Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Slams Trump’s Attack on Syria: Interviewed by Tucker Carlson

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), who met with Trump two months ago and praised with promised foreign policy restraint, blasts his move to attack Assad’s forces in Syria. She was interviewed by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson last night (4/7/17).

32 thoughts on “Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Slams Trump’s Attack on Syria: Interviewed by Tucker Carlson”

  1. She’s right on topic! And she talked about the comparison with Iraq and the fact that the UN hasn’t been given an opportunity to investigate. It can’t get any better than that and it’s also given a direction for Ron Paul and maybe later, Rand Paul if he sees it as safe ground.

    Only one problem, she’s a part of the Democrat party and that’s going to put a sour taste in a big part of the US citizens’ mouths.

    But note too how she was able to rise above the bait Tucker Carlson tried to feed her on the Russia/Trump issue.

    Did what followed her on Fox destroy her?

    That has got to be the single most truthful and valuable interview Fox has done in years!

    1. since more people voted Democrat in the presidential election, that might not be such a ‘bad taste’. The partisan straight ticket voters on both major parties have been really rudely awakened.

      The propensity to jump on the war bandwagon, however, is going to bring out the loudest mouths.

      1. I think the biggest problem is that the Democratic party can’t forward an antiwar agenda and thereby accept this woman as their new direction.
        An idea to entertain would be Bernie Sanders putting forward a new direction for the US and Tulsi Gabbard moving over there with him to lead the antiwar cause.

        Or, maybe Bernie doesn’t have what it takes and so it’s going to take a new leader that is independent of the two major parties. In any case, if this woman stays true, then should could have all that it takes to become the president. Good looks being probably half the battle to start with. Seriously! Judging by the comments we hear, that was Clinton’s biggest losing factor. It’s much more important than any political ideals to Americans.


    1. Don’t make her out to be of either party.

      Support what she is saying and be ready to jump on her if she doesn’t stay on topic. It doesn’t get any better than this and it’s also an example for Ron Paul and the libertarians to finally get it right!

  3. Totally agreed with her in 2015 and totally agree with her today and she is consistent with her viewpoints and facts.

  4. Tulsi Gabbard has the intelligence, courage, commitment, charisma and clarity to be a great presidential candidate in 2020. She is the only Democrat who has stood up to Clinton, Obama, the DNC as well as to Bush and Trump. Gabbard accused Obama of running a “neocon foreign policy” and was a rising star in the Democratic Party until she resigned from her position as Vice Chair of the DNC to become the first elected official to endorse Sanders.

    This may be her moment. Gabbard introduced the “Stop Arming Terrorists Act” in Congress a few weeks ago. Unlike Trump, Bush, Clinton or Obama, Gabbard actually served in the military and saw combat and remains a major in the active Hawaiian reserves,. Gabbard often cites her combat experience in Iraq as a turning point in her political development that strengthened her commitment to peace and tolerance.

    Gabbard has the potential for representing a broad coalition of antiwar Republicans ,Democrats and independents.

    My main reservation about Gabbard is that she often stated that Iran needs to be restrained from seeking nuclear weapons and accepts the premise that the Iranian regime is seeking nukes. I would also like to know more about her position on Israel.
    But I believe Gabbard shown the capacity to grow and to lead. She was the youngest woman ever elected to a state legislature in US history 15 years ago when she was elected to the Hawaiian state assembly at the age of 21.She has grown significantly since then and I hope she continues to grow as she emerges as the leading Democratic anti war spokesperson in Congress.

    1. Former soldiers seem to make the mightiest pacifists. A lot of people forget that veterans were at the core of both the anti-Vietnam and anti-Iraq war movements.

      1. She could be completely honest in what she is saying but we’re not going to sell the farm by speculating on her possible motive.

        It may be that she is clever enough to be looking forward to being a nominee for president and she’s insightful enough to think that there’s a possibility of her message becoming very popular in two years time, when her campaign would begin.

        Either way, honest or just clever politics, she’s right on message. Very small chance of many hearing her out right now though.

        As for your comment on former soldiers, there’s no evidence to show that would be the rule, as opposed to it being the opposite. I would definitely lean toward it being the opposite and the antiwar protesters of that era were the exception.

        If you think you’re going to be a writer comrade, think out what you say carefully. You’ve only got one reputation to destroy. And fwiw, I would start by distancing yourself from pies in the sky that libertarians depend upon.

    2. She is the only Democrat who has stood up to Clinton, Obama, the DNC as well as to Bush and Trump.

      Bernie Sanders

      1. 1. Sanders is an Independent, he has never run as a Democrat
        2. Gabbard met with Assad and Trump to explore possibilities for peace. Can Sanders or any Democrat say the same?

        1. 1. Sanders ran in the Democratic Primary for President.

          2. That was not your original statement.

          1. 1. Sanders left the Democratic Party immediately after the convention. He was re-elected to the Senate as an Independent and has run for office as an independent since 1979.
            2, Not my original statement. But Gabbard’s willingness to meet with anyone for the cause of peace as well as her independence and honesty mark her as a possible alternative to the self-seeking politicians like Trump, Obama and rand Paul who consistently to disappoint those of us who want to support an antiwar candidate.

    3. Yesterday Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden, called on Hawaiians to vote Rep. Tulsi Gabbard out of office after the Gabbard questioned whether Syrian President Assad was responsible for last week’s chemical attack.

      “This is a disgrace. Gabbard should not be in Congress,” Dean tweeted. He later added, “She sounds like Trump making excuses.”

      Dean and Tanden are calling for a “liberal” to challenge Gabbard for re-election. It looks like Gabbard is the new primary target of the Neocons and the Zionist lobby.

  5. Good interview. Good for Tucker to push back against the war propaganda. Did you see his interview with Lindsey Graham? Damn! It was hilarious seeing him shred Graham’s faulty logic.

  6. It’s probably worth noting that judging individuals based on their strength of character rather than what political party they support makes more sense than making a set of assumptions just because of political party. That said, it does not surprise me at all that Democrats support this strike by the Trump administration. The neocons, after all were Scoop Jackson Trotskyite Democrats. Democratic administrations got the U.S. embroiled in both world wars. Labels like Democrat, Republican, liberal and conservative…even libertarian seem to have no meaning these days. That said, this woman, Tulsi Gabbard sounds like a principled individual…almost impossible to believe in someone who holds political office.

    1. “The neocons, after all were Scoop Jackson Trotskyite Democrats.” Correction: they were ex-Trotskyites, turned anti-Communist. Get your facts straight.

      1. More like pro-Vietnam war which was a false flag war. It was a put up job. You can go on youtube and hear Robert Macnamara say that there was no attack that was cited as the caus belli..

        1. They were “pro-Vietnam war” and anti-Communist. The two are related. And, yes, I know about the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Support for the Vietnam war was fueled by anti-Communism and the “domino theory,” not just outrage over the “false flag” incident.

  7. Pretty much perfect, Tulsi! How the oligarchy has let her slip thru its iron curtain of media control is baffling. Expect operations to be run against her forthwith. Stay strong, Congresswoman!!!

  8. So far the only voice against the Syrian escalation from congress. But it is a strong and clear voice.

  9. She’s very eloquent, “… it doesn’t matter what ‘I’ believe..”

  10. She speaks her mind and she is honest. A really praiseworthy personality. You will find few like her in the arena of politics.

  11. Wilkerson took a chance and defied the narrative too on MSNBC the day after I think it was. You won’t be seeing him talking about it on their t.v. programs anymore.

    And tonight Lawrence O’Donnell proved that he is completely hopeless in serving any antiwar cause.

    Maddow has to be in the employ of the spooks or whoever it is that’s pushiing for war with Syria so frantically. I complete writeoff for anyone hoping to hear somethihg useful and truthful.

  12. It’a wonderful to see a worthy public servant (and I am seldom able to use that word when referring to politicians) given a chance to speak on Mainstream cable venues, whether here or on CNN Wolf Blitzer’s show , where she also appeared to speak on this topic. And, yes, she is right on spot, as should be our many other “leaders, ” who are not there simply because they, in reality, are a best only actors and actresses with varying degrees of acting ability. While pretending to have Americans’, and the world’s best interests at heart , the vast majority of them are serving a corporate agenda for more oil and natural gas profits, not to mention profits for defense contractors (Maybe the US will get that pipeline deal it wants that needs to go through Syria, but has been given to other countries instead, much to the disapproval of the powers that be, if we pretend we care oh so very much about the Syrian people. There are terrible atrocities happening all over the world on a daily basis, some honestly even worse then a few chemical attacks , in some poor countires in Africa for example, but in general the only we see the US intervening is where it has a financial or strategic interest at stake (albeit, foolish strategy that has caused us to fund jihadist terrorists to the gills in Syria for 4 years now, puttng ourselves all the more at danger in the process. I had hoped President Trump would change the course of these actions, and address the terroist jihadists there, most notably ISIS, without trying to overthrow the Syrian government as well. pPerhaos he felt he had to act to prove himself not an ally of Russia, due to all the repetitious neo-McCarthyism in political circles and the media, and because of his financial ties to that country. I don’t for a minute belive he is convinced that Assad is necessarilly responsible for those attacks, and I hope this is his sole foolish venture at attacking the Syrian government. We need for our tax dollars to go towards helping our own people and real economy, with infrastructure jobs, education, healthcare adequate environmental protections and regulatory agencies that oversee our food, air and water quality and more. We certainly don’t need to spend more money on endless Middle East quagmires that the estabilshments of both partys, have been engaging in for a couple of decades now. As Tulsi Gabbard said, if there is real, un-manufactured (falsified) proof of Assad’s guilt in this , let Congress and the American people see it (and there is still no real determination of who was responsible for the chemical attacks in 2013 eihter, with German intelligence telling us it was not Mr Assad’s doing. ) Then if he is TRULY guilty let us try him as a war criminal if that is the best course. In the meantime, I tend to believe this is not unlikely a lie made up to justify a missile strike. In any case, it is certiany an unethical act to attack a country without proviiding any such proof. (Perhaps unofrtunately) it takes an unusual and principled leader like Tulsi Gabbard to speak honestly and courageously on such matters. I frankly would love to see her become our first female President in 2020 for this and other reasons. She is also very well-spoken, intelligent, understands diplomacy, has always been principled, has served in the US military, has experince in Congress and in the DNC, where she left on principle due to it sundemocratic treatment of Bernie Sanders, and she is in one of the only states (perhaps the only) that has done away with the undemocratic super delegates of the Deomocratic Party

  13. She’s great 100% honest, speaking against the worst war mongering liars.

    She does pretty much everything right except she doesn’t…

    “Name the Jew”

    The Jewish Neo Conservatives, the Jewish investment banking firm of Goldman Sachs is pretty much running the Trump Administration. None of these Goldman Sachs Jew boys like President Trump’s geeky Son in Law have ever spent a day in combat, but they are getting erections now to just do another Iraq style war with White boy cannon fodder from the Rust Belt.


  14. It’s the J ew s. These are a J ew Wars. Kushner is Ch a bad. They are pure evil .

Comments are closed.