Russia's propaganda machine has been promoting Tulsi Gabbard.

[pnwmom]

This first piece, from NBC news, is from February, but Russia continues to promote her.

The Daily Beast piece is from May.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

The Russian propaganda machine that tried to influence the 2016 U.S. election is now promoting the presidential aspirations of a controversial Hawaii Democrat who earlier this month declared her intention to run for president in 2020.

An NBC News analysis of the main English-language news sites employed by Russia in its 2016 election meddling shows Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who is set to make her formal announcement Saturday, has become a favorite of the sites Moscow used when it interfered in 2016.

Several experts who track websites and social media linked to the Kremlin have also seen what they believe may be the first stirrings of an upcoming Russian campaign of support for Gabbard.

Since Gabbard announced her intention to run on Jan. 11, there have been at least 20 Gabbard stories on three major Moscow-based English-language websites affiliated with or supportive of the Russian government: RT, the Russian-owned TV outlet; Sputnik News, a radio outlet; and Russia Insider, a blog that experts say closely follows the Kremlin line. The CIA has called RT and Sputnik part of "Russia's state-run propaganda machine."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/tulsi-gabbards-campaign-is-being-boosted-by-russophiles?ref=home

Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination is being underwritten by some of the nation’s leading Russophiles.

Donors to her campaign in the first quarter of the year included: Stephen F. Cohen, a Russian studies professor at New York University and prominent Kremlin sympathizer; Sharon Tennison, a vocal Putin supporter who nonetheless found herself detained by Russian authorities in 2016; and an employee of the Kremlin-backed broadcaster RT, who appears to have donated under the alias “Goofy Grapes.”

Gabbard is one of her party’s more Russia-friendly voices in an era of deep Democratic suspicion of the country over its efforts to tip the 2016 election in favor of President Donald Trump. Her financial support from prominent pro-Russian voices in the U.S. is a small portion of the total she’s raised. But it still illustrates the degree to which she deviates from her party’s mainstream on such a contentious and high-profile issue.

Data on Gabbard’s financial supporters only covers the first three months of the year. In that time, her campaign received just over $1,000 from Cohen, arguably the nation’s leading intellectual apologist for Russian president Vladimir Putin.

[rainin]

1. I've seen her as a russian foil from the beginning.

She's espousing democratic talking points right on cue, but she's a wolf in sheep's clothing, IMO.

[MBS]

16. Agreed.n/t

[brush]

39. Bashing Obama and Dems several times on FOX, and the Assad...

association should've set off alarm bells to everyone here years ago.

[Sapient Donkey]

41. Totally. She does come off as intelligent and does make good points at times

but whenever I start thinking maybe she isn't all that bad, she goes and says some weird shill level shit about Russia, Putin, or Syria/Assad. I say this as someone who isn't a huge fan of the US intervention in Syria either. I am curious if she actually believes this stuff and Russia is just supporting the obvious candidate who would be friendly to them, or if she has some outside motivation for some of her stances.

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. And she is routinely DEFENDED here on THIS SITE..makes me FUCKING FURIOUS

[pnwmom]

3. The funniest thing is when a supposed Biden supporter champions her. What's up with that? n/t

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. Yep, saw that yesterday and I said I was thru here, but here I am

And Epstein was murdered but there are tons of people HERE saying not so.

I think this country is not gonna make it, too many of us are stupid.

[JI7]

12. just becsuse she went after Harris who had gone after Biden

[R B Garr]

22. Sigh. Harris brought up a 40-year-old busing issue and

implied Biden was racist, although she said he wasn’t racist. She suggested his words from 40 years ago, which were twisted for presentation purposes, were fair game. Ironically, Gabbard delivered instant karma by bringing up Harris’ current record. Harris’ *current* record.

[JI7]

28. that doesn't mean one should prop up Russian propaganda. the

removed posts below from the banned troll who was also spewing fucked up shit about Biden.

[R B Garr]

45. Her record is fair game, though, especially when you

consider that she was trying to nail Biden but ironically got nailed herself. Her record is not Russian propaganda. The OP and many others posts numerous Biden hit jobs about Bidens record, but they are not called Russian trolls. Harris brought this on herself—something her predecessor Barbara Boxer observed on Hardball after the first debate. I miss Barbara Boxer. I agree with what she said about Harris. “inviting scrutiny” I believe were Boxer’s exact words.

Some would say Harris’ attack on Biden helps Trump. Trump is the actual racist. I’m mostly really ticked she would put this 40 year old divisive issue at Democrats feet when an absolute monster is in the White House—such poor judgment, not Russian propaganda.

[emmaverybo]

34. I don't think, in any case, that Russian troll support tells us anything about Gabbard, whom, for

having served honorably in the military, I would call a patriot, especially given that she volunteered.

We know Russians continue to try to divide us and to sow discord within our party, in fact in our country. I see no evidence that Gabbard is helping those efforts.

I agree with your characterization of Harris’s attack on Biden. Nonetheless, her record is fair game.
She is touting it. It forms part of the background she is running on.

It is all the more relevant to her candidacy in that, as you point out, it is current.

Of course that record is subject to interpretation. Harris and supporters can defend it. They will have to, ultimately, do better than to insinuate that Gabbard is somehow “in with the Russians ”
to explain controversies that pre-exist Gabbard’s offensive and go beyond Gabbard’s sources,

Then, Democratic voters will weigh that record’s facts and their interpretation of them against all
other grounds on which to evaluate Harris’s candidacy. Gabbard’s claims were not exhaustive, so
writing off Gabbard is not going answer all concerns.

[pnwmom]

37. She also immediately called for "moving forward" from the Russia investigation

after William Barr wrote his deceptive letter, a month before they finally released the redacted report. And she falsely said that the report showed there had been no collusion and that Trump did not conspire with the Russians.

This is the evidence that she's been helping Russia's efforts. It was in Russia's interest, but not ours, that the Russia probe end after Barr's letter.

Link to tweet

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1111458991165579267&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newsweek.com%2Ftulsi-gabbard-twitter-trump-russia-probe-1380775

[emmaverybo]

40. Such a leap. She expressed a point of view. Mueller did not report a finding of criminal conspiracy

between Trump campaign and Russia. She used the word “collusion,” which the public kept using, in place of the legal term “conspiracy.”

So her viewpoint does not align with the vast majority of Dems.

Holding a different viewpoint, even one that is not well-founded, does not mean one is in league with Russians or going contrary to American interests.

Of course, you don’t respond to controversies in Harris’s record, some of which Gabbard did not
point out. I won’t either.

And I will not respond to anything further you have to say that promotes a Gabbard conspiracy theory.

[pnwmom]

43. Yes, it was quite a leap for her, to read Barr's deceptive letter

and immediately accept Barr's twisted conclusions and announce that we should move forward --- without waiting for the Justice Depart to release the redacted report.

She shouldn't have made that leap. She should have waited till Mueller's report was finally released , a full month later. If she had waited, she'd have heard Mueller say that, no , he never said there was no collusion. She would have heard him say it wasn't true there was no evidence of conspiracy. He merely said he didn't have enough evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy in court -- and part of the reason he didn't have enough evidence was because of the obstruction coming from the Trump team.

When her "different viewpoint" -- whether on the Mueller investigation, American isolationism, or on Syria -- coincides with that of the Russians, reasonable people ask reasonable questions about why.

[emmaverybo]

44. Harris's controversial record will be questioned when Gabbard is out of contention. Your doubling

down response, seemingly so fast you ignored that I used the phrase “criminal conspiracy,” which means conspiracy that meets the legal burden for it, does nothing to quell concerns about a record Harris touts, one subject to questions that arose during her two different tenures and that persist.

[R B Garr]

46. Exactly, well said. Harris just got beat at her own game--

trying to nail Biden but got nailed instead.

Looks like Tulsi just built a better mousetrap than Harris. It happens.

[Andy823]

21. Sure does make one wonder

I know some Biden supporters simply "like" that she is going after Harris, so the old "friend of my enemy is my friend" thing. Others I think are just here to stir things up and try to cause problems. The are not really supporters of any Democrat.

[JI7]

29. yup, and the troll before spreading Putin propaganda is has

also gone after Biden in ugly ways.

people can criticize and attack without propping up Russian attacks.

[Princetonian]

48. You keep saying that but it is not true. I read what he/she wrote because I was posting.

That person simply protested the onslaught of false attacks on Tulsi on one OP and on another OP where I was posting after her/him, he correctly refuted false attacks on Representative Gabbard's LGBTQ history. She/he never attacked Joe at all in her/his posts on those two OP threads.

[Sapient Donkey]

42. Didn't that mostly start after the debate in which she went after Harris?

[Devil Child]

17. I've punched the ballot straight down-ticket DEM my entire voting life

I will happily cast my vote for Rep. Gabbard if she is on my state's ballot in the upcoming primaries. Stay furious if it suits you but seems a silly thing to let get to you.

[Eliot Rosewater]

47. uh huh, sure, you bet

[Devil Child]

49. It's a safe bet

If Sen. Harris secures the nomination she has my support and vote. If staying salty helps you through the primaries then you do you buddy.

[Eliot Rosewater]

50. Uh huh, yeah, sure, you bet

[Hoyt]

5. Russia helped Sanders in 2016, as well.

[Hoyt]

26. Yes they did, look it up.

Here is just one link.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-russian-effort-to-target-sanders-supporters--and-help-elect-trump/2019/04/11/741d7308-5576-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html%3foutputType=amp

[nini]

6. It's not hard to figure out

I don't trust her ass farther than I could throw her.

[at140]

27. Are you angry because Gabbard filleted Kamala's prosecutor record?

I can understand that.

[nini]

33. I caught on to Gabbard a while ago

I'm way ahead of the curve.

Carry on.

[at140]

35. Gabbard will drop out by mid Sept, she is irrelevant

The real competition will be between Elizabeth & Kamala for a long time.

[Claritie Pixie]

7. The only way I'll change my mind about her motives -

if she makes a public statement condemning Russia's promotion of her and tells them to cease and desist.

She must also promise to protect the integrity of our elections if she's elected.

I won't hold my breath.

[PandoraAwakened]

10. This!

Ask her this, repeatedly, on video and watch as the worm turns on the hook.

[Blue Owl]

8. The Propagabbard Machine

n/t

[Me.]

9. Just So Tulsi

Francesca Chambers

@fran_chambers
And here's video of me asking Tulsi Gabbard if Walmart should stop selling firearms. She told me, "That's up to Walmart."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287234517

[flamingdem]

11. Last week I saw several ads for her pop up here on DU

Doubt that her crew did that, no doubt Vlad's crew is doing those kind of ads.

[flamingdem]

13. Just got another one!

yeesh creepy to see those

[yaesu]

14. whatever, but she is a candidate and I will not participate in any anti candidate propaganda. nt

[Devil Child]

18. Thank you NoMiddleGround! n/t

edited to add

Welcome to DU

[pnwmom]

19. NBC has not been debunked. It did its OWN analysis, which was backed up with several other sources.

New Knowledge was just one of the other sources (and the articles you cited about them concerned Roy Moore and were from 2018.)

And Matt Taibbi? He was a Russophile all through the 2016 election (ever since he lived in Russia he's been a proponent). You'll have to do better than that.

Some of the other sources include:

Josh Russell, a researcher and "troll hunter" known for identifying fake accounts, similarly told NBC News he recently spotted a few clusters of suspicious accounts that retweeted the same exact text about Gabbard, mostly neutral or slightly positive headlines.

"They usually spam links to websites, but also retweet specific tweets or accounts in an effort to boost a website or accounts search results," he said.

[pnwmom]

25. New Knowledge was one MINOR source in this long article. Ever hear of Clint Watts? Apparently not.

And The Intercept is Glenn Greenwald's libertarian rag. It isn't a progressive publication and no one should take it seriously.

I'm not surprised, of course, that you're quoting from The Intercept now.

I'd rather quote Clint Watts.

Watts notes the difference between Stein and Gabbard is that Gabbard is member of Congress and part of the Democratic Party while Stein is more of a fringe figure. Watts and Stamos think the Russians may be gravitating to Gabbard not because they think she can win, but because her positions, often in line with those of the Kremlin, will become part of the Democratic primary debates.

"They probably just spotted her and figured this is someone to promote," said Watts, who is also an NBC News analyst. "You can just see it coming. They're telegraphing what coming the next two years, which is playing in the left."

"They want someone like Gabbard to voice a Russian position. They are not telling her what to say but they want her pro-Russian positions play into the debate."

[Celerity]

23. +2

[jaysunb]

30. Right here on DU too. nt

[Princetonian]

31. "Clinton Says Chinese Money Did Not Influence U.S. Policy" (The New York Times, May 18, 1998)

Last edited Sat Aug 10, 2019, 07:55 PM - Edit history (3)

I supported Bill Clinton through thick and thin. It makes me sad that some are casting ugly aspersions on Tulsi Gabbard when she is in Indonesia in service to the National Guard. This story from 1998 is an example of how misguided people can be. Republicans attacked Bill Clinton even after Clinton returned the money from Chung.

"President Clinton said today that reported political campaign contributions from China to the Democrats had not influenced his foreign policy... responding for the first time to reports that a Democratic Party fund-raiser told Federal investigators of funneling thousands of dollars from a Chinese military officer in the President's 1996 re-election campaign... Congressional committees are looking into whether the Administration's policy shift on exporting satellite technology helped China and other countries develop and use nuclear missiles.

<snip>

The Democratic National Committee subsequently returned the money to Mr. Chung, who began cooperating with investigators after he pleaded guilty in March to campaign-related bank and tax fraud..."

THIS IS THE BEST PART OF THIS STORY:

"The Administration's decision to reverse State Department policy drew concerned comments today from a leading Democrat. Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the ranking minority member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the Administration's policy switch was ''serious stuff.'' Interviewed on ''Fox News Sunday,'' Senator Biden said any ''correlation of quid pro quo'' linking campaign contributions to a shift in national security policy should be ferreted out."

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/18/us/clinton-says-chinese-money-did-not-influence-us-policy.html

Joe was a mensch then and he is a mensch now.

OH NO... Senator Biden spoke to Fox News!!!!!

[pnwmom]

36. So you're supposedly a big supporter of Clinton and Biden, but you think you should defend Gabbard

by bringing up a 20 year old controversy about them?

[Princetonian]

38. Irony is dead.

[mahina]

32. Many of us in Hawaii don't care for her either.

She sure does know how to get a few select talking points to hit people's buttons so they stop thinking and assume she is like them.

She is not.

[empedocles]

51. Please let us know of suspicious postings here on DU

[Tarc]

52. It doesn't really matter, Gabbard sits at 1%-1.5%

She is a non-entity in this election, despite Czar Vlad having a desperate desire to insert a wedge into the primaries.