Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for defamation over Russia remarks

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Sookiechacha

so you agree that Tulsi is a Russian asset?

Ummm...I would agree that she may have used Russian dressing...and is an asshat...





YouSir

a reply to: Salander

, and when she resigned from the DNC because of its cheating, she demonstrated her integrity. That's when she won me over.

She is still running for president under the DNC party tent, and she's still a Democrat representative in The House of Representative.

Who else in congress is half as principled as she is?

Justin Amash.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes, Amash and Gabbard are rather in the same boat regarding integrity.

Are you a Democrat yourself?

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: irgust

Essentially politicians can lie to us as its not a crime. I like Tulsi and hope nothing sad happens to her. Clinton may have destroyed her political career as Tulsi then stated that she will not seek re-election.

That sucked.

Ummm...are you sure it's not because she sucked as a candidate...and didn't resonate with anybody other than the mentally infirm...and other progressives...her being a progressive and all...





YouSir

a reply to: Salander

Not really. Gabbard just attacks her party, but still sits under its tent. Justin Amash left his party, and now is an independent.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

This is why the Democrats can't have nice moderate things. As soon as they get them, their core tears them to shreds.

They been eating their own for the last few years.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

i think if she dropped her stance on gun control shed have a lot more supporters

LMAO.

Amash is principled!

thanks for the funny.

She's no threat to Hillary. Unless of course they had a duel, and I'd pay to see that.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Salander

, and when she resigned from the DNC because of its cheating, she demonstrated her integrity. That's when she won me over.

She is still running for president under the DNC party tent, and she's still a Democrat representative in The House of Representative.

Who else in congress is half as principled as she is?

Justin Amash.

Wait - what? Amash is principled? OMG. When it comes to wishy-washy sleazeballs he's right there on top of the heap. I'm glad he switched parties, we don't need people like him in the Republican party. Hm. Hey Mitt, did you hear that?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

This is why the Democrats can't have nice moderate things. As soon as they get them, their core tears them to shreds.

They been eating their own for the last few years.

Ironically, it was just 8 years ago that the biases of the media were on full display, saying the GOP was killing itself with the TEA Party shift because only "extremists" could win their primaries and yet only a moderate could win in the general, making whoever came out of the primaries unelectable in the eyes of moderates, independents, and cross party voters. My how that worm has turned!

a reply to: HalWesten

I'm glad he switched parties, we don't need people like him in the Republican party. Hm. Hey Mitt, did you hear that?

And we don't need people like Tulsi Gabbard in the Democratic Party.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: HalWesten

I'm glad he switched parties, we don't need people like him in the Republican party. Hm. Hey Mitt, did you hear that?

And we don't need people like Tulsi Gabbard in the Democratic Party.

Any particular positions she disagrees with the Democrat standard on which cause you to say that?

The funny thing is, that, as far as I know, Hillary never actually mentioned Gabbard's name, so the lawsuit is frivolous BS.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Victoria Woodhull 1872
Belva Lockwood 1884
Oveta Hobby was endorsed by Eisenhower no less in 1960 but she declined
Margret Chase Smith 1964 Republican candidate if major party matters.
Charline Mitchell in 1968 received votes in a general election and not just a primary.
Shirley Chisholm in 1972 was the first black Democratic primary candidate and a woman
Tonie Nathan in 1972 was the first female to receive an electoral vote by a faithless voter.
Lenora Fulani in 1988 was both the first black woman on the primary in all 50 states.

This election cycle is the first time there has been more than one woman on stage. But that has more to do with keeping Jill Stein out of the debates in 2016.

But if you want a laugh Gracie Allen (yes George Burns’s wife) “ran” for president in 1940 against FDR as a publicity stunt complete with a whistle stop tour. She received 42,000 write in votes. Who knows what would have happened had it been a legitimate attempt instead of a prolonged joke.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Idk, I find her to be just as socialist as the rest. Just not as gun grabby as the others.

originally posted by: Liquesence
The funny thing is, that, as far as I know, Hillary never actually mentioned Gabbard's name, so the lawsuit is frivolous BS.

True, Clinton simply said "one of the candidates is being groomed by Russia to be a third party candidate and she is a favorite of the Russians." With only 5 females in the race at that time, Tulsi assumed she was who Clinton was referring to. Funny thing that, if I'm Vladimir Putin, I'd far prefer a socialist like Warren or Harris or a political airhead like Williamson to be running my primary rival nation than Gabbard. In fact, I'd argue it is far, far more likely that Williamson was a possible target for foreign malfeasance than Gabbard simply based on how clueless of foreign policy and legal practice she was/is.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Idk, I find her to be just as socialist as the rest. Just not as gun grabby as the others.

Same here... which would indicate any Democrat trying to shove her out of their party is truly what they've sworn for years the Democrats are not: Second Amendment haters and Firearm abolitionists. Unless of course the member I asked can enlighten those of us not in tune with the nuances of being a Democrat in 2020 and explain what positions the considerably Left of Center Gabbard is too far right of the Dem party's expectations on.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: HalWesten

I'm glad he switched parties, we don't need people like him in the Republican party. Hm. Hey Mitt, did you hear that?

And we don't need people like Tulsi Gabbard in the Democratic Party.

Any particular positions she disagrees with the Democrat standard on which cause you to say that?

I guess you really don't much about her record, do you?

Part of what has made her a target for the Democratic Party is her snark and disregard for her constituents. The rest is in reference to the way her talking points often play a little too well with Republicans, which weakens the Democrats as a party and gives more power to the right.

….

Through and through, she’s proven to be a problem for Democrats. During the Obama administration, aside from her frequent visits on Fox News, she consistently criticized his foreign policy, the administration’s tactics of toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and ramped up the trash talk in 2015 going towards the elections, much to the Democratic party’s distress. And, to make matters worse, Gabbard’s voting history has often fallen more in line with Republicans rather than Democrats in key areas like immigration.

…..

Gabbard’s history with the Democratic party is fraught with instances where she chose to attack instead of support and embrace her position of leadership, so the taste of a brewing feud on stage at the most recent debate is just the latest backlash from Democrats — not the first. Perhaps it’s a sign that she still thinks trying to set herself apart from fellow candidates by smearing them is the way to go, but is it working?
….

According to recent analyses by FiveThirtyEight, it’s not the Democratic party that’s supporting Gabbard, and it isn’t people on the left. So who exactly are her supporters, and who believes in the messages she’s sending? The analyses indicates that Gabbard’s backers are mainly conservatives and men. While the Hawaii congresswoman may be sticking to her values, her overall disloyalty to her party and her eagerness to attack fellow candidates might mean her campaign can’t hold on for the long haul, as it’s currently unclear if there Democrats in the party who support her.

www.refinery29.com...

Not to mention her stance on Democratic strategy on Trump's impeachment.

originally posted by: Steveogold
a reply to: CriticalStinker

i think if she dropped her stance on gun control shed have a lot more supporters

Her gun stance and health care just seem like she's not really trying on those fronts.

Both are dealbreakers for me.

She's be immensely better like you said if she wasn't for more gun restrictions.