Gabbard’s past support for Edward Snowden
Yeah, Republicans WOULD be upset about her only correct stance, even if it's a past one 🤦
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Gabbard’s past support for Edward Snowden
Yeah, Republicans WOULD be upset about her only correct stance, even if it's a past one 🤦
Whether or not you agree with notorious intelligence leaks, and I'm not saying I don't, it's not a great look for the Director of National Intelligence to support the leaking of sensitive intelligence documents.
Well, the sensitive intelligence documents showed that the NSA was interpreting the law in a way that goes way beyond what Congress allowed.
Having someone at the top that agrees that their department has limits regarding the US constitution is prepared to enforce those limits does NOT sound like a bad thing.
Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that it was a breach of security.
It's like applying for bank security after praising Pretty Boy Floyd.
The call is coming from inside the house..
Well, Senate, technically. But the joke was perfect.
The Senate receiving every bit of intelligence on a nominee from every government organization should be a requirement. If there's a national security issue with disclosure to the general assembly, that information should still go to the committees/Senators that have those clearances, like the Intelligence Committee.
"Although FBI file reviews are standard for presidential cabinet candidates..."
I don't disagree with you, but this is a non-story. The committee asks for and receives this information as a matter of course
Apart from the fact that the transition team hasn’t signed the required paperwork to actually kick that off, sure.
The fucker won't sign it either. It will go to inauguration and he will proclaim its not needed by executive decision.
Trump wanted the Senate to just take a recess so he could make all his appointments without oversight.
That was never going to happen unless he allowed The Heritage Foundation to choose the cabinet and the Federalist Society to choose the judges. But Gaetz, Hegseth, and Gabbard made the request laughable.
i love that he won't even be in office for a couple more months and they're already eating each other
I really hope the infighting completely paralyzes them or at least slows down the fascism
My thoughts too. I prefer non functional over fascist functional.
Though it looks like people around him this time are expecting to be able to manipulate him and to have a real power.
Another concern is that he likely replace Thomas and Alito with younger ones, basically cementing this corrupted makeup.
I could see Alito retiring for party over country but Thomas is too self-serving, he'd have to die to give up the free money position.
He better book his rooms on the ground floor for the next 4 years then, or else a certain somebody might try his overlord's favorite trick.
Nah Trump doesn't care about the long-term that way. So long as he votes for Trump's side in every case.
Unfortunately, incompetence and infighting haven’t slowed fascism much in the past. Recklessness fuelled by ignorance actually makes autocrats more dangerous, not less.
For example: Hitler Was Incompetent and Lazy—and His Nazi Government Was an Absolute Clown Show.
The parallels are uncanny.
They had all three branches for two years under Trump starting in 2016 and only got the tax cuts passed, and otherwise dicked around.
ACA repeal was only after a surprise vote by John McCain. Before that it was assumed to go through. I'm not so sure it won't be replaced this Congress with "concepts of a plan"
Marco Rubio is on the Intelligence Committee, yeah?
Dude wants to be Sect. Of State so damn bad he's throwing all those Alphabets directly under a speeding Lada.
But Trump said the FBI was crooked', so... Now what?
Don't try and make sense of the crazy lunatic. You will just drive yourself crazy.
So supporting Snowden is a bad thing now?
To government bootlickers, always has been.
Tulsi Gabbard is literally in a cult. And I don't mean the GOP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Identity_Foundation
Tulsi is a Kremlin asset and she qualifies as a Russian SVR RF agent!
after Gaetz dropped out i told a friend of mine that if I could have only one other person kept from the new administration, it would be Gabbard.
She is absolutely compromised, and it must be very, very deep. Whatever she afraid of, it must be massive.
Either that or she's actually turned and loves (Soviet) Russia.
Quit being concerned quietly in private and freak the fuck out loudly like the rest of us, you fuckheads! Why do you keep choosing the most shit-filled route and then saying that the amount of shit you have to wade through gives you pause.