Hillary Clinton Claims Russians ‘Grooming’ Tulsi Gabbard as Third-Party Candidate

Surely even Clinton supporters can see the madness taking over in their queen?

Surely.

originally posted by: 19Bones79
Surely even Clinton supporters can see the madness taking over in their queen?

Surely.

It is perfectly acceptable to to disagree with Gabbard concerning the Kurds in northern Syria. However, in polite terms, Hillary Clinton's, unfounded allegations are unacceptable to say the least.

Hillary is demonstrating why she is unfit to hold any kind of political office, from city level to the Oval Office.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

To be fair, Hillary Clinton didn't say the Russians were grooming Tulsi Gabbard for a 3rd party race, she said the Republicans are grooming her for a 3rd party race.

Along those lines, Gabbard has just announced that she will not run for re-election to her house seat. (she's being primaried in Hawaii by Hawaii State Senator Kai Kahele.)

Tulsi Gabbard, the last House member still in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, said Thursday she would not seek reelection for her Hawaii seat.

“I believe I can best serve the people of Hawaiʻi and our country as your President and Commander-in-Chief,” she said in an announcement posted on Twitter.

www.msn.com...

Her unorthodox positions made her a target of former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who speculated last week on a podcast that Gabbard was being “groomed” by Republicans to become a third-party nominee.

Looks like Hillary might be right.

Tulso Gabbard has zero chance of winning the Democratic nomination, yet she's giving up her seat, that the people of Hawaii gave her, because she thinks she would be better at presidenting!

So which 3rd party ticket would she run on?

a reply to: thedigirati

the question is

why does Mrs Bill Clinton

get news time?

at all?

Good Question.

Hannity mentioned Clinton on 505 of the 587 episodes of his Fox show that he hosted between Trump’s inauguration and the end of August 2019 -- 86% of the total -- according to a Media Matters review. On 31 additional broadcasts, Hannity did not mention Clinton, but one of his guests did. Altogether, that means that the former secretary of state was mentioned on 91% of the episodes Hannity hosted during that period, a total of 536 editions of the program.

Link

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Thank you for that info sookie, that had slipped by me. It's interesting that she has decided not to run in Hawaii again. That could be part of a larger plan though what that plan might be is questionable.

I disagree with almost everyone that she has no chance as a Democrat and while it seems the whole question of the next two years is in limbo, or rather up in the air due to all the ifs on the impeachment and the ifs of public fluctuations and everything else for that matter,and barring earth shaking jolts to the system at which point it would be anyone's guess how we come out of it, the democrats still when it comes down to it need to deal with the electoral college problem.

And that is middle America. Who do the Dems have running at this point that could appeal to the moderates of the nation who live in those counties and states that need to vote democrat this time. I would say certainly not the more arguably liberal candidates that now hold the focus of the media polls. The Dems might really have to turn to a moderate of which Gabbard still has some moderate cred on her side. As well she is not totally abhorrent to the more liberal as she has expressed her favor for many of the more liberal issues being brought forth.

And this Clinton thing. Well, I have to wonder whether or not it is an isolated fracture. Is it limited to Gabbard or does it go deeper. I think deeper. Watching Mayor Pete on Jake Tapper a week ago Tapper asked him about that issue and Pete dodged it several times which Tapper said ''a nimble dodge'' and finished the interview. The camera held for a few more seconds on Pete's face and for me at least there was a strong look in his eyes of ''I have much more on this but better hold my tongue.'' How deep this rift with the Clinton Machine goes remains to be seen.

But come the convention that either will, or will not come out. If Biden continues to look old and flabbergast able and others have not pulled away from the pack, that first ballot could be a toss. And should the possible chasm with the old Clinton era explode, then Gabbard could vault into a prominent position of leading the revolt against it.

Another important thing to remember here is that the DNC and their super delegates can no longer vote their super delegate status on the first ballot. Thank you Bernie for pushing though that rules change. Again if things are up in the air at that point and the rift becomes a major issue, that could allow for her to be chosen by the convention to be the one to beat Trump and that, after all, is much more important at this juncture than all the rest of the Democrat Issues.

Long shot yes, but I still have not written her off.

As for a third party run, well, as she has said, she will not do that. Likely it would go nowhere as both parties would smother them. Likewise, I do not consider Gabbard to be so dumb or self centered as to do that. She is well aware of the threat Trump poses to the nation and I just don't see her helping to toss it all over to him should he still be in the race for 2020

a reply to: Sookiechacha

sookie that was a change after the fact, there is a threaqd about it on ATS

she said Russia and then the paper reporting it changed it latter

why would they do that??

a reply to: Liquesence

I only watch Hanity once a month, maybe, if the wife puts FOXNEWS on.

they sad thing is, before 2016, Hannity made no sense to me, Since 2016, Hannity makes a lot more sense....


Thanks Democrats...

a reply to: Puppylove

What a load of horsecrap, the UN is powerless when the big players ( Security Council ) leave it a toothless tiger.

The tangled mess benefits Arms suppliers of the West, surges in oil price benefits Wall St and US oil interests.

Ask those questions of your taxpayer funded CIA, who effectively look after the interest of US corporations.


en.wikipedia.org...


www.theguardian.com...

Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq