Democrat Congresswoman Defends Trump Moves in Syria, says it’s Not about Russia

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is a liberal from the state of Hawaii and she seems to be more intellectually honest than her Democrat counterparts in Congress. For years she has been working with the some in the GOP to force the federal government to stop arming al-Qaeda and ISIS allied terrorists in Syria.

We’ve written about her efforts before – you can read about her attacking President Obama’s weakness on radical Islam here, here, and here. Her work had been for naught, until now.

(Sadly, even though she’s done some good work, she’s also mentioned impeaching President Trump at least once.)

Last week, President Trump finally ended the CIA-backed program that was funding and arming the Syrian rebels. Here’s the thing, we weren’t just funding and arming anti-Assad troops, we were also funding and arming pro-al Qaeda forces in Syria. We were literally handing money and guns to terrorists who work for al-Qaeda, and we’ve been doing it for years!

take our poll - story continues below

What is your top alternative to Facebook? - FIXED

  • What is your top alternative to Facebook?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Art of the Meal

So did the liberal media and their friends on the left cheer when President Trump finally ended this ridiculous program? Nope, they implied that he only did it as a favor to the Russians.

Seriously. Thankfully, Congresswoman Gabbard was willing to clear things up by appearing on Fox News with Tucker Carlson to explain why not arming Al Qaeda is a good thing for the United States too, and not just Russia.

Tulsi Gabbard: For the benefit of your viewers, let’s talk about what this CIA program actually was. It has been widely reported that for years now, the CIA was provding arms, intelligence, money, and other types of support to these armed militants who were working hand in hand, and who are working hand in hand, and oftentimes under the command of al-Qaeda in Syria. 

This isn’t a matter of giving weapons to people, but they end up falling into the wrong hands. We are directly arming militants who are working under the command of al-Qaeda, all in this effort to overthrow the Syrian government.

Tucker Carlson: That is groteque. Why would anyone defend this? 

Tulsi Gabbard: It is this addiction to regime change. And this idea that somehow this is what must be done, without actually looking at the facts. We have been providing direct and indirect support to al-Qaeda, the very group which attacked us on 9/11, that we are supposedly continuing to fight against and trying to defeat.

The thing that should make everyone feel sick is that people would rather support, directly and indirectly, al-Qaeda, than actually give up their regime change goals. 🇺🇸

I am the supreme law of the United States. Originally comprising seven articles, I delineate the national frame of government. My first three articles entrench the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress; the executive, consisting of the President; and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts. Articles Four, Five and Six entrench concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments and of the states in relationship to the federal government. Article Seven establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it. I am regarded as the oldest written and codified constitution in force of the world.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.