Hillary implies Tulsi is a Russian asset.

Hillary  said........

“They’re also going to do third party again. And I’m not making any predictions,” she said before making one in the second half of the sentence, “but I think they’ve got their eye on someone who’s currently in the Democratic primary, and are grooming her to be a third party candidate. She’s a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. And that’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she’s also a Russian asset.


Yeah, she’s a Russian asset. Totally! And so, they know they can’t win without a third party candidate. And so, I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I will guarantee you that they’ll have a vigorous third party challenge in the key states that they most need it.”

Tulsi replied....

"Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know — it was always you, through your proxies and powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine, afraid of the threat I pose.

It’s now clear that this primary is between you and me. Don’t cowardly hide behind your proxies. Join the race directly."


Shots fired!!!

Cat fight!!!


https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/hillary-implies-tulsi-is-a-russian-asset-tulsi-fires-back/?fbclid=IwAR1mwuIcIbtDMGm2j87i7pSAGGa3iJEpylixHkpTGOmNVH9hrDwQHUwknSM

Cat fight...right!  Neither one of them are significant players, nor have any chance.

But I agree with H. that the Russians are priming players. Republicans, in particular, are susceptible to the 'dangle' and many have no doubt been corrupted. Maybe a right leaning Dem might be tempted?

Funny how she erupted like that when HRC didn't actually call her out by name...

Ben Reilly wrote:Funny how she erupted like that when HRC didn't actually call her out by name...

Everyone knew who Hillary meant before Tulsi commented.

And she called out Jill Stein by name. Hillary is a horrid human. I didn't vote for Trump but I was happy to see her lose.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Funny how she erupted like that when HRC didn't actually call her out by name...

Everyone knew who Hillary meant before Tulsi commented.

Please explain.

Ben Reilly wrote:Funny how she erupted like that when HRC didn't actually call her out by name...

I agree:

Clinton wrote:HC: Yeah, she’s a Russian asset. Totally! And so, they know they can’t win without a third party candidate. And so, I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I will guarantee you that they’ll have a vigorous third party challenge in the key states that they most need it.”

Although she didn’t use Tulsi’s name here, I don’t think there is any doubt who Hillary means among anyone paying attention.

I would dearly love to hear the back story on this.  If HC knows something, she should share it with us.  But first, we need to know what brings Gabbard into this.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Everyone knew who Hillary meant before Tulsi commented.

Please explain.

What's there to explain? It was pretty widely reported (At least on the sources I follow) who Hillary was taking about.


Hillary was talking shit about Tulsi and everyone including Tulsi knew.

Remember the right wing conspiracies Hillary used to blame for Bill being accused of being whore dog? She knew what Bill was but would rather throw other women under the bus.

Shes still blaming everyone else for her problems.

She hasn't changed much has she?

Maddog wrote:What's there to explain? It was pretty widely reported (At least on the sources I follow) who Hillary was taking about.

But you RW Alt.facts nutz are the last ones we should believe. Didn't you guys have Obama kissing an Amazon tree frog?

If you can't deliver, that's all right. We can find a hospital bed for you.

Maddog wrote:Remember the right wing conspiracies Hillary used to blame for Bill being accused of being whore dog? She knew what Bill was  but would rather throw other women under the bus.  

Shes still blaming everyone else for her problems.  

She hasn't changed much has she?  

I remember her blaming a "vast right wing conspiracy." I also remember a member that conspiracy, David Brock, author of Confessions of a Right-wing Hitman, saying that what Hillary really got wrong was that the conspiracy was not really that vast.

Interesting link I came across. Does "everyone" know she meant Gabbard because it's been widely reported for nine months that Russia favors Gabbard, I wonder?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

So what's the scandal? To me, it's that that it's taken her three-quarters of a year to say anything, and that she still won't talk about Gabbard by name.

Interesting link I came across reporting that Russian-run social media outlets were bigging up Stein: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

I guess the libertarian source in the OP is unaware of these reports.

Yeah right.

Russia favors anyone that doesn't want challenge them in Syria.

I'm OK with staying out of Syria even if it means the Russians have a great deal of influence there.

It's not our problem.

Ben Reilly wrote:Interesting link I came across. Does "everyone" know she meant Gabbard because it's been widely reported for nine months that Russia favors Gabbard, I wonder?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

So what's the scandal? To me, it's that that it's taken her three-quarters of a year to say anything, and that she still won't talk about Gabbard by name.

Who said it was a scandal? Hillary called a war veteran, democratic congressperson and active reservist running for president a Russian asset.

Tulsi rightfully reminded Hillary what a piece of shit she has always been.

No scandal.

Gabbard is not important enough to give raise to a risk. If the Russians want to back her, it's like picking a horse at Santa Anita for seventh place, in a six horse race.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Interesting link I came across. Does "everyone" know she meant Gabbard because it's been widely reported for nine months that Russia favors Gabbard, I wonder?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

So what's the scandal? To me, it's that that it's taken her three-quarters of a year to say anything, and that she still won't talk about Gabbard by name.

Who said it was a scandal?  Hillary called a war veteran, democratic congressperson and active reservist running for president a Russian asset.  

Tulsi rightfully reminded Hillary what a piece of shit she has always been.  

No scandal.  

I think some people are upset because of the word "asset." You could be an asset to a country's government without even realizing it. It doesn't mean Clinton thinks Gabbard is on the Kremlin's payroll; they see a few of her foreign policy positions as something they can use as a wedge.

And now for some frivolity:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Who said it was a scandal?  Hillary called a war veteran, democratic congressperson and active reservist running for president a Russian asset.  

Tulsi rightfully reminded Hillary what a piece of shit she has always been.  

No scandal.  

I think some people are upset because of the word "asset." You could be an asset to a country's government without even realizing it. It doesn't mean Clinton thinks Gabbard is on the Kremlin's payroll; they see a few of her foreign policy positions as something they can use as a wedge.

And now for some frivolity:

Maybe Hillary is a Russian asset?

Ben wrote:I think some people are upset because of the word "asset." You could be an asset to a country's government without even realizing it.

Asset = "A clandestine source or method, usually an agent."

Agent = "A government employee who is influenced to cooperate with a foreign government instead of defecting; now working for two employers instead of one."

https://www.spymuseum.org/education-programs/spy-resources/language-of-espionage/#U

The Russian KGB/GRU slang for anyone less formal than an 'Agent' is a 'Useful Idiot'.

There is no evidence that HC was referencing Gabbart. That's a RW wannabe claim.

I’m only asking this to play devil’s advocate...

If this thread was about Trump doing the same thing, would the LW here, have been so generous...?

eddie wrote:I’m only asking this to play devil’s advocate...

If this thread was about Trump doing the same thing, would the LW here, have been so generous...?

Well, Gabbard is left-wing just like HRC, so it would have to be Trump bashing a Republican (which he has often done) to be the *exact* same thing.

I usually take up for the Republican he's bashing -- for example, decorated Vietnam War hero and Senator John McCain, who negotiated to have other prisoners of war released before himself, and who Trump continues to bash well after his death.

I'm just going by the facts stated in that article I linked to. Gabbard has been the darling of Russia's state-run English-language media outlets, while they've reported less, and much less favorably, on the rest of the Democratic candidates.

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I’m only asking this to play devil’s advocate...

If this thread was about Trump doing the same thing, would the LW here, have been so generous...?

Well, Gabbard is left-wing just like HRC, so it would have to be Trump bashing a Republican (which he has often done) to be the *exact* same thing.

I usually take up for the Republican he's bashing -- for example, decorated Vietnam War hero and Senator John McCain, who negotiated to have other prisoners of war released before himself, and who Trump continues to bash well after his death.

I'm just going by the facts stated in that article I linked to. Gabbard has been the darling of Russia's state-run English-language media outlets, while they've reported less, and much less favorably, on the rest of the Democratic candidates.

Tulsi wrote: You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long.

With a comment like that, I wouldn't call her anything like Hillary.

Tulsi who?

Now Bernie has weighed in.

And now Gary has weighed in.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I’m only asking this to play devil’s advocate...

If this thread was about Trump doing the same thing, would the LW here, have been so generous...?

Well, Gabbard is left-wing just like HRC, so it would have to be Trump bashing a Republican (which he has often done) to be the *exact* same thing.

I usually take up for the Republican he's bashing -- for example, decorated Vietnam War hero and Senator John McCain, who negotiated to have other prisoners of war released before himself, and who Trump continues to bash well after his death.

I'm just going by the facts stated in that article I linked to. Gabbard has been the darling of Russia's state-run English-language media outlets, while they've reported less, and much less favorably, on the rest of the Democratic candidates.

Tulsi wrote: You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long.

With a comment like that, I wouldn't call her anything like Hillary.  

Yet I'm sure if you were to compare their policy positions, you'd find at least 90 percent similarity.

Fuck personality-driven politics. Elections are job interviews, not talent shows.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:




With a comment like that, I wouldn't call her anything like Hillary.  

Yet I'm sure if you were to compare their policy positions, you'd find at least 90 percent similarity.

Fuck personality-driven politics. Elections are job interviews, not talent shows.

They have similar positions.

However, one is peace of shit and the other isn't.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Yet I'm sure if you were to compare their policy positions, you'd find at least 90 percent similarity.

Fuck personality-driven politics. Elections are job interviews, not talent shows.

They have similar positions.

However, one is peace of shit and the other isn't.  

Hahaha... Policy-driven southern politics!