Staff Reports
President-elect Donald Trump has put to rest the feigned outrage emanating from the left regarding Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination for Director of National Intelligence, providing solid backing for the former congresswoman. Despite the hand-wringing from the left about Gabbard’s past meetings with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, Trump stands firm in support of her. After all, what is politics without a little melodrama?
During an appearance on “Meet the Press,” an NBC reporter decided to play the role of a concerned parent, bringing up Gabbard’s two meetings with Assad back in 2017. One can’t help but wonder if this reporter is still worried that the boogeyman is lurking under their bed. Trump waved off the manufactured concern, reminding viewers that American diplomats often meet foreign leaders. His resume includes meetings with a colorful roster of characters, including Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un—none of which have earned him any “friend of an enemy” award.
As Elites Trash Tulsi Gabbard for Her Assad Meeting, Look Whose Portrait They Just Hung at the State Department: John Kerry, Who Met with Assad Several Times https://t.co/tpuF2VHAgh
— Ben Owen (@hrkbenowen) December 11, 2024
The irony in the Democrat’s accusations against Gabbard is rich. In recent history, individuals like Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry have also met with Assad, yet no one is accusing them of treason or harboring a secret loyalty to the Syrian regime. It’s almost as if the left keeps a selective memory—perhaps they’ve misplaced their recall function in this digital age. Gabbard’s past does not eclipse her qualifications and claiming otherwise smacks of desperation, not diplomacy.
Trump Jr. has pointed out that the left is simply recycling the same script they used during the Russia collusion narrative—this time, swapping out Putin for Assad, and Gabbard for some other convenient whipping post. The Democrats seem to operate a one-size-fits-all template for smearing conservative figures, and it looks increasingly outdated. Nowadays, decades-old conversations are thrown under the bus while their own party’s past transgressions are conveniently forgotten.
As for Gabbard’s views, they deviate from the war-loving status quo, which surely stings those who benefit from the perpetual military engagements. The current uproar over her candidacy is less about her past meetings and more about her anti-war stance. With a Pentagon budget teetering on the brink of inefficiency and waste, the last thing entrenched interests want is someone who asks tough questions about military expenditures or dares to challenge America’s endless wars.
Public skepticism of leftist narratives runs high, primarily due to a track record riddled with debacles, falsehoods, and “oops” moments. Today, the left’s latest fabricated outrage about Gabbard stands as little more than a sad attempt to distract from their failures. As history shows, American politicians often meet foreign leaders for various reasons—strategic diplomacy being just one. A commitment to open channels of communication is a hallmark of effective leadership, and that’s a lesson the left seems to have forgotten in its rush to judge.
