American Politics > Tulsi Gabbard Quits the Democratic Party

..

Tulsi Gabbard abandons the Democratic Party

In 1 minute and 19 seconds on Twitter, Tulsi Gabbard announced that she is

abandoning the Democratic Party

The only Democrat with a sense of reality, integrity, and conscience is leaving the party that has abandoned all of those character traits. Truth, the First Casualty of War, has been dead in the far-left party for a long time as it leans further and further to the left, and further and further from God.

Note which candidate is leaning the farthest to the left. Klobuchar and Warren both seem to be listing slightly

to port, while Gabbard stands straight along with the two old geezers who seem to be struggling just to stand.

Gabbard, like Trump, is not being controlled by Deep State. Most everyone else in the Dems is. As a consequence, Hillary Clinton accused Tulsi of being a Russian asset because she hasn't bought into the NATO/USA proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Nor has she bought into the false flag chemical weapons attacks in Syria. 

Hillary is probably right when she suggests Tulsi may be about to form a new political party. After all, the old-line parties seem to have sold their souls to the devil, the weapons-manufacturing oligarchs of America.

‘Stop Operation Soros’ Movement Begins in Macedonia

It is interesting to watch as country after country begins to chip away at the foundations established by George Soros. They started out well enough helping communist countries transition to democracies, but their influence didn't stop there. Soros was a polarizing figure in the recent American elections and probably one of the reasons that establishment politics was rejected. 

While Russia has born the brunt of criticism for interfering with the American elections, which is probable but not really proven, we have no idea what role Soros had to play in the elections. We know he was a big supporter of Hillary but whether it was just financial support or if there were more clandestine things going on, we may never know.

Does Soros have a God-complex because he has so much money and he thinks he knows how the world should work and goes about trying to make it so? Who knows? We also don't know whether this 'push-back' by Macedonia and Hungary is completely legitimate or whether there is a communist-like benefactor behind it. In politics things are seldom as they seem. 

Caution: This article is from RT (Russia Today) and so some political bias can be expected. 

A new initiative, Stop Operation Soros (SOS), dedicated to countering the influence of American billionaire activist George Soros, has been launched in Macedonia.

In a press conference on Tuesday, the founders of the group called on all “free-minded citizens,” regardless of ethnicity or religion, to join them in the “fight against one-mindedness in the civil sector, which is devised and led by George Soros,” the Vecer newspaper reported. The movement says it will first focus on uncovering ‘subversive’ activities by Soros-funded NGOs.

According to Nikola Srbov, a columnist for pro-government news portal Kurir and co-founder of SOS, Soros-funded NGOs have monopolized civil society in Macedonia and used their position to suppress dissenting views.

“We've witnessed the takeover of the entire civil sector and its abuse and instrumentalization to meet the goals of one political party. That is unacceptable and goes beyond the principles of civic organizing,” Srbov said at the press conference.

“The Open Society Foundation, operating under the Soros umbrella, used its funding and personnel to support violent processes in Macedonia. It has monopolized the civil society sector, pushing outside any organization which disagrees with the Soros ideology,” he stated.

Another co-founder, Cvetin Cilimanov, editor-in-chief of the state-run MIA news agency, accused Soros’s Open Society Foundations of undermining Macedonian sovereignty by working not only with the opposition center-left SDSM party, but also with outside interests. By cooperating with foreign embassies and organizations such as USAID, Cilimanov believes Soros-backed groups have interfered in the political process of Macedonia.

“This is unacceptable and has largely contributed to a feeling in the public that the traditional relations of partnership Macedonia enjoyed with some countries are being undermined,” Cilimanov told journalists.

A third founder of the initiative and editor-in-chief of the Republika news portal, Nenad Mircevski, declared that the group would work towards the “de-Soros-ization” of Macedonia, echoing a speech made by former prime minister and leader of the ruling VMRO-DPMNE party Nikola Gruevski in December. In the speech, Gruevski accused foreign powers and Soros-backed organizations of meddling in Macedonian politics.

Opposition figures have expressed concern at the rhetoric used by Gruevski, fearing the start of a crackdown on dissent and advocacy groups.

The Open Society Foundation (OSF) was set up by Hungarian-born Soros between the mid-1980s to early 1990s with the stated aim of helping former Eastern bloc countries transition from communism. However, aside from its support for progressive causes such as drug policy reform, the OSF has also been involved in political activities and Soros publically supported the violent overthrow of the legitimately-elected government in Ukraine during the ‘Euromaidan’ revolution. This has earned him the ire of Russian authorities, which in 2015 banned Soros and his foundations as a threat to national security.

Soros and his foundations have come under scrutiny elsewhere as well. In an interview with the internet portal 888.hu in December, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said that 2017 would bring about “the extrusion of George Soros and the forces symbolized by him.” Orban has accused Soros of undermining European borders and values by helping facilitate the flow of refugees and asylum seekers from the Middle East and elsewhere. During a Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything), WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange also blasted the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, funded by Soros, for focusing “exclusively on negative stories about Russia and former Soviet states.”

George W. Bush Bashes Obama on Middle East

Personally, I am not an Obama fan. George's criticisms are right on the mark! However, in criticizing his predecessor, he leaves himself open for criticism. So, criticism he will get in the interest of truth and integrity.

By Josh Rogin
Bloomberg View
In a closed-door meeting with Jewish donors on Saturday night, former President George W. Bush delivered his harshest public criticisms to date against his successor on foreign policy, saying that President Barack Obama is being naïve about Iran and the pending nuclear deal and losing the war against the Islamic State.

One attendee at the Republican Jewish Coalition session, held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas with owner Sheldon Adelson in attendance, transcribed large portions of Bush’s remarks. The former president, who rarely ever criticizes Obama in public, at first remarked that the idea of re-entering the political arena was something he didn’t want to do. He then proceeded to explain why Obama, in his view, was placing the U.S. in "retreat" around the world. He also said Obama was misreading Iran’s intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily. 

According to the attendee's transcription, Bush noted that Iran has a new president, Hassan Rouhani. “He's smooth," Bush said. "And you’ve got to ask yourself, is there a new policy or did they just change the spokesman?”

I think we know the answer to that.

Bush said that Obama’s plan to lift sanctions on Iran with a promise that they could snap back in place at any time was not plausible. He also said the deal would be bad for American national security in the long term: “You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That’s how Americans should view the deal.”

Bush then went into a detailed criticism of Obama’s policies in fighting the Islamic State and dealing with the chaos in Iraq. On Obama’s decision to withdraw all U.S. troops in Iraq at the end of 2011, he quoted Senator Lindsey Graham calling it a “strategic blunder.” Bush signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw those troops, but the idea had been to negotiate a new status of forces agreement to keep U.S. forces there past 2011. The Obama administration tried and failed to negotiate such an agreement.

Bush said he views the rise of the Islamic State as al-Qaeda’s "second act” and that they may have changed the name but that murdering innocents is still the favored tactic. He defended his own administration’s handling of terrorism, noting that the terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who confessed to killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, was captured on his watch: “Just remember the guy who slit Danny Pearl’s throat is in Gitmo, and now they're doing it on TV.”

That he had 8 years to get Osama Bin Laden and didn't, seems to have slipped his mind.

Obama promised to degrade and destroy Islamic State's forces but then didn’t develop a strategy to complete the mission, Bush said. He said that if you have a military goal and you mean it, “you call in your military and say ‘What’s your plan?’ ” He indirectly touted his own decision to surge troops to Iraq in 2007, by saying, “When the plan wasn’t working in Iraq, we changed.”

I hate to rag on you George, but that was the first good decision you made in that whole fiasco. Your decision to go in was completely wrong and you had absolutely no plan for what you would do once you did go in. Mountains of weapons and ammunition disappeared only to be used later against American troops. You incorrectly assumed that the Iraqi people would welcome you with open arms. You diverted attention from Osama Bin Laden onto the hapless Saddam Hussein. And, you set into play the dynamics for the formation of ISIS. Thanks a  lot.

“In order to be an effective president ... when you say something you have to mean it,” he said. “You gotta kill em.”

Bush told several anecdotes about his old friend and rival Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bush recalled that Putin met his dog Barney at the White House and then later, when Bush went to Moscow, Putin showed him his dog and remarked that he was “bigger stronger and faster than Barney.” For Bush, that behavior showed him that Putin didn’t think in “win-win” terms.

Good observation. Putin is an 'I win - You lose' kind of guy. His competitiveness reveals both pride and immaturity, neither of which are very becoming on a world leader. 

Bush also remarked that Putin was rich, divorced his wife and loves power. Putin’s domestic popularity comes from his control of Russian media, according to Bush. "Hell, I'd be popular, too, if I owned NBC news," he said.

You mean you don't own Fox?

Regarding his brother Jeb’s potential run for the presidency, Bush acknowledged that he was a political liability for Jeb, that the Bush name can be used against him, and that Americans don’t like dynasties. He also said that foreign policy is going to be especially important in the presidential campaign and that the test for Republicans running will be who has got the “courage” to resist isolationist tendencies.

Regarding Hillary Clinton, Bush said it will be crucial how she plays her relationship with the president. She will eventually have to choose between running on the Obama administration’s policies or running against them. If she defends them, she's admitting failure, he said, but if she doesn't she's blaming the president.

For George W. Bush, the remarks in Vegas showed he has little respect for how the current president is running the world. He wouldn't be a Republican if he did. He also revealed that he takes little responsibility for the policies that he put in place that contributed to the current state of affairs. He wouldn't be a Republican if he did.

Josh Rogin at joshrogin@bloomberg.net