Tulsi Gabbard #1 Trending on Google As DNC Changes Rules For the Next Debate To Specifically Exclude Gabbard
The past 2 weeks have been quite eventful for presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, who, yes, is still in the race as much as Bernie and others like to deceitfully pretend otherwise.
Sen. Bernie Sanders: "There were some 18 candidates contesting for the Democratic nomination. Well, we're down to 2." pic.twitter.com/ktsUERFhGS
The Hill (@thehill) March 6, 2020
In light of (baseless) allegations of Russian support for Bernie Sanders, Gabbard wrote an op-ed for The Hill just over a week ago on Feb. 27th that was titled, "Presidential candidates must also condemn election interference by US intelligence agencies".
Reckless claims by anonymous intelligence officials that Russia is “helping” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are deeply irresponsible. ... I am calling on all presidential candidates to stop playing these dangerous political games and immediately condemn any interference in our elections by out-of-control intelligence agencies.
The article is jam-packed with heavy-hitting shots taken at the DNC, the mainstream media, intelligence agencies, Trump, and even the other democratic nominees. This op-ed inevitably pissed off alot of people. Referring to the "manufactured media firestorm" set off by WAPO's initial article alleging Russian support for Sanders in 2020, Gabbard would state that:
This is a laughably obvious ploy to stifle legitimate criticism and cast aspersions on Americans who are rightly skeptical of the powerful forces exerting control over the primary election process. We are told the aim of Russia is to “sow division,” but the aim of corporate media and self-serving politicians pushing this narrative is clearly to sow division of their own — by generating baseless suspicion against the Sanders campaign.
It’s extremely disingenuous for “journalists” and rival candidates to publicize a news article that merely asserts, without presenting any evidence, that Russia is “helping” Bernie Sanders — but provides no information as to what that “help” allegedly consists of.
After further emphasizing that no evidence what so ever has been provided to support these "highly dubious and vague insinuations filtered through its [intel community] preferred media outlets", Tulsi would state that "All this does is undermine voters’ trust in our elections, which is what we are constantly told is the goal of Russia."
Tulsi would denounce this "new McCarthyism" as an attempt to suppress genuine concerns and grievances of the American people - "with the threat that if they dare criticize the Democratic Party establishment, they will be labeled hostile foreign agents"
It is now clear that the mainstream corporate media and the warmongering political establishment are seeking to do two things:
- Create enough suspicion around Sanders, by falsely tarnishing him as a puppet of Russia, that he loses the election.
- Or, at the very least, if Bernie wins the Democratic nomination, force him to engage in inflammatory anti-Russia rhetoric and perpetuate the new Cold War and nuclear arms race, which are existential threats to our country and the world.
On March 3rd, Super Tuesday, days after Tulsi wrote her op-ed on interference in our elections by unrestrained, runaway intelligence agencies that have gone unchecked, Gabbard would win her first delegate from American Samoa, as would Michael Bloomberg. Gabbard acquiring a delegate would have allowed her to attend the next debate.... If the DNC had not changed it's rules after her victory on Super Tuesday - but it did . Not only would one delegate have been enough, but she actually won two, despite many in the media reporting or implicating only one was aquired. Fox News reports in the article, "DNC says debate 'threshold will go up' after Gabbard clears previous mark":
Candidates who had at least one pledged delegate automatically qualified for the debates that took place in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina earlier this year
However, after the polls closed on Super Tuesday, the DNC communications director would tweet that they are changing the criteria for the next debate:
We have two more debates-- of course the threshold will go up. By the time we have the March debate, almost 2,000 delegates will be allocated. The threshold will reflect where we are in the race, as it always has.
Xochitl Hinojosa (@XochitlHinojosa) March 4, 2020
This did not sit well with Tulsi supporters, who have already watched her be systematically kept out of other debates such as CNN's town hall in New Hampshire, a state where she was consistently polling higher than 3 of the candidates invited: Yang, Steyer, and Patrick. And if you were to count the many polls where she was beating Klobuchar, she was out polling half of the candidates CNN extended an invitation to.
While the DNC tried to pass of the change in the debate rules following Gabbard's acquisition of two delegates on Super Tuesday, it is not normal. It is not okay. It is blatant interference in our democracy by the corrupt DNC establishment.
.@TulsiGabbard wins her first delegate which qualifies her for the next debate.
Jimmy Dore (@jimmy_dore) March 4, 2020
So they are now changing the rules and pretending it’s normal.
Just get it in your head, The War Machine will not be challenged.
Stay afraid of Russia! https://t.co/HetuVBywjY
Jimmy Dore would supplement that tweet by pointing to his coverage of Gabbard's recent Op-ed covered at the beginning of this article, saying that,
@TulsiGabbard Drops Truth Bomb About Election Interference & the Democrats immediately change the rules to keep her out of the debates.
This is EXACTLY why they are cheating to keep @TulsiGabbard out of debates, she’s THE ONLY CANDIDATE with the courage to tell Americans what is REALLY going on with their Intelligence Agencies, their Wars, & our Elections!"
Many disenfranchised Tulsi supporters tried to cope with the recent display of blatant corruption by the DNC through comedy:
BREAKING: The DNC just released their new debate requirements.
K. Rosef (@kayrosef) March 5, 2020
Required delegates: n+1
(n=amount of delegates Tulsi Gabbard currently has)
Not letting this reprehensible DNC rule change go unopposed, Tulsi Gabbard would respond to this tweet:
Yesterday @TulsiGabbard won one delegate. By DNC rules, that gets her into the next two debates…So the DNC changed the rules!
John Stossel (@JohnStossel) March 4, 2020
They don’t like her opposition to the War on Drugs? To our soldiers in the Middle East? Here’s more about @TulsiGabbard: pic.twitter.com/lCd5tGksKq
Her comment would read
I welcome the opportunity to raise & discuss the foreign policy challenges we face, like the new cold war/nuclear arms race, Turkey's efforts to drag the U.S. into a war with Russia over Syria, the coronavirus, & more. Domestic policy cannot be separated from foreign policy. https://t.co/jgVxSz1huX
Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) March 5, 2020
The day following Super Tuesday, on March 4th, U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson dismissed Gabbard's lawsuit against Google, throwing it out under the premise that "Google is not now, nor (to the Court's knowledge) has it ever been, an arm of the United States government", with his decision pointing out that the protection of freedom of speech only applies to government affiliated entities.
The problem with this is Google HAS been shown to act as an arm of the United State's governments. As addressed in Part Two of How and Why Tulsi Gabbard is Held to a Higher Standard, which addresses Google having VOLUNTEERED unsolicited assistance to the Clinton State department for its regime change agenda in Syria among many other documented connections and events that clearly show ties between Google and the State Department and government entities, Google DOES act as an arm of the United States Government.
This litigation against Google for interfering in our democracy being dismissed by a federal judge for dubious reasons the day after DNC announced that they would up the requirements for the next debate had Tulsi #1 trending on Google on March 4th, with over 500,000 searches, 10x that of the #2 trending search at the time I archived the page. The archived Google Trends page can be found here.. Although, while Tulsi remained #1 throughout the day, the #2 search was drifting between a few different searches.
WOW! @TulsiGabbard is #1 trending on Google today!!! Over 500,000 searches today! 😎🏄♀️🔥#StandWithTulsi pic.twitter.com/ol92qzXuo7
EarthYogi 🕉🌐Ⓥ🌺 (@EYogi01) March 4, 2020
Many Americans are far more worried about the DNC and Big tech agencies interfering in our democracy than Russia, as the DNC and Big Tech do it blatantly in plain sight, without repercussions or apologies. Russia is not expected to wholeheartedly respect our democracy, they are a foreign actor who have their own interests to challenge US imperialism, which is seen interfering in democracies across the world. However, the DNC and Big Tech's interference in our democracy being disregarded and allowed by the government is a disgrace, a stain on our democracy These are American institutions, they should be expected to respect the integrity of American elections.
The ironically-named democratic party is one of two parties that realistically can nominate a candidate for president who can acquire momentum - unless a political revolution dismantles the two-party system that has our country grid-locked in an ultimatum between two corrupt parties. Our democracy's integrity is dependent on the integrity of the two parties that comprise it. Our democracy is also dependent on the freedom of information and speech, which as federal judge Wilson acknowledged, apparently does not apply to private companies - even if they have virtual monopolies(no pun intended) on the distribution of information to the average citizen.
This doesn't even mention the intelligence agencies and the mainstream media they have influence over. As Tulsi Gabbard said at the end of her op-ed released last week,
The question facing any potential Democratic nominee is this: Am I going to allow myself to be manipulated and forced into a corner by overreaching intelligence agencies and the corporate media where, in order for me to win the presidency, I'm going to have to do what I know is not in the interests of the American people and world peace?
Or will I stand up to the corrupt neocon and neoliberal establishment, condemn their lies and smears, and act with the integrity and foresight necessary to forge a rational policy that will serve all our interests?