormed those hearings. Not. One. And the GOP was, remarkably, fine with that. So they're full of shit for demanding that their own damn rules be changed NOW.
And Gabbard is an idiot for parroting their complaints. She - and they - KNEW THE RULES when this session began. They did nothing to change them. They can introduce legislation tomorrow to make all closed sessions illegal...period. Have any of them done that? No? Then they can STFU about wanting "transparency". They're lying. To blame the Dems for following GOP rules would mark someone as being stupid as hell.
Of course they are. Where did I say they weren't?
You commented on the DOJ investigation. I compared it to the Mueller. I then told you how I felt about the Impeachment Inquiry and the outcome I want to see.
Come down off the soapbox.
Damn...it's not about that...it's about the GOP reaction. And Gabbard parroting that reaction to right-wing nutjob Sean Hannity. If she agrees with their idiotic position, she's either an idiot or she's trying to curry favor with...someone. Is she an idiot?
So you're telling me, Gabbard as a Democrat, cannot hold the opinion that the inquiry should not be private, because the GOP holds the same opinion? Yes, the GOP is putting on an act, and they are hypocrites because they are the reason the inquiry can be conducted like this.
But Gabbard can hold the same opinion and still not be beholden to the GOP.
IMO, she is only on Fox News because the other networks only want to drive the Russian Asset narrative.
That said, Fox News is using her, and going on Hannity (I hate him the most on that network) is not wise.
Now, hit back with your, "sigh", "damn", soapbox mentality. I expect nothing less from you.
