What's new

Hillary Clinton says Tulsi Gabbard is a 'Russian asset' groomed to ensure Trump reelection

The understanding of where this is going or what is motivating it is not agreed upon by everyone as your echo chamber says. I don’t necessarily agree with them as I’ve stated that Russia could indeed move into the Donbas where there are a lot of ethnic Russians, but those who think this is all posturing do point to some interesting evidence to support their case.
back to topic.

Hillary Clinton is a globalist who'd laugh and enjoy a tumble in the straw with Putin or any other world leader. She doesn't believe in borders or nation states, just money. It's all good as long as she gets her jollies and her money.

As weak minded as any know-nothing ignoramuses in the trailer park might be, there is no one there stupid enough not to see that fact about HC. Yet we have a completely indentured media service and flocks of professors all over the country whose job it is to create a more complicated mythology to bedazzle the populace. The reason this is needed is to legitimize corrupt governance and get kids to go shoot people in foreign lands, or where ever, in the service of the game.

I don't know Putin. I read a little Russian, I can go see what he is saying in the Russian press.. Go figure. Perhaps the Russian people are mushroomed the same way we are. What should you believe.

I'd expect Putin to be corrupt just like Hillary or Biden, the same way Marxist strategists employ "the Politics of Personal Destruction" against people like Trump using merely false assertions without evidence.

But the undeniable fact is that during Gorbachev days, negotiating stuff like independent states for Eastern European countries like Ukraine and nuclear arms reductions like the START treaty, we made a deal with Russia that we wouldn not move NATO into that space, not even one inch. Putin is calling us out on that broken promise, and our leaders and our Press are all lying to us about what what is going on.

Our leaders and our Press have been goading the American public for war for a damn long time already. I could lay out the game leading up to our own Civil War and even the Indian wars and removals like the Trail of Tears. There's always the money, and always the corrupt politicians and their backers/cronies who make fortunes off of war, poverty, death and destruction of ordinary people.

It was "Remember the Maine" that got us to go take Cuba and the Philippines. It was "Over There" that got us to send millions of duped Americans to go fight to save the Crown in WWI, and our own stupid elites who built up Hitler until he went Amok and attacked the West.

And it's been the big Cold War lie after we gave Russia the nuke technology, even while our super elite played Russia and China like the little puppets they are.

Reading Putin as I do, the fact is that whatever his political ideology or background, he is a Russian nationalist more than a globalist. He may be on the short list for regime change in the eyes of Western managers. He favors home-grown financial interests' "oligarchs" over American oligarchs. Whoop de doo. What a crime against humanity.

I believe Putin will develop good relations with elected Ukrainian leadership, but he will also take out Western fascist agitators/fascists if they do a provocation. Imagine that. A tactical strike against a small band of terrorists funded by Soros and perhaps other Western Oligarchs. Pretty much the same thing as us taking out an Iranian agitator in Iraq. He will do what has to be done, then he will leave. He can count on two things. Ukrainians, whether ethnic Russian or not, do not want him to come in to stay. Whatever he does will be communicated to those people as a benevolent Russia helping Ukrainian democracy. There will be a treaty with Ukraine about a security zone around Russia's Black Sea bases. Maybe even a few long-term leases for further military bases.

Tulsi Gabbard is a good American who doesn't believe we should be using our military to fight for our industrialists' interests. More of a conventional democrat than Hillary.
 
The understanding of where this is going or what is motivating it is not agreed upon by everyone as your echo chamber says.

Of course not. Russian apologists very much disagree.

This isn't about whether some Russian attack is shortly imminent. This is about the question of why Putin wants guarantees that Ukraine will join Nato.

And if you (and Tulsi) think there is more than one possible answer, then you're either being facetious or naive. Take your pick.
 

This actually supports my case that Gabbard is a tool of the Kremlin. She’s reading their talking pts line by line.

1. The TV stations shut down were propaganda outlets for Russia. One of the outlets is owned by a man whose daughter was baptized by putin. While not ideal, it’s pretty obvious why they’d shut these down. I mean, after all, why was Donald asking their president to dig up dirt on Hunter Biden? It was because he knew that Ukraine is desperate. They’re at war with Russia. When you’re at war, like they have been since 2014, you can’t permit Russian propaganda to shred your society.
2. The former president is currently under investigation for corruption surrounding the purchasing of coal from separatist controlled areas. But he hasn’t been imprisoned.


Ask yourself, “What would Putin want?”

1. Ukraine to have the support of the west?
2. The west to abandon Ukraine over the guise that it’s “not really a democracy anyway” so it’s all good if Russia invades?

Cmon guys, let’s get better at this game. ****. Russia assassinates critics, imprisons dissidents, has no free press, invades other countries, hacks the servers of our political parties, and manipulates how we vote and think through social media and tools like Tulsi.

We need to get better at this fight.
 
It’s pretty funny to see the same posters who downplayed Russia’s influence in 2016 and who dismissed Donald’s blackmailing of Zelensky, continue to hold water for Putin during his buildup to invade Ukraine. We get it we get it, you have a crush on Putin. And we all know why:

Some of you folks might get triggered, you’ve been warned.

Why did it happen?
Some of it, I suppose, we could dismiss as uninformed rubes merely aping Donald Trump’s reverence of the Russian president. Trump, as we’ve all cringed at seeing, has a creepy, man-crush attraction to authoritarian rulers, and so his cult follows suit. (In case you think I’m exaggerating, Trump is still going on about his “love letters” from Kim Jong Un. Imagine, just for a moment, the pictures Republicans would paint if Joe Biden said he was exchanging love letters with, say, the current leader of Iran. Better yet, put it out of your mind immediately.)
Putin, even more than Trump, was a loser who became a winner. Here was this homely mediocrity, a drab and hangdog figure who never rose to a significant rank even in his own country, a man of no account who nonetheless today, 20 years after being handed the Russian presidency, is one of the richest and most powerful people in the world. His jowls and rubbery cheeks have somehow firmed up, he’s ditched his wife, and he’s allegedly taken up with a younger girlfriend. He rides around shirtless on horses, scores hockey goals against professionals, and probably wrestles bears in front of his cabinet just to prove he can do it.

He is every loser’s image of a winner. And that, for a party that has now almost explicitly branded itself as the party of angry losers, is an irresistible story.

 

She lost me completely when she said "this is what Putin has been accused of doing."

No. Let's stop right ****ing there. Putin DID all of those things. Putin has assassinated journalists. Putin has jailed political rivals. Putin has control over the state run media. Putin has bombed apartments full of RUSSIANS as a way to smear Muslims and rise to power in his quest to bring those Muslims to justice.

Putin isn't accused of these things, he is 100% guilty of these things.
 
She lost me completely when she said "this is what Putin has been accused of doing."

No. Let's stop right ****ing there. Putin DID all of those things. Putin has assassinated journalists. Putin has jailed political rivals. Putin has control over the state run media. Putin has bombed apartments full of RUSSIANS as a way to smear Muslims and rise to power in his quest to bring those Muslims to justice.

Putin isn't accused of these things, he is 100% guilty of these things.
Weird. Almost like she’s a tool of the Kremlin. What would Putin want? Politicians to accurate describe him as the monster he is? Or for a tool like Tulsi to inject disinformation into the conversation?

You can see what their target demo is; cynical Americans who greatly distrust political parties and the media.

You can practically see the wink and nod she’s giving to that targeted demographic (which consists of people both on the left and right):

“Putin is accused of xyz, just like Iraq had WMDs, like Hillary was supposed to win, Trump colluded with Russia, and Fauci (insert any number of accusations made).”

Those already cynical towards political parties and distrustful of major institutions will then come to believe that Putin really isn’t any worse than any other politician and Ukraine isn’t any better than Russia.

It’s a cynical game that Putin has perfected over the years.

Sound familiar? This is what Tucker, Trump, and the RW (in particular) in our country are trying to accomplish:
“Everything is P.R.,” my Moscow peers would tell me. This cynicism is useful to the state: When people stopped trusting any institutions or having any values, they could easily be spun into a conspiratorial vision of the world. Thus the paradox: the gullible cynic.
As the Kremlin plays the West, we see it extend the tactics it uses at home to foreign affairs. The Kremlin courts the West’s financial elites, including the German and American business lobbies that opposed new sanctions; backs anticapitalist shows like Abby Martin’s “Breaking the Set” on the broadcaster RT (formerly Russia Today); and encourages the European far right with money and support to parties such as France’s National Front. The Kremlin can’t hope to dominate the West as it does the domestic situation, but its aim is to sow division, to “disorganize” the enemy through an information war.

At the core of this strategy is the idea that there is no such thing as objective truth. This notion allows the Kremlin to replace facts with disinformation. We saw one example when Russian media spread a multitude of conspiracy theories about the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine in July, from claiming that radar data showed Ukrainian jets had flown near the plane to suggesting that the plane was shot down by Ukrainians aiming at Mr. Putin’s presidential jet. The aim was to distract people from the evidence, which pointed to the separatists, and to muddy the water to a point where the audience simply gave up on the search for truth.
Sadly, this mind-set resonates well in a post-Iraq and post-financial-crisis West increasingly skeptical about its own institutions, where reality-based discourse has already fractured into political partisanship. Conspiracy theories are prevalent on cable networks and radio shows in the United States and among supporters of far-right parties in Europe. President Obama, responding to Russian aggression in Ukraine, pointed out that Russia is not the Soviet Union. “This is not another Cold War that we’re entering into,” he said. “Russia leads no bloc of nations, no global ideology.” But perhaps he was missing the point.
Keep in mind, this article was written in 2014, before the latest batch of cynical disinformation of 2016-present.
 
Last edited:
Weird. Almost like she’s a tool of the Kremlin. What would Putin want? Politicians to accurate describe him as the monster he is? Or for a tool like Tulsi to inject disinformation into the conversation?

You can see what their target demo is; cynical Americans who greatly distrust political parties and the media.

You can practically see the wink and nod she’s giving to that targeted demographic:

“Putin is accused of xyz, just like Iraq had WMDs, like Hillary was supposed to win, Trump colluded with Russia, and Fauci (insert any number of accusations made).”

Those already cynical towards political parties and distrustful of major institutions will then come to believe that Putin really isn’t any worse than any other politician and Ukraine isn’t any better than Russia.

It’s a cynical game that Putin has perfected over the years.
Yeah, the way she phrased that was 100% disingenuous. It wasn't accidental. It wasn't asking an actual question about what Putin has or hasn't done. It wasn't a reasonable statement that a knowledgeable person would make.

It could only be made specifically to deflect and shift blame. That statement had an intended audience.

Tulsi Gabbard has no integrity. I will not speculate beyond that, but that much is established without question.
 
and much worse.
Have you read the book “The Man Without a Face” by Masha Gessen? It’s a little older but she details some of the early putin crimes. From manufacturing terror bombings, to having journalists digging into his fraud assassinated, to buying media outlets out through bribes or blackmail. He probably would’ve received more attention had we not become so overwhelmed with the war on terror.

It’s truly astonishing and a pretty short and easy read.

Amazon product ASIN 1594486514
 
This isn't about whether some Russian attack is shortly imminent. This is about the question of why Putin wants guarantees that Ukraine will join Nato.

And if you (and Tulsi) think there is more than one possible answer, then you're either being facetious or naive. Take your pick.
The thing about pieces of history is that time reveals the truth. If Putin does not storm into Ukraine I will beat you over the head with your stated belief of it being impossible for anyone but the facetious or naive to believe Putin didn't intend to take Ukraine. You could end up being correct or you could be like The Thriller who was so sure inflation was only limited to the price of milk and would evaporate entirely in the first few months of 2022.
 
The thing about pieces of history is that time reveals the truth. If Putin does not storm into Ukraine I will beat you over the head with your stated belief of it being impossible for anyone but the facetious or naive to believe Putin didn't intend to take Ukraine.

Well, this took less than a week to age about as well as that carton of milk I forgot in the back of the fridge.
 
Well, this took less than a week to age about as well as that carton of milk I forgot in the back of the fridge.

We shall see. I've said all along that Russia could move in to take the Donbas. Here is the quote from a few posts above the one you quoted:
I don’t necessarily agree with them as I’ve stated that Russia could indeed move into the Donbas where there are a lot of ethnic Russians

There is still a chance Russia will not roll in, and yes I will still beat you over the head with your wrong prediction if it doesn't happen.
 
nice job hedging your bets so you're right regardless.
If Putin rolls in to Kyiv then I'll be wrong. As for Biden, we now get to see if he isn't completely worthless. He said that if Russia rolled in to Ukraine then we would end the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. He didn't say "sanction". He didn't say "oppose". Biden said "end" as in no Nord Stream 2 pipeline will ever be built.


Now the whole world will see what Biden's word is worth.
 
If Putin tried to take Kyiv, Russia would be curtains. Putin knows this - he has no chance of a full takeover of Ukraine. He’s simply trying to rally the people of Ukraine against the government.
 
If Putin tried to take Kyiv, Russia would be curtains. Putin knows this - he has no chance of a full takeover of Ukraine. He’s simply trying to rally the people of Ukraine against the government.
He’s amputating it. By the end of this Ukraine will have lost at least 1/3rd of its territory since 2014. And if anyone in Ukraine retaliates against Russian forces? Russia will now have reason to take the rest of Ukraine. And right wingers here (like Tucker) and on this forum will excuse it.
 
Top