Hillary Clinton says Tulsi Gabbard is a 'Russian asset'

Wow, all this fuss over a spat between somebody whose political career is over, and somebody whose chances of getting the nomination are around zero.
 
RecoveringYuppy said:
Unwitting people doing what?
Click to expand...

Being asshats ... eh ...assets.


From the original OP link:
..."She is a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. That's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she is also a Russian asset...
Click to expand...

Hillary called Jill Stein a Russian asset but also implied that Tulsi was an asset too.

However, it was actually the failing New York Times that called Tulsi a Russian asset.

In Tuesday's Democratic debate, Gabbard accused the New York Times of calling her a "Russian asset."
Click to expand...
 
Elagabalus said:
However, it was actually the failing New York Times that called Tulsi a Russian asset.
Click to expand...
Can you provide a citation for that? BTW Your quote, which is unsourced, doesn't actually say that.


ETA: Clicking back through all the links I find in the OP links leads to an NYT article that doesn't use that phrase either.
 
Last edited:
RecoveringYuppy said:
Can you provide a citation for that? BTW Your quote, which is unsourced, doesn't actually say that.


ETA: Clicking back through all the links I find in the OP links leads to an NYT article that doesn't use that phrase either.
Click to expand...

The first one is a podcast (Apparently).

OK, my mistake, Tulsi herself said the failing New York Times accused her of being a "Russian Asset".


@1:17


Here's the link from the OP to the Washington Examiner.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...w-york-times-during-their-presidential-debate

The New York Times article mentioned by Tulsi.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/us/politics/tulsi-gabbard.html

The original OP link:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...groomed-to-ensure-trump-re-election?_amp=true
 
RecoveringYuppy said:
Yes.
Click to expand...

Then you should have your answer already:

Do not even know they are being used (so called "useful idiots"). Assets can be loyal to their country, but may still provide a foreign agent with information through failures in information safety, such as using insecure computers or not following proper OPSEC procedures during day-to-day chatting.
Click to expand...

That's one of several possible examples.
 
I think a major question with Gabbard is why David Duke, the leader of the Ku Klux Klan, continues to back her despite her rejecting his support. She has said:
“I have strongly denounced David Duke’s hateful views and his so-called ‘support’ multiple times in the past, and reject his support,” she told The Post in a statement [last week]. Link
Click to expand...

How does she explain Duke continuing to support her?
David Duke Tweets
Tulsi Gabbard in 2020. Finally a candidate for President who will really put America First. Link
Click to expand...

She was asked recently how she explains it on "The View" TV show but she sidestepped the question. One obvious explanation is, he sees in Gabbard an opportunity to sow division in the Democratic Party. Calling Hillary Clinton a warmonger. Accusing the party of "rigging" the 2020 primary process. With friends like that you don't need enemies. Is that what Duke sees?
 
CJ Hopkins with another scary look at pre$$titute "reality": The Putin-Nazis Are Coming (Again)!

CJ Hopkins said:
[...] The Times piece goes on to list an assortment of unsavory, extremist, white supremacist, horrible, neo-Nazi-type persons that Tulsi Gabbard has nothing to do with, but which Hillary Clinton, the Intelligence Community, The Times, and the rest of the corporate media would like you to mentally associate her with. Richard Spencer, David Duke, Steve Bannon, Mike Cernovich, Tucker Carlson, and so on. Neo-Nazi sites like the Daily Stormer. 4chan, where, according to The New York Times, neo-Nazis like to “call her Mommy.”

In keeping with professional journalistic ethics, The Times also reached out to experts on fascism, fascist terrorism, terrorist fascism, fascist-adjacent Assad-apologism, Hitlerism, horrorism, Russia, and so on, to confirm Gabbard’s guilt-by-association with the people The Times had just associated her with. Brian Levin, Director of the CSU Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism, confirmed that Gabbard has “the seal of approval” within goose-stepping, Hitler-loving, neo-Nazi circles. The Alliance for Securing Democracy (yes, the one from the previous paragraph) conducted an “independent analysis” which confirmed that RT (“the Kremlin-backed news agency”) had mentioned Gabbard far more often than the Western corporate media (which isn’t backed by anyone, and is totally unbiased and independent, despite the fact that most of it is owned by a handful of powerful global corporations, and at least one CIA-affiliated oligarch). Oh, and Hawaii State Senator Kai Kahele, who is challenging Gabbard for her seat in Congress, agreed with The Times that Gabbard’s support from Jew-hating, racist Putin-Nazis might be a potential liability.

“Clearly there’s something about her and her policies that attracts and appeals to these type of people who are white nationalists, anti-Semites, and Holocaust deniers.”​

But it’s not just The New York Times, of course. No sooner had Clinton finished cackling than the corporate media launched into their familiar Goebbelsian piano routine, banging out story after television segment repeating the words “Gabbard” and “Russian asset.” I’ve singled out The Times because the smear piece in question was clearly a warm-up for Hillary Clinton’s calculated smear job on Friday night. No, the old gal hasn’t lost her mind. She knew exactly what she was doing, as did the editors of The New York Times, as did every other establishment news source that breathlessly “reported” her neo-McCarthyite smears. [...]
Click to expand...
 
newyorkguy said:
I think a major question with Gabbard is why David Duke, the leader of the Ku Klux Klan, continues to back her despite her rejecting his support.
Click to expand...


David Duke is not the leader of the Ku Klux Klan. You are again carried away by junk you've read and put a load of crap on top of it, like recently when you made the Crimea "annexation", if one wants to call it that, into a violent invasion with thousands lives taken and 1.5 million fleeing. Total nonsense.

Duke was some "grand wizard" or something in the KKK half a century ago, and might be a terrible person (I dunno), but Tulsi Gabbard is incapable of doing something against him endorsing her. It is the dumbest form of "contact guilt" imaginable, one that doesn't even contain contact. Why do you claim to think it is "a major question"?
 
Last edited:
Right, he's the former Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan. My bad! Nowadays he's mostly described as a neo-nazi, anti-semitic conspiracy theorist.
 
newyorkguy said:
Right, he's the former Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan. My bad! Nowadays he's mostly described as a neo-nazi, anti-semitic conspiracy theorist.
Click to expand...


Great post. I endorse it completely with the full power of my St. Petersburg troll factory assessment card. You're screwed now, newyorkguy,
 
newyorkguy said:
Right, he's the former Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan. My bad! Nowadays he's mostly described as a neo-nazi, anti-semitic conspiracy theorist.
Click to expand...


So he's the same Alpha Hotel; he just does not wear the Halloween costumes anymore?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom