Why you should not believe Tulsi when she says she won't run as third-party

[Bhphoto]

Here is Miss Gabbard denying she plans to run as third-party candidate:

Link to tweet

Tulsi gabbard has told two big lies recently.
First, she pretended to be in favor of an impeachment inquiry. but she was against the inquiry both before and after claiming to be for it.
that is, first she said she was against it, then she said she was for it, and now recently she told Hannity that she is against it.

The second is her alleged opposition to Donald Trump's withdrawal from Kurdish areas. Anyone who knows Gabbard's background knows that she is for anyting Assad and Putin support.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. She has been so loud as she proclaims no 3rd party run for her!

We need to remember all of this--

Well, duh!

[thesquanderer]

2. Like many other dems in the house, she was against the impeachment inquiries until the Ukraine thing

and from the clip I saw, she did not contradict that on Hannity, despite the unfortunate parroting of the republican talking point against their being behind closed doors at this point.

[Bhphoto]

6. Both False and misleading

You strategically compared her to "many House members" without telling us how many House members waited as long as she did to say they supported an inquiry.
And you falsely that the "Ukrainian thing" was not in the news at the time she opposed it. It was.
It was the transcript that she cited as the alleged reason for her flip flop.
Other major Democratic candidates supported an inquiry without reading the Whistleblower transcript.

Can you please tell us what your preferred candidate said about Ukraine-related impeachment before Tulsi said the transcript swayed her? (Assuming you truly are a Warren supporter).

[thesquanderer]

9. Wrong, and unnecessarily accusatory.

Both False and misleading - You strategically compared her to "many House members" without telling us how many House members waited as long as she did to say they supported an inquiry.

The day she switched to supporting the impeachment efforts, I was curious and looked to see how many other Dems hadn't supported it yet. I don't remember, but it was something in the teens or twenties... not a ton, but a decent number, she was hardly the last holdout. Anyway, if you must know the exact number, I'm sure google can find it for you.

And you falsely that the "Ukrainian thing" was not in the news at the time she opposed it. It was. It was the transcript that she cited as the alleged reason for her flip flop.

The transcript IS the Ukrainian thing, it's a transcript (more or less) of a conversation with the leader of Ukraine! And it is the "smoking gun."

Can you please tell us what your preferred candidate said about Ukraine-related impeachment before Tulsi said the transcript swayed her? (Assuming you truly are a Warren supporter).

Beats me. But she did support impeachment before TG did. I'm sure google can find her exact statements for you, if you need to know. It's not relevant to anything I said, though.

[Bhphoto]

10. Tulsi Gabbard: Trump-Zelensky transcript didn't change my mind

Since Gabbard prefers right wing outlets, here is the link from the Washington Times: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/26/tulsi-gabbard-trump-zelensky-transcript-didnt-chan/

Then there days later she flip flopped.
By then ,. The candidate whom you claim to be your favorite already supported the inquiry.

Did you support the inquiry before Tulsi did? Or after.

[thesquanderer]

12. I thought it was the transcript. It was *something* about the Ukraine story that changed her mind.

To answer you querstion, I supported impeachment proceedings before TG did, though after a lot of other people here did. Not sure what difference that makes though. Why so concerned with my personal opinions, and timetable for when I supported what? I'm not running for president.

And why again with personal attacks about who I "claim" to be supporting? If you can't discuss facts and issues without personal slams, I suspect you may find your stay here to be short.

[Me.]

4. A Trust Issue?

[BigMin28]

5. After reading up on Gabbert

I'm inclined to find anything she says as suspect until proven otherwise.

[Voltaire2]

7. So Gabbard is attacked here for a rumor that

she said she would run third party, is attacked for not denying the rumor, and is attacked for denying the rumor.

Got it.

[Bhphoto]

8. I only criticized her for being dishonest

Did you?

[cwydro]

11. I really doubt she's going to run third party.

Just don’t think so.