Post New

“Tulsi is an asset of the Kremlin.”

Or,

“Tulsi is a useful idiot for the Kremlin.”

Would anyone care to weigh in, with evidence of support or contradiction of either of these statements?

Would anyone care to weigh in, with evidence of support or contradiction of either of these statements?

Given that we don’t have bank deposit slips showing that she’s being paid by the Russians the first one is impossible to prove.

The second is a matter of opinion. And you’re about to get inundated with left wingers substituting what they’ve been told (opinions) for actual facts.

Dope, thank you. What you say sounds reasonable. Let me press just a bit - has Tulsi made statements or supported policies, either as our DNI or before, that are “tough” on Russia or anti-Putin?

"Tulsi is a useful idiot for the Kremlin.” Would anyone care to weigh in, with evidence of support or contradiction of either of these statements?

Tulsi's behavior and messaging have repeatedly aligned with Russian interests and Kremlin propaganda narratives...
Former advisers to Gabbard suggest that her views on Russia have been shaped not by some covert intelligence recruitment as far as they know -- but instead by her "unorthodox" media consumption habits.
Three former aides said Gabbard, regularly reads and shares articles from the Russian news site RT -- formerly known as Russia Today -- which the U.S. intelligence community characterized in 2017 as "the Kremlin's principal international propaganda outlet."

Gabbard has parroted Kremlin narratives on prominent issues, such as attributing the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war to alleged NATO provocations and U.S. interference,
and suggesting that Russia’s invasion was justified by Ukraine’s possible NATO membership—claims that mirror Russian state media propaganda and are rejected by Western governments and security analysts.

On one occasion Gabbard posted a video on social media asserting "the undeniable fact" of purported bio labs funded by the U.S. across Ukraine.
Ukraine’s government, the U.S. government, news organizations and independent researchers have all said there is no evidence for the claim, which originated from Moscow.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., said Gabbard had embraced "actual Russian propaganda" and called it "traitorous."
Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said Gabbard was "parroting fake Russian propaganda."

Russian news outlets, including RT (formerly Russia Today), have regularly promoted Gabbard’s statements. She has often circulated articles from RT, which the U.S. intelligence community classifies as the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet. Russian state media has described her as "our girl" and "Russia’s girlfriend," openly celebrating her as beneficial to Russian interests.

Gabbard has opposed U.S. sanctions on Russia and characterized such attempts as unnecessary antagonism. She has argued that the U.S. seeks to keep Russia "a poor country," echoing a long-running Russian grievance narrative.

Gabbard’s meetings with Syrian President Bashar Assad in 2017 helped legitimize a leader accused of war crimes, who has served as a proxy and host for Russia and Iran in the Middle East.

I could go on, and on, but I don't the the time or the inclination.

Further reading if interested:

https://apnews.com/article/gabbard-trump-putin-int...

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/18/us/politics/tul...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security...

https://abcnews.go.com/US/gabbards-views-russia-sh...

All the Liberals here who loved Gorbachev and the Soviet Union and couldn't stand Reagan and America's defense build up - are openly agents of the Kremlin.

It's only "Putin!" they have a personal thing with well before "Ukraine!".


They are communist sympathizers at heart. The only thing that changed is they became corporate sellouts since the 80s and saw their little 401K's grow due to the very Evil Corporations they pretend to trash every election so now they are a bit less communist sympathizers than they used to be.


Look at Communist China - try to find Liberals here critcizing Xi or China.

"But former advisers to Gabbard suggest that her views on Russia and its polarizing leader, Vladimir Putin, have been shaped not by some covert intelligence recruitment as far as they know -- but instead by her unorthodox media consumption habits.

Three former aides said Gabbard, who left the Democratic Party in 2022, regularly read and shared articles from the Russian news site RT -- formerly known as Russia Today -- which the U.S. intelligence community characterized in 2017 as "the Kremlin's principal international propaganda outlet."

While it was not clear to those former staffers whether or when she stopped frequenting the site, one former aide said Gabbard continued to circulate articles from RT "long after" she was advised that the outlet was not a credible source of information."

The rest of the article and a few other articles should give you a good perspective.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/gabbards-views-russia-sh...

I once enjoyed watching RT, because I got to see films of parts of Russia that I'd never seen - like the Kamchatka Peninsula. Then at one point it became clear there was a narrative that contradicted what I was hearing from the free press. Disturbed, I researched, found RT was an untrustworthy source, and even though I was watching mostly films of Russian land, etc., dropped them.

“Tulsi is an asset of the Kremlin.”

Or,

“Tulsi is a useful idiot for the Kremlin.”

“Useful idiot” is a subset of “asset”.

All useful idiots are assets.

But not all assets are useful idiots.

“Tulsi is an asset of the Kremlin.”

Or,

“Tulsi is a useful idiot for the Kremlin.”

I think she is both.

What you say sounds reasonable. Let me press just a bit - has Tulsi made statements or supported policies, either as our DNI or before, that are “tough” on Russia or anti-Putin?

Let's look into that.
https://www.newsweek.com/what-tulsi-gabbard-has-sa...

Newsweek actually has a reasonably balanced article on her.

Look at Communist China - try to find Liberals here critcizing Xi or China.


Sorry, but that's just silly. Try to find a liberal here that is praising Xi or China. I don't recall reading a single post to that effect on this board (though, I confess, I don't read all of them...maybe you can point me to one?).

Also, no public figure I'm aware of is doing it, either. Though that would be a larger sample population, so you might find one or two. I'd bet it was less than 1%.

So your characterization is unfair.

Also, I remember Gorby. And I voted for Reagan (second term...wasn't old enough first term). I was a Cold Warrior. USSR was the enemy. I only liked Gorby for his moves to loosen the grip of the Party on the people. But Yeltsin, despite his character flaws, was the first one that I liked...and only because he offered a hope that our mortal enemy wasn't anymore.

I don't think anyone could ever say I was a Com-Symp (to quote Colonel Flagg).

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.