Seduction Spa

What Everyone Gets Wrong About Tulsi Gabbard

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,280
5,316
113
What’s wrong with requesting the required vetting materials?
It's about intent. Their intent is to delay and to sabotage progress.
You know that right?
 

richaceg

Well-known member
Feb 11, 2009
16,558
8,050
113
How dare she change her mind... DNC is the party of the good guys and party of angels... they can't do no wrong... Trump grabs women by their pussies...Pete Hegseth cheated on his wife blah blah blah.... if Trump did all these you lefties will be outraged.

 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
35,870
70,453
113
She might actually get Sanders.
I don't think he is on the committee, so it would have to be on the floor.
Which means less chance of him talking about why or why not he supports her.

I think Bernie has more integrity than you give him credit for…but we’ll see.
I think it would depend a lot on how you define "integrity".

Again, what would be interesting would be for Sanders to explain his support or opposition.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
35,870
70,453
113
What’s wrong with requesting the required vetting materials?
Vetting materials might result in bad things being uncovered.
Therefore it is unfair to ask Trump nominees to provide them.

Trump tried to skip all of that (and even the Senate voting at all), which delayed things.

 

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
7,730
4,062
113
It's about intent. Their intent is to delay and to sabotage progress.
You know that right?
If the materials are required for vetting and not being turned over then it would seem the GOP are the ones delaying things and playing games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,280
5,316
113
If the materials are required for vetting and not being turned over then it would seem the GOP are the ones delaying things and playing games.
If only the Dems were as critical of proper vetting at the border....
But they would rather focus on someone who already has security clearance, already completed a background check and submitted most of the paperwork.

And you think the Dems aren't trying everything to cause delays and sabotage progress? hahahaha that's funny!
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,978
7,892
113
More Democrat sabotage attempts (from your same source/article)...yawn...it's all they really have at this point.


Senate Democrats are forcing a delay in Tulsi Gabbard's confirmation hearing next week, claiming she hasn't provided required vetting materials — while Republicans accuse them of playing games, Axios has learned.
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/07/tulsi-gabbard-senate-democrats-delay-hearing
When trump nominates an incompetent person that is a risk to such a critical position in the Government as it could compromise the security of all Americans then The Democrats are correct to get to the bottom of her meetings with Assad and her relationships with the likes of the Russians!!
Republicans have also done the same to less controversial appointments during The Obama and Biden eras. When the shoe is on the other foot as usual it is a "Yawn" to the right lies!!
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,280
5,316
113
When trump nominates an incompetent person that is a risk to such a critical position in the Government as it could compromise the security of all Americans then The Democrats are correct to get to the bottom of her meetings with Assad and her relationships with the likes of the Russians!!
Republicans have also done the same to less controversial appointments during The Obama and Biden eras. When the shoe is on the other foot as usual it is a "Yawn" to the right lies!!
She already has security clearance and submitted most of the paperwork.
Do you think the remaining form she needs to submit has anything to do with judging her for anything? Do you think the remaining form is the dealbreaker for whether she's qualified for that role?

They are desperately trying to sabotage and delay. It's the only thing they have left.
You would have to be an idiot not to see that.
 

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
7,730
4,062
113
She already has security clearance and submitted most of the paperwork.
Do you think the remaining form she needs to submit has anything to do with judging her for anything? Do you think the remaining form is the dealbreaker for whether she's qualified for that role?

They are desperately trying to sabotage and delay. It's the only thing they have left.
You would have to be an idiot not to see that.
I guess it turns out that nominees for senior cabinet positions have to submit ALL of the paperwork…not just most of it. That wouldn’t cut it if she was applying for her passport or drivers license…how can she be trusted to run a major government agency when she can’t even fill in the correct forms?

Plus…What is she trying to hide on the forms she has not submitted? I’m not saying she is actually hiding anything…I’m just asking questions.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,280
5,316
113
I guess it turns out that nominees for senior cabinet positions have to submit ALL of the paperwork…not just most of it. That wouldn’t cut it if she was applying for her passport or drivers license…how can she be trusted to run a major government agency when she can’t even fill in the correct forms?

Plus…What is she trying to hide on the forms she has not submitted? I’m not saying she is actually hiding anything…I’m just asking questions.
If she already has security clearance then she has nothing to hide. To obtain that clearance would require significant vetting just for that.
This is a Dem tactic and nothing else.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
35,870
70,453
113
I guess it turns out that nominees for senior cabinet positions have to submit ALL of the paperwork…not just most of it. That wouldn’t cut it if she was applying for her passport or drivers license…how can she be trusted to run a major government agency when she can’t even fill in the correct forms?

Plus…What is she trying to hide on the forms she has not submitted? I’m not saying she is actually hiding anything…I’m just asking questions.
Probably nothing.
The paperwork is delayed because Trump insisted he didn't need to have his nominees approved by the Senate or be vetted.
He lost that push, but it slowed everything down.

I don't think this is a case of Gabbard, specifically, hiding paperwork.
This is a case of Trump, on principle, trying to prove that no one is allowed to question him or check him.
He knows he will always have people like Skoob willing to support him breaking rules and laws.


Like firing the IGs yesterday.
He is supposed to submit a statement to congress 30 days in advance explaining why he is firing an IG.
He didn't.
Probably not due to some nefarious reason for the firing - he just doesn't think the rules apply to him and he wants Congress to know that.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,978
7,892
113
She already has security clearance and submitted most of the paperwork.
Do you think the remaining form she needs to submit has anything to do with judging her for anything? Do you think the remaining form is the dealbreaker for whether she's qualified for that role?

They are desperately trying to sabotage and delay. It's the only thing they have left.
You would have to be an idiot not to see that.
When Convicted Felon Trump's own former members of staff like Bolton are condemning her past record for the manner in which visited Syria to have multiple meetings with Assad and then praising him for his rule, especially when he gassed his own people on numerous occasions. She was also notorious for parroting The Russian "Biolabs" Conspiracy theory in order to sway the opinion against Ukraine in their war with Russia!!
Stop your illiterate name calling scoob!!
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,280
5,316
113
When Convicted Felon Trump's own former members of staff like Bolton are condemning her past record for the manner in which visited Syria to have multiple meetings with Assad and then praising him for his rule, especially when he gassed his own people on numerous occasions. She was also notorious for parroting The Russian "Biolabs" Conspiracy theory in order to sway the opinion against Ukraine in their war with Russia!!
Stop your illiterate name calling scoob!!
When Convicted Felon Trump's own former members of staff like Bolton are condemning her past record for the manner in which visited Syria to have multiple meetings with Assad and then praising him for his rule, especially when he gassed his own people on numerous occasions. She was also notorious for parroting The Russian "Biolabs" Conspiracy theory in order to sway the opinion against Ukraine in their war with Russia!!
Stop your illiterate name calling scoob!!
Nope...paperwork.
Just another case of a former Democrat being attacked and bullied by the same party that used to cherish her.


The Jan. 30 hearing comes after Democrats resisted the scheduling of an earlier hearing, saying they still didn’t have the full slate of background checks, ethics disclosures and paperwork on a candidate whose overall qualifications have sparked their concern.
https://www.kxan.com/hill-politics/senate-panel-sets-hearing-on-tulsi-gabbard-nomination/

Sen. John Barrasso said Sunday that the confirmation hearing for Tulsi Gabbard, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for director of national intelligence, is being held up by "a paperwork problem" with the Office of Government Ethics.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-b...nate-whip-tulsi-gabbard-confirmation-hearing/





btw Tulsi Gabbard met with Assad in 2017 when she was a member of the Democrat party. Where was your outrage then?
 

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
7,730
4,062
113
Nope...paperwork.
Just another case of a former Democrat being attacked and bullied by the same party that used to cherish her.
The paperwork is important. She is applying for a senior cabinet position that directly affects national security. If it was a Dem nominee you would not be this dismissive of the vetting process.

The Jan. 30 hearing comes after Democrats resisted the scheduling of an earlier hearing, saying they still didn’t have the full slate of background checks, ethics disclosures and paperwork on a candidate whose overall qualifications have sparked their concern.
https://www.kxan.com/hill-politics/senate-panel-sets-hearing-on-tulsi-gabbard-nomination/

Sen. John Barrasso said Sunday that the confirmation hearing for Tulsi Gabbard, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for director of national intelligence, is being held up by "a paperwork problem" with the Office of Government Ethics.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-b...nate-whip-tulsi-gabbard-confirmation-hearing/
Yes…Dems have been complaining about this for weeks while Tulsi and the GOP have refused to complete the required documents.

You know what would solve this problem? Filling in the required forms.

Tulsi is either incompetent or she is trying to hide something. I wouldn’t be able to cross the border to watch a Sabres game if I didn’t have my documents in order but you guys all wanna give Tulsi a free pass? smh


btw Tulsi Gabbard met with Assad in 2017 when she was a member of the Democrat party. Where was your outrage then?
Same place it is now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,953
5,784
113
The paperwork is important. She is applying for a senior cabinet position that directly affects national security. If it was a Dem nominee you would not be this dismissive of the vetting process.



Yes…Dems have been complaining about this for weeks while Tulsi and the GOP have refused to complete the required documents.

You know what would solve this problem? Filling in the required forms.

Tulsi is either incompetent or she is trying to hide something. I wouldn’t be able to cross the border to watch a Sabres game if I didn’t have my documents in order but you guys all wanna give Tulsi a free pass? smh




Same place it is now.
From my read, it isn't her holding up the paperwork, but government depts with in charge of the checks.

So perhaps the question is why are they not supplying the necessary things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knuckle Ball

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,978
7,892
113
Nope...paperwork.
Just another case of a former Democrat being attacked and bullied by the same party that used to cherish her.

The Jan. 30 hearing comes after Democrats resisted the scheduling of an earlier hearing, saying they still didn’t have the full slate of background checks, ethics disclosures and paperwork on a candidate whose overall qualifications have sparked their concern.
https://www.kxan.com/hill-politics/senate-panel-sets-hearing-on-tulsi-gabbard-nomination/

Sen. John Barrasso said Sunday that the confirmation hearing for Tulsi Gabbard, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for director of national intelligence, is being held up by "a paperwork problem" with the Office of Government Ethics.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-b...nate-whip-tulsi-gabbard-confirmation-hearing/

btw Tulsi Gabbard met with Assad in 2017 when she was a member of the Democrat party. Where was your outrage then?
Gabbard became a controversial person and caused alarms in both Republican and Democratic Party over the manner in which she visited Syria and meeting Assad on three separate occasions. She did not inform the House about these meetings and even her own staff were not fully aware of her scheduled meetings. But during the 2020 nomination process is where she fell out with the Democrats and with Hillary Clinton in particular. They both attacked one another. But remember that this position as Director of National Intelligence is a cause for concern due to her support once again for the Russian backed Conspiracy Theories that I already posted. We know that the Republicans also have their concerns about this pick, but just do not have the balls to speak out against it. No doubt McConnell and maybe two other Republicans will vote against her nomination!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knuckle Ball

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
7,730
4,062
113
Gabbard became a controversial person and caused alarms in both Republican and Democratic Party over the manner in which she visited Syria and meeting Assad on three separate occasions. She did not inform the House about these meetings and even her own staff were not fully aware of her scheduled meetings. But during the 2020 nomination process is where she fell out with the Democrats and with Hillary Clinton in particular. They both attacked one another. But remember that this position as Director of National Intelligence is a cause for concern due to her support once again for the Russian backed Conspiracy Theories that I already posted. We know that the Republicans also have their concerns about this pick, but just do not have the balls to speak out against it. No doubt McConnell and maybe two other Republicans will vote against her nomination!!

From the article above:
What Do Republicans Say About Gabbard?
So far, no Republican senators have said they’ll vote against Gabbard, but several, in addition to Graham, have expressed reservations, including Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Mike Rounds, R-S.D. Collins specifically citing her views on Russia as a deterrent. Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., also initially questioned whether Gabbard would support Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows the U.S. government to conduct surveillance of non-citizens abroad without a warrant. Gabbard voted against legislation authorizing the act during her time in Congress, but reversed course after she was nominated for director of national intelligence, issuing a statement earlier this month stating her support for the surveillance program. Lankford said publicly he would support her after she endorsed Section 702.
I dunno…I suspect she will get through in the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bver_hunter

The Oracle

Pronouns: Who/Cares
Mar 8, 2004
28,557
57,759
113
On the slopes of Mount Parnassus, Greece
Gabbard became a controversial person and caused alarms in both Republican and Democratic Party over the manner in which she visited Syria and meeting Assad on three separate occasions. She did not inform the House about these meetings and even her own staff were not fully aware of her scheduled meetings. But during the 2020 nomination process is where she fell out with the Democrats and with Hillary Clinton in particular. They both attacked one another. But remember that this position as Director of National Intelligence is a cause for concern due to her support once again for the Russian backed Conspiracy Theories that I already posted. We know that the Republicans also have their concerns about this pick, but just do not have the balls to speak out against it. No doubt McConnell and maybe two other Republicans will vote against her nomination!!
Russian backed conspiracy theories, lol...My word, lol

And she fell out of favour with the Dems when she exposed Kamala Harris during the DNC debate. You seemed to skip over that one...Just like your news sources have a habit of.
 
Last edited:

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,978
7,892
113

From the article above:


I dunno…I suspect she will get through in the end.
All depends on Collins and Murkowski voting with the Democrats. But you are right as Lindsey Graham will not break ranks with Trump. He will rather crap his pants than get on Trump'sbad books. But it could be another tie breaker for Vance to decide!!
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,978
7,892
113
Russian backed conspiracy theories, lol...My word, lol

And she fell out of favour with the Dems when she exposed Kamala Harris during the DNC debate. You seemed to skip over that one...Just like your news sources have a habit of.
You forgot about the "25+ US Funded Biolabs" in Ukraine Conspiracy Theory, that she was supposed to have "revealed".............Really??

But Gabbard has repeatedly shared conspiracy theories, including claiming shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine that there are “25+ US-funded biolabs in Ukraine which if breached would release & spread deadly pathogens to US/world”. In fact, the US program stemming back to the 1990s is directed at better securing labs that focus on infectious disease outbreaks.
Well Gabbard made some gaffes while in Syria such as:

During a congressional trip in 2015, Moustafa recalled, Gabbard had asked three young Syrian girls whether the airstrike they had narrowly survived may not have been launched by Assad, but rather by the terrorist group Isis. The one problem? Isis did not have an air force.

Not everything from Gabbard during the debate against Harris was true. But can she be fully trusted for one of the most critical positions in the cabinet, based on these conspiracy theories and misinformation from her as well?
 
Toronto Escorts