Perhaps Democrats are happier about President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to nominate her as Director of National Intelligence than it would seem. After all, it has given them another opportunity to shout “Russia, Russia, Russia,” one of their favorite talking points.
Advertisement
Since Trump announced his intention to place Gabbard in this position, Democrats have been making the unsubstantiated claim that she is a Russian asset working for the Kremlin’s interests.
Gabbard’s critics refer to her supposed sympathies toward autocratic regimes and instances where her rhetoric supposedly aligned with Russian disinformation. It seems apparent that Democrats and their close friends and allies in the establishment media are telegraphing their planned attacks against Gabbard as she goes through the confirmation process.
During an appearance on MSNBC, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), slammed Gabbard, intimating that she supports “war criminals” and is working as a “Russian asset.”
Tulsi Gabbard is someone who has met with war criminals, violated the Department of State’s guidance, and secretly, clandestinally, went to Syria and met with Assad, who gassed and attacked his own people with chemical weapons. She’s considered to be, essentially, by most assessments, a Russian asset, and would be the most dangerous- Is that how you consider her? Is that what you consider her? Oh, There’s no question.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz says that Tulsi Gabbard is a “Russian asset.”
You simply should not be allowed to defame somebody like this on cable TV without consequences. pic.twitter.com/fduHdchEnr
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) November 15, 2024
Schultz is not the only one using this talking point. Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) made similar accusations in another appearance on MSNBC. “Someone who has aligned herself with Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad and trafficked in Russian-backed conspiracy theories is an unsuitable and potentially dangerous selection,” she said.
Advertisement
The men and women of the U.S. Intelligence community honor their oaths by collecting the vital intelligence that keeps our fellow Americans safe.
The global threats we face require a Director of National Intelligence who would do the same.
Tulsi Gabbard is not that person. pic.twitter.com/B5yF6DI4Id
— Rep. Abigail Spanberger (@RepSpanberger) November 14, 2024
Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO) told NBC News that Gabbard’s appointment might make allies hesitant to share important information.
Rep. Jason Crow, (D-Colo.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said he had “deep questions about where her loyalties lie” and “her long-standing affinity” for autocrats and U.S. adversaries.
“We get a lot of intelligence from our allies, and there I would be worried about a chilling effect,” Crow told NBC News.
He said he was especially concerned that the other members of the so-called “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance — the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand — might be unwilling to share sensitive information “because they’re concerned about sources and methods being protected, or what will happen with that intelligence.”
It is almost as if these Democratic lawmakers coordinated these attacks on Gabbard. They are sounding awfully similar, are they not?
Gabbard has long defended herself against these baseless allegations, portraying her interactions with Syria’s regime and others as an effort to avoid military conflicts by relying on diplomacy.
“I think it’s dangerous that we are in a place now where our media culture and political culture are openly and roundly criticizing diplomacy. This is one of the reasons why we find ourselves in a perpetual state of ongoing regime change wars,” she said during a 2020 speech in New Hampshire.
Advertisement
Of course, none of these people truly believe Gabbard is some clandestine Russian asset looking to gain a position of power to benefit the Kremlin, just as they never believed Trump colluded with Russia to swing the outcome of the 2016 election.
This is nothing more than a talking point aimed at dissuading politicians from confirming her as National Intelligence Director while also smearing the incoming Trump administration. Moreover, these criticisms are coming from people who detest the idea that the United States should stop involving itself in the war between Ukraine and Russia and other military conflicts.
Over the past decade, Democrats removed the anti-war mask they wore during the Bush administration and have castigated anyone who suggests that America should not become entangled in foreign military conflicts. Their current attacks against Gabbard show that these people were never who they claimed to be in the first place.
