First of all, don't bring up being a woman of colour when it suits your attempts at dodging criticism. The criticisms against Gabbard had nothing to do with her being a woman or a person of colour (which is a far different experience when you are white-passing by the way). Defend your intellectualism, that's fair enough...but all the other comments was so cheap and sickening to listen to her bring up. As a person of colour, don't cheapen my experiences in this world as though someone's criticism of you and your campaign platform is some kind of affront to me and my very existence. As far as I'm concerned, Gabbard can take her cult-ish leader speak far away and never come back. She came prepared, I'll give her that, but she came prepared to be a victim. I read the transcript and heard the full answer from HC. The question was about Republican strategy and in response, Clinton said they (Republicans) were grooming a third party candidate (Gabbard). And then she made reference to the Russian interest in Gabbard given the rise of bots and fake sites in support of her. She said that Jill Stein was a Russian asset (pretty sure an asset not in the sense that she's on the phone with Russia conspiring against the United States, but a Russian asset in the sense that they have special interest in her for a reason (as they do with Gabbard). Clinton's spokesperson did in a roundabout way confirm that it was Gabbard that HC was referencing, BUT Gabbard is continuing to push a false narrative that HC is saying she is being groomed by the Russians even though there has since been corrections to clarify this.
This has nothing to do with calling into question her patriotism. When I read the actual transcript and heard the podcast, I wondered if so many people can be so obtuse...can people not keep up with conversation and simultaneously have consideration of context? Is this not what we learn in grade school when we read stories and have to write summaries on them? I find it alarming that anyone would consider Gabbard a real candidate for President when her comprehension skills are so clearly lacking which is a good basis to suggest that maybe she isn't as smart as she thinks she is. And I say all of this as someone who can't stand HC. It's unfortunate, because I agree on her general sentiment with respect to war. When you topple other governments, you give rise the chaos and instability.
Pretty sure Meghan's turnabout on Gabbard is because Gabbard has said she won't take her guns.
Joy is often flippant with her remarks and she was called to task today. I don't mind that she doubled down but she didn't do it all that well. I get that her issue with Tucker Carlson is that she feels that Gabbard is giving someone a platform they don't deserve and it's a matter of principle for Joy and even the likes of Warren but that's a personal decision. Nothing wrong with understanding that you have to promote yourself to many different demographics and going on popular Fox shows is just part of playing the game.
I wish Sunny would have been there today as I do think she would have a done a better job at not only clarifying the comments, but also pushing back on Gabbard's insistence that HC's camp confirmed it was her that HC claimed was being groomed by Russian as a Russian asset.