LaxPower Back-Up Stick

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.goodth ... 28125/amp/

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

So you know these people when you make assumptions personally? And Putin as well? And Natasha?

Tell me again about your portfolio of nasdaq stocks…

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:09 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

So you know these people when you make assumptions personally? And Putin as well? And Natasha?

Tell me again about your portfolio of nasdaq stocks…

I pay attention to what they say & do. 1 primary holding. > 5,000 % ROI

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:09 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

So you know these people when you make assumptions personally? And Putin as well? And Natasha?

Tell me again about your portfolio of nasdaq stocks…

He speaks for other people all the time. He’s like Obama’s interpreter. He is what he is.

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:40 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:09 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

So you know these people when you make assumptions personally? And Putin as well? And Natasha?

Tell me again about your portfolio of nasdaq stocks…

I pay attention to what they say & do. 1 primary holding. > 5,000 % ROI

Coolp

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:56 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:09 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

So you know these people when you make assumptions personally? And Putin as well? And Natasha?

Tell me again about your portfolio of nasdaq stocks…

He speaks for other people all the time. He’s like Obama’s interpreter. He is what he is.

Obama’s gon whoops some a** on all you negative crackers!

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

Again, you have zero credibility on this as an inveterate denier of the Russian attempts to influence our elections.
Experience

And no, on policy, it's immensely dumb (or worse) to say on national TV that we should not stand with a free, democratic, western-leaning Ukraine because, ohh my, the Russians have nuclear weapons...ohh my...and hey a lot of Ukrainians speak Russian...I don't think she's actually this stupid, nor do I I think she's merely prioritizing fighting Islamic extremists...nope...but that's just my opinion, just my impression...which is why I said "sure seems like it's intentional" (I don't know it's intentional, she just appears to be inviting Vlad's support)...after all, she knows she's Vlad's darling, she knows how much press coverage she gets on RT etc, she knows the Russian troll farms have worked on her behalf; again, she's not that stupid not to know...but she's never said, knock it off, get out of our elections, step back Vlad. Thus, my impression that she's inviting Vlad's support.

But, of course, you could be right that she's entirely and simply just a "useful idiot" from Vlad's perspective. A tool.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:02 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

Again, you have zero credibility on this as an inveterate denier of the Russian attempts to influence our elections.
Experience

And no, on policy, it's immensely dumb (or worse) to say on national TV that we should not stand with a free, democratic, western-leaning Ukraine because, ohh my, the Russians have nuclear weapons...ohh my...and hey a lot of Ukrainians speak Russian...I don't think she's actually this stupid, nor do I I think she's merely prioritizing fighting Islamic extremists...nope...but that's just my opinion, just my impression...which is why I said "sure seems like it's intentional" (I don't know it's intentional, she just appears to be inviting Vlad's support)...after all, she knows she's Vlad's darling, she knows how much press coverage she gets on RT etc, she knows the Russian troll farms have worked on her behalf; again, she's not that stupid not to know...but she's never said, knock it off, get out of our elections, step back Vlad. Thus, my impression that she's inviting Vlad's support.

But, of course, you could be right that she's entirely and simply just a "useful idiot" from Vlad's perspective. A tool.

...as opposed to you being a useful idiot & tool for HRC. Her campaign hired a Russian agent to insert disinformation into a campaign which dominated the media coverage for years, fooled the FBI, & lead to an impeachment. ...& you bought into it totally.

Do you support US military intervention in Ukraine against Russia ? Should we do more than our NATO allies ?
https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 76?lang=en
She supported Obama's sanctions on Russia & supported limited military aid to Ukraine AND our Baltic NATO allies.
https://www.msnbc.com/taking-the-hill/w ... 2796739629

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 3:49 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:02 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

Again, you have zero credibility on this as an inveterate denier of the Russian attempts to influence our elections.
Experience

And no, on policy, it's immensely dumb (or worse) to say on national TV that we should not stand with a free, democratic, western-leaning Ukraine because, ohh my, the Russians have nuclear weapons...ohh my...and hey a lot of Ukrainians speak Russian...I don't think she's actually this stupid, nor do I I think she's merely prioritizing fighting Islamic extremists...nope...but that's just my opinion, just my impression...which is why I said "sure seems like it's intentional" (I don't know it's intentional, she just appears to be inviting Vlad's support)...after all, she knows she's Vlad's darling, she knows how much press coverage she gets on RT etc, she knows the Russian troll farms have worked on her behalf; again, she's not that stupid not to know...but she's never said, knock it off, get out of our elections, step back Vlad. Thus, my impression that she's inviting Vlad's support.

But, of course, you could be right that she's entirely and simply just a "useful idiot" from Vlad's perspective. A tool.

...as opposed to you being a useful idiot & tool for HRC. Her campaign hired a Russian agent to insert disinformation into a campaign which dominated the media coverage for years, fooled the FBI, & lead to an impeachment. ...& you bought into it totally.

Do you support US military intervention in Ukraine against Russia ? Should we do more than our NATO allies ?
https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 76?lang=en
She supported Obama's sanctions on Russia & supported limited military aid to Ukraine AND our Baltic NATO allies.
https://www.msnbc.com/taking-the-hill/w ... 2796739629

IMO the reference to the queen of evil as a useful idiot is being way too kind to her. I can think of some more appropriate terms but then I have to deal with the faux FLP hypocritical outrage.

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 3:49 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:02 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

Again, you have zero credibility on this as an inveterate denier of the Russian attempts to influence our elections.
Experience

And no, on policy, it's immensely dumb (or worse) to say on national TV that we should not stand with a free, democratic, western-leaning Ukraine because, ohh my, the Russians have nuclear weapons...ohh my...and hey a lot of Ukrainians speak Russian...I don't think she's actually this stupid, nor do I I think she's merely prioritizing fighting Islamic extremists...nope...but that's just my opinion, just my impression...which is why I said "sure seems like it's intentional" (I don't know it's intentional, she just appears to be inviting Vlad's support)...after all, she knows she's Vlad's darling, she knows how much press coverage she gets on RT etc, she knows the Russian troll farms have worked on her behalf; again, she's not that stupid not to know...but she's never said, knock it off, get out of our elections, step back Vlad. Thus, my impression that she's inviting Vlad's support.

But, of course, you could be right that she's entirely and simply just a "useful idiot" from Vlad's perspective. A tool.

...as opposed to you being a useful idiot & tool for HRC. Her campaign hired a Russian agent to insert disinformation into a campaign which dominated the media coverage for years, fooled the FBI, & lead to an impeachment. ...& you bought into it totally.

Do you support US military intervention in Ukraine against Russia ? Should we do more than our NATO allies ?
https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 76?lang=en
Tulsi supported Obama's sanctions on Russia & supported limited military aid to Ukraine AND our Baltic NATO allies.
https://www.msnbc.com/taking-the-hill/w ... 2796739629

...& based on your posts, you do not seem to be as paranoid about China as you are about Russia. I wonder why that might be

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 4:59 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 3:49 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:02 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

Again, you have zero credibility on this as an inveterate denier of the Russian attempts to influence our elections.
Experience

And no, on policy, it's immensely dumb (or worse) to say on national TV that we should not stand with a free, democratic, western-leaning Ukraine because, ohh my, the Russians have nuclear weapons...ohh my...and hey a lot of Ukrainians speak Russian...I don't think she's actually this stupid, nor do I I think she's merely prioritizing fighting Islamic extremists...nope...but that's just my opinion, just my impression...which is why I said "sure seems like it's intentional" (I don't know it's intentional, she just appears to be inviting Vlad's support)...after all, she knows she's Vlad's darling, she knows how much press coverage she gets on RT etc, she knows the Russian troll farms have worked on her behalf; again, she's not that stupid not to know...but she's never said, knock it off, get out of our elections, step back Vlad. Thus, my impression that she's inviting Vlad's support.

But, of course, you could be right that she's entirely and simply just a "useful idiot" from Vlad's perspective. A tool.

...as opposed to you being a useful idiot & tool for HRC. Her campaign hired a Russian agent to insert disinformation into a campaign which dominated the media coverage for years, fooled the FBI, & lead to an impeachment. ...& you bought into it totally.

Do you support US military intervention in Ukraine against Russia ? Should we do more than our NATO allies ?
https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 76?lang=en
Tulsi supported Obama's sanctions on Russia & supported limited military aid to Ukraine AND our Baltic NATO allies.
https://www.msnbc.com/taking-the-hill/w ... 2796739629

...& based on your posts, you do not seem to be as paranoid about China as you are about Russia. I wonder why that might be

I bet the folks that live in Taiwan are way more concerned about the Chicoms than they are about Russia. Here in America in FLP fantasy land where the queen of evils reset button didn't work as advertised, the Russians are the real problem. I wonder why we are concentrating all our defense dollars on the South Pacific? If Vlad is the real threat why would that be?

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 3:49 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:02 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:56 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:14 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:28 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:55 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 5:17 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:37 pm Good lord, Gabbard's DOA as a Dem candidate and disqualified in oh so many ways...

Has she introduced any actual legislation in the past couple of years?
Oh yeah, anti-transgender legislation under "Protect Women's Sports Act"...

She may lose support from that massive group of unrestricted transgender sports advocates

And we haven't even gotten to Vlad's support...

...still using your HRC talking point McCarthyite smears.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics ... index.html

Clinton did not provide proof about how Russia is “grooming” Gabbard. She and her team pointed to allegations that Russian news and propaganda sites often report on Gabbard’s campaign and that moments in Gabbard’s campaign have been reportedly amplified by trolls and bots on Twitter with ties to Russia. Gabbard has denied those allegations.

Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“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,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “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.”

The funny thing was that Tulsi was looking for the attention, she was only at 1.2%...never did get much past that point...yet, claimed to be HRC's main competition-I don't think she was merely delusional, I think she was desperate.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent story that said she is being backed by Russians on Twitter. “This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable.”

Yup, and you still don't believe that Vlad had his folks trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. Nah, nuthin' to see...

You're ohh so credible.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

I think you know how low my regard was for HRC; despite my revulsion at Trump, and that was well-earned revulsion, a totally disqualified on every dimension candidate, I still couldn't bring myself to cast a vote for Clinton. Went for the 3rd party knucklehead as a protest vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -explained

But hey, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iywKH60NUGg

She's not the first candidate who's opposed to getting into wars, & wars with Russia specifically.

Of course any country is going to promote a candidate who best serves their interests. That does not make them a Russian asset.

Did you decry John Kerry as a Soviet or Chinese asset for his antiwar views during Vietnam (the height of the Cold Wat), or accuse him of being an Iranian asset for JCPOA ?

She served 2 tours in Iraq & is still serving as a Major in the Army Reserve.
Speaking of credibility -- who are you to accuse her of being a Russian asset ?
You claim to be repulsed by Clinton yet you eagerly embrace her McCarthyite smear tactics.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 52?lang=en

I only said she had Vlad's support...favorite Dem candidate of Vlad...and indeed, they had the bots and troll farm working for her. I don't need to like or agree with Hillary on a darn thing to believe the data scientists.

And yup, Tulsi's still a tool for the Russians. Whether that's intentional or not (and sure seems like it's intentional) she's nevertheless predictably useful to them.

"Useful idiot" is still an "asset", though not the same as an "agent" the latter being something I highly doubt.

But yeah, you have zero credibility on this one. You pooh poohed that the Russians were involved actively in supporting Trump and against Clinton from the get go and you're still hanging on...

What is your basis for saying it is intentional on her part ?
She's isolationist in that she eschews great power conflict -- whether with Russia or China.
She does not wish to provoke either of them until/unless they are a clear & present danger -- an imminent existential military threat to the US.
After 9-11, her tours in Iraq & her NG/Army Reserve experience, she obviously still sees the spread of militant Islam as the most imminent threat.
None of that makes her a Russian asset or Islamophobe.

You are so intolerant of people who do not share your perspective that you assign darker motives rather than tolerate honest, legitimate & well reasoned differences of opinion & perspective, based on relevant experience (...more extensive than yours).

Again, you have zero credibility on this as an inveterate denier of the Russian attempts to influence our elections.
Experience

And no, on policy, it's immensely dumb (or worse) to say on national TV that we should not stand with a free, democratic, western-leaning Ukraine because, ohh my, the Russians have nuclear weapons...ohh my...and hey a lot of Ukrainians speak Russian...I don't think she's actually this stupid, nor do I I think she's merely prioritizing fighting Islamic extremists...nope...but that's just my opinion, just my impression...which is why I said "sure seems like it's intentional" (I don't know it's intentional, she just appears to be inviting Vlad's support)...after all, she knows she's Vlad's darling, she knows how much press coverage she gets on RT etc, she knows the Russian troll farms have worked on her behalf; again, she's not that stupid not to know...but she's never said, knock it off, get out of our elections, step back Vlad. Thus, my impression that she's inviting Vlad's support.

But, of course, you could be right that she's entirely and simply just a "useful idiot" from Vlad's perspective. A tool.

...as opposed to you being a useful idiot & tool for HRC. Her campaign hired a Russian agent to insert disinformation into a campaign which dominated the media coverage for years, fooled the FBI, & lead to an impeachment. ...& you bought into it totally.

Do you support US military intervention in Ukraine against Russia ? Should we do more than our NATO allies ?
https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 76?lang=en
She supported Obama's sanctions on Russia & supported limited military aid to Ukraine AND our Baltic NATO allies.
https://www.msnbc.com/taking-the-hill/w ... 2796739629

I'm anything but a supporter of HRC, not remotely a fan.
Much less have any influence, nor have any claim of political leadership pretensions.

Tulsi has such pretensions, seeks to have such influence, and really is supported by Vlad as a "useful idiot".

And what a lot of baloney you spew, constantly, to try to distract from what the Russians actually did and continue to do.
My 'experience' may well be far more extensive than yours in this arena, while I would certainly defer to your knowledge of military equipment, tactics...and jargon.

Yes, I do support being a bulwark for Ukraine. Definitely...I recall you trying to tell us it wasn't really the Russians who crossed the border and took Crimea, then you pivoted to the claim that it was really Russia's in the first place...I recall our argument at that time, the tragic history of appeasement.

I'm still right, IMO.

Listen, if you want to be an isolationist and a nationalist, rejecting international law and organizations, global interdependence, prefer to let other nations deal with their own crises and threats, etc...no sweat, that's simply your opinion (Tulsi's too?)...but how about some actual integrity and consistency to this isolationism?

If you and Tulsi actually believe we should go back to isolationism, then advocate pulling the Navy and Air Force all the way back, abandon all bases around the world, including ME and North Africa...stop messing with what's happening elsewhere, stop striking perceived enemies and simply defend ourselves at home. No more pretending that we need to fight Islamic extremists as if they're actually a bigger threat to America's interests than Russia, China...much less the threat from within. Go ahead and build your wall, keep out all those non-white immigrants...

But be consistent.

We'll disagree.

Bill Maher panic attack over 2024

Channeling Roy Scheider "We need a bigger boat!"

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 4:59 pm

...& based on your posts, you do not seem to be as paranoid about China as you are about Russia. I wonder why that might be
[/quote]

Missed this later addition.

I've responded to this specious claim a whole bunch of times.
No, I think the Party is hugely dangerous and, thus, China is by far the greatest long term strategic threat to US influence and the success of democracy vs autocracy.

However, the issue is not which country is the greater long term threat, the issue is how best to respond to those threats.

Fundamentally, we need to compete on the basis of the virtues of our system versus autocracy. Our system needs to ultimately need to deliver better for the world than does autocracy.

Both Russia and China are autocracies, though quite different.
Russia is a kleptocrat dictatorship, and quite inefficient in delivering economic goods for its people, so Putin has decided to utilize tactics that undermine democracy in the west, rather than participating in the competitive marketplace. I believe that'll ultimately fail miserably (if we resist vigorously), but in the short term Putin is our most aggressive, direct adversary on behalf of democracy, moreover he's enabled by a white supremacist, "nationalist" movement within the US and numerous other democratic countries that has successfully, in the US, frozen our capacity to work efficiently as a government.

Actual, present threat to democracy's competitiveness on the world stage.

China's longer term threat is indeed greater though, as they are actually successfully delivering far more economic goods and progress to their people (though not all!) and have various strategic assets, including population scale, that are likely to make them an incredibly challenging economic competitor over the next decades. Unlike Putin's Russia, they are much, much more focused on delivering that 'value' to their people, much more efficient. Moreover, they think long term.

So, IMO, it's incredibly important that we get our act together, and focus on competing on the world stage, cooperatively with those who share or are willing to move towards our values, rather than withdrawing into the isolationist, "nationalist" posture, divisive partisan logjams, that will inevitably lead to strategic disadvantage.

And Russia's meddling... and those who appease them, the 'white nationalists', nativists, isolationists that are represented in Trumpism, do great damage to our longer term competition against autocracy and authoritarianism, most specifically China.

That's a mouthful, and I suspect you really don't 'get it', but how about stop asking me the same dumb question as if I haven't answered previously?

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:36 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 4:59 pm

...& based on your posts, you do not seem to be as paranoid about China as you are about Russia. I wonder why that might be

Missed this later addition.

I've responded to this specious claim a whole bunch of times.
No, I think the Party is hugely dangerous and, thus, China is by far the greatest long term strategic threat to US influence and the success of democracy vs autocracy.

However, the issue is not which country is the greater long term threat, the issue is how best to respond to those threats.

Fundamentally, we need to compete on the basis of the virtues of our system versus autocracy. Our system needs to ultimately need to deliver better for the world than does autocracy.

Both Russia and China are autocracies, though quite different.
Russia is a kleptocrat dictatorship, and quite inefficient in delivering economic goods for its people, so Putin has decided to utilize tactics that undermine democracy in the west, rather than participating in the competitive marketplace. I believe that'll ultimately fail miserably (if we resist vigorously), but in the short term Putin is our most aggressive, direct adversary on behalf of democracy, moreover he's enabled by a white supremacist, "nationalist" movement within the US and numerous other democratic countries that has successfully, in the US, frozen our capacity to work efficiently as a government.

Actual, present threat to democracy's competitiveness on the world stage.

China's longer term threat is indeed greater though, as they are actually successfully delivering far more economic goods and progress to their people (though not all!) and have various strategic assets, including population scale, that are likely to make them an incredibly challenging economic competitor over the next decades. Unlike Putin's Russia, they are much, much more focused on delivering that 'value' to their people, much more efficient. Moreover, they think long term.

So, IMO, it's incredibly important that we get our act together, and focus on competing on the world stage, cooperatively with those who share or are willing to move towards our values, rather than withdrawing into the isolationist, "nationalist" posture, divisive partisan logjams, that will inevitably lead to strategic disadvantage.

And Russia's meddling... and those who appease them, the 'white nationalists', nativists, isolationists that are represented in Trumpism, do great damage to our longer term competition against autocracy and authoritarianism, most specifically China.

That's a mouthful, and I suspect you really don't 'get it', but how about stop asking me the same dumb question as if I haven't answered previously?
[/quote]

Listened to a discussion on Bloomberg Radio today about China and our crackdown on China’s access to computer chips and other technologies. China is committed to decoupling from the US in response. Long term, it’s likely to be a losing battle for us if technology is bifurcated by trading partners. China graduates twice as many students as we do annually and 50% are STEM. “We be Fkuc’d”….may turn out to be poor policy decisions but moat of us won’t be around to see it.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:07 pm
Yes, I do support being a bulwark for Ukraine. Definitely...I recall you trying to tell us it wasn't really the Russians who crossed the border and took Crimea, then you pivoted to the claim that it was really Russia's in the first place...I recall our argument at that time, the tragic history of appeasement.

I'm still right, IMO.

Listen, if you want to be an isolationist and a nationalist, rejecting international law and organizations, global interdependence, prefer to let other nations deal with their own crises and threats, etc...no sweat, that's simply your opinion (Tulsi's too?)...but how about some actual integrity and consistency to this isolationism?

If you and Tulsi actually believe we should go back to isolationism, then advocate pulling the Navy and Air Force all the way back, abandon all bases around the world, including ME and North Africa...stop messing with what's happening elsewhere, stop striking perceived enemies and simply defend ourselves at home. No more pretending that we need to fight Islamic extremists as if they're actually a bigger threat to America's interests than Russia, China...much less the threat from within. Go ahead and build your wall, keep out all those non-white immigrants...

But be consistent.

We'll disagree.

That part is a fabrication. I never denied that the little green men who seized Crimea were Russians. I pointed out that they received little to no resistance from Ukranian military forces.

My isolationism is non-interventionist. No nation building or wars of choice for human rights abuses or imposing changes in culture.
I support strong naval forces to keep the sea lanes open (with allies) which are vital to our economic survival, robust alliances with fellow democracies & a strong military for deterrence purposes. I support our pivot to Asia to support our Indo-Pacific allies via conventional deterrence. I think we over-invest in defending a wealthy EU from a Russian threat that they do not take seriously, just because we let Putin get under our skin with his political needling. We need to do as much in NATO as our EU allies do, & no more, & focus more on the W Hemisphere & Arctic.

You think we should be a "bulwark" for Ukraine -- whatever that weasel word means. Should we respond with military force against Russia if they invade Ukraine ? Yes or No ?

Do you think we should respond with military force against China if they invade Taiwan ? Yes or No ?