Strong Left Bias
This article has strong left bias with a bias score of -89.24 from our political bias detecting A.I.
This is an opinion article. As such, the content below expresses the viewpoint of the author, not our site as a whole.
Former Washington Journalist
Contributor on The Bipartisan Press
Hover to Expand
It began with allegations from 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton against a fellow Democrat running for president this time around of being a “Russian asset.”
They were explosive allegations, given that Clinton was the proven victim of Russian election meddling in 2016.
The finger soon pointed to Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii as the so-called Russian asset.
Given the nation’s very real experience with Russian interference in the 2016 election, the potential for a Russian asset to play a destabilizing role this time is not terribly far-fetched.
Yet Clinton has provided absolutely zero evidence to back up her claims.
And for her part, Gabbard’s response has been just as strange. She’s ostensibly running for the Democratic nomination for president. But where does she go to plead her case?
Tucker Carlson’s program on Fox News, whose viewership consists almost entirely of Donald Trump supporters.
Then the question becomes–whether Gabbard is an asset or not, knowingly or not–what purpose is served by this bizarre standoff between these two Democratic women?
Before this blew up, Gabbard’s presidential campaign was headed for the same slide into oblivion that the other also-rans of this cycle have taken.
Now, thanks to Clinton’s bombshell, Gabbard could be, conceivably, resurrected into some conspiracy theory cause celeb third-party candidate for president which could only give Trump a wider avenue toward re-election.
Except was that the Russian plan all along?
Content from The Bipartisan Press. All Rights Reserved.