Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Joe BidenCongratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
 

LAS14

(15,538 posts)
18. Hillary should have avoided the word "asset,"
Wed Oct 23, 2019, 12:43 PM
Oct 2019

even though it was probably the most accurate word available. It's too sophisticated for most of her audience to understand that an "asset" doesn't have to be a spy or a traitor. We shouldn't be wasting time attacking Gabbard's intentions, just her policies and the threat of a 3rd party candidate. An asset is just very useful for whatever reasons. The link below is very helpful.

Following its established playbook, Russia has increasingly interfered in the politics of traditional opponents throughout the West in the hopes of undermining democracy and stability from within. Donald Trump was a political novice with a longstanding public admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin and a penchant for advancing conspiracy theories. He espoused isolationist policies and had potentially compromising financial relationships with Kremlin-aligned oligarchs. He also had few apparent scruples and was running against a woman Putin considers among his main adversaries. Trump was simply an ideal candidate for the Kremlin to back. There is also reason to suspect that Russia began cultivating Trump as an asset long before his campaign for president, a common tactic the Kremlin pursues with people it suspects may be useful in the future.


https://themoscowproject.org/collusion-chapter/chapter-3/

Edit: And here is another place to see the definition of "asset."

Russia's success in attacking our democracy is not tied to their ability to recruit Gabbard (or anyone else) to parrot Russian talking points. Rather, their success comes with their ability to influence and manipulate, through amplification, certain messages and candidates that create division. As we saw in 2016, Russia was able to aid Donald Trump by using tailored and manipulated social media campaigns, without even the knowledge or direction of the Trump campaign itself. After all, Russia's goal in 2016 was the delegitimization of our elections; they did not need to coordinate with Trump to make that happen. That's the disturbing parallel with Gabbard: Russia can seek to support her, without her knowledge.


https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-being-used-russians-former-us-double-agent-evidence-clear-opinion-1466750

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

If the nesting dolls fit... comradebillyboy Oct 2019 #1
I would only add... Mike Nelson Oct 2019 #2
Right, because that is exactly what Democrats are embracing. MrsCoffee Oct 2019 #3
Hillary didn't accuse anyone of working for the Russians. See posts 4 and 18. nt LAS14 Oct 2019 #19
In the words of counterintelligence expert Malcolm Nance hlthe2b Oct 2019 #4
Are you joking? We have the Manchirian Candidate in the oval office... zaj Oct 2019 #5
I agree. I am sure you and many others here would be disheartened. Anon-C Oct 2019 #6
It's unfair, because Russia knows how to influence people without their knowing it. So to attack ancianita Oct 2019 #7
BTW, I think it "ugly"to defend mass murderers and genocidal authoritarians hlthe2b Oct 2019 #8
Joe McCarthy was a drunken Republican Senator From Wisconsin ritapria Oct 2019 #9
So we're supposed to ignore Trump's collusion with Russia because of McCarthyism? Really? DanTex Oct 2019 #10
Just like accusing liars of lying or traitors of treason Baltimike Oct 2019 #11
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Oct 2019 #12
I get it... you're shamed by the Democratic reponse to Trump and Russia LanternWaste Oct 2019 #13
Well, it's disappointing to see disingenuous false equivalance kcr Oct 2019 #14
Case in point: Trump. Very ugly, and it is making history. beastie boy Oct 2019 #15
RG&B we are living at a point in history when the president of the United States and many in his Nitram Oct 2019 #16
McCarthyism was directed towards any thought ismnotwasm Oct 2019 #17
Hillary should have avoided the word "asset," LAS14 Oct 2019 #18
Sorry you're disappointed. Your post is yet another vague attack on Dems. Claritie Pixie Oct 2019 #20
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»Accusing people of workin...»Reply #18