• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tulsi Gabbard lied in her testimony to the Senate yesterday. It was proven. Now she's going with the "misremembered" thing. LOL

It's been a popular defense since 2016.
 
Also, did anyone catch Gabbard saying Iran wasn't building a nuke?
 
Here's a pic of her when she was younger...



220px-Tulsi-gabbard-promoted-major.jpg
 
This is from wiki. It's the only reason she has a job...



"On October 11, 2022, Gabbard announced on Twitter that she was leaving the Democratic Party, accusing its leadership of "cowardly wokeness, anti-white racism, [being] hostile to people of faith and spirituality, and dragging us closer to nuclear war". Shortly thereafter, she endorsed and campaigned for several Donald Trump-supported Republican candidates in the 2022 midterm elections. Among those she endorsed were Senate candidates Don Bolduc, Adam Laxalt and JD Vance, and Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake."
 
The Trump Administration is lawless. It is not concerned. It will continue to be lawless.


On a side note, this probably explains why Putin is running circles around these morons. They have been using an app I can download to discuss national security matters.
 
CaughtInThe said:
Here's a pic of her when she was younger...



220px-Tulsi-gabbard-promoted-major.jpg
Click to expand...
I'm sure she considers herself and honorable person.

Up until yesterday, where (it seemed to me) she knowingly mislead/omitted information in her testimony, you could see the conflict on her face.

I'm betting she was coached by Trump and/or his heavies to do so.
 
Kelby said:
I'm sure she considers herself and honorable person.

Up until yesterday, where (it seemed to me) she knowingly mislead/omitted information in her testimony, you could see the conflict on her face.

I'm betting she was coached by Trump and/or his heavies to do so.
Click to expand...
1743002696901.webp
 
It's rare that I take the side of democrats on an issue, but these people (Gabbard, Ratcliffe, Patel, et al) are obviously lying, and the information which was leaked is HIGHLY classified because it describes specific types of weapons which would be deployed, and it describes specific time frames.

Heads should roll. This cannot be swept under the rug.
 
SkyChief said:
It's rare that I take the side of democrats on an issue, but these people (Gabbard, Ratcliffe, et al) are obviously lying, and the information which was leaked is HIGHLY classified because it describes specific types of weapons which would be deployed, and it describes specific time frames.

Heads should roll. This cannot be swept under the rug.
Click to expand...
Heads should roll, but won't.
 
SkyChief said:
It's rare that I take the side of democrats on an issue, but these people (Gabbard, Ratcliffe, et al) are obviously lying, and the information which was leaked is HIGHLY classified because it describes specific types of weapons which would be deployed, and it describes specific time frames.

Heads should roll. This cannot be swept under the rug.
Click to expand...

Kudos to you for this post.
 
SkyChief said:
It's rare that I take the side of democrats on an issue, but these people (Gabbard, Ratcliffe, Patel, et al) are obviously lying, and the information which was leaked is HIGHLY classified because it describes specific types of weapons which would be deployed, and it describes specific time frames.

Heads should roll. This cannot be swept under the rug.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't be a partisan issue.
 
Is the problem they should be texting this kind of information or is the problem they had a journalist as one of the recipients?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom