Connect with us

Faith

Tulsi Gabbard Launches $50 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Hillary Over ‘Russian Asset’ Comment

Published

on

Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is quickly proving that while she is most assuredly on the left politically, she’s also got a lot in common with those on the right as well.

Like a mutual disdain for former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Clinton targeted Gabbard for some of her more centrist policies last year, stating that Gabbard is a “Russian asset.”

Well, much like President Trump, Gabbard isn’t afraid of a fight. In fact, she’s now suing Hillary for $50 million in a defamation lawsuit over the statement.

Trending: Another Local Reporter Stops Mid-Broadcast to Inform Station She Is Taking Them Down

Here’s more from Fox News:

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration? (1)

  • Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

During an October 2019 interview with the podcast Campaign HQ With David Plouffe, Clinton suggested the 2020 presidential candidate was “the favorite of the Russians” and “a Russian asset.” Gabbard insists these statements have no grounds in reality, and that Clinton knew or should have known this at the time.

“Rather than facts or reliable evidence, Clinton’s basis for the Defamatory Statements was one or both of: (a) her own imagination; or (b) extremely dubious conspiracy theories that any reasonable person (and especially Clinton, a former United States Senator and Secretary of State) would know to be fanciful, wholly unverified, and inherently and objectively unreliable,” said the lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Manhattan federal court.

Clinton did not specifically name Gabbard in her remarks, but strongly implied she was referring to her. The complaint points out that when asked if she was referring to Gabbard, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill responded, “If the nesting doll fits,” a reference to Russian dolls.

Gabbard’s complaint states in no uncertain terms that “Tulsi is not a Russian asset,” and that neither Russia nor anyone else “controls her or her presidential campaign.” To the contrary, it plays up her history of public service, from her time in the Army National Guard to her four terms as a U.S. congresswoman.

Citing her roles on House committees and in the military, the complaint points out that Gabbard “has never had her security clearances challenged or revoked,” and claims that Clinton was aware that if Gabbard was really a Russian asset, she would not have been able to serve in these positions which provide her “access to highly sensitive and classified information.”

Gabbard has claimed that Hillary has a “unique, personal connection to Tulsi that animates her hostility towards Tulsi and her presidential campaign.”

The lawsuit goes on to claim that much of the conflict between the two comes from when Gabbard gave her support to Sen. Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic Presidential primary. Gabbard was the vice chair for the Democratic National Committee at the time and was the most high profile person in Congress to lend support to Bernie’s campaign against Clinton.

In other words, Hillary is bitter because Gabbard didn’t give her political support in the 2016 election. It seems Hillary might just be the most miserable person on the planet with all of the venomous hatred she’s carrying around.

Faith

America Gets Tutored in the Doctrine of Devils

College Fix editor Jennifer Kabbany says “Nevermind the War on Christmas – what about the War on Jesus Christ?”

Published

on

College Fix editor Jennifer Kabbany says “Nevermind the War on Christmas – what about the War on Jesus Christ?” Universities across America show an outright disregard and disdain for Jesus Christ, a survey by The College Fix finds. “A look at hundreds of religious studies classes at universities across the nation uncovered that, for the most part, professors prefer to snub the subject of who Jesus is and what he preached. Classes that are focused on Christianity, meanwhile, tip-toe around or altogether avoid the topic of Christ’s teachings.” College Fix says, classes in witchcraft, shamanism, yoga, after life beliefs, gender and religion are, but a few of the courses schools now offer the students in American colleges. But it doesn’t start there – it begins in kindergarten classes and elementary education. Drag queens are reading to the kiddies on anything they see fit, all while dressed in full gay regalia. Prophecy News Watch site says “Queer Is In, Christian Is Out.” The piece written by author Jonathon Van Maren that many classic ideas, teachings, and stories for children are getting LGBT makeovers, like these. “According to Christianity Daily, the fairytale Cinderella will be coming to Amazon Prime in September with a “LGBTQ sexless godmother,” played, unsurprisingly, by male homosexual Billy Porter. Porter told CBS that the new version will be “a classic fairytale for a new generation.” The BBC is also plugging a new children’s book called My Daddies, the story of a motherless little girl adopted by two men. This book was newsworthy not because there is any shortage of this sort of thing lately, but because it is “the first book of its kind to be written and illustrated by same-sex adoptive parents,” and “the first picture book about two gay dads with both an LGBT author and illustrator.” PBS, as…

Continue Reading

Faith

Leftists on God, Creation, and Religion

What do you say to a mass political movement that denies the existence of God…?

Jeff Davidson

Published

on

As many citizens know, even those on the Left, our nation was founded based on a strong belief in God. The Founding Fathers recognized that the rights of human beings are bestowed by the Creator, not by other people. They did not require that anyone be religious or adhere to any particular religious doctrine.  Concurrently, the often misquoted phrase about the “separation of church and state” does not appear anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. The statement was part of Thomas Jefferson’s response in 1802 to a religious association in answer to their letter from October 1801. https://usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html An Immutable Right The Danbury Baptists, a religious minority based in Connecticut, lamented that their religious liberty was regarded not as an ‘immutable right,’ but as a privilege granted by the state legislature. Jefferson’s carefully replied, but focused only on religious liberty on the national level.  His letter included the phrase “wall of separation between church and state.” This phrase has served as a type short-hand for the First Amendment’s ‘Establishment Clause’ which forbids the government from passing any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”  This Establishment Clause forbids the government from establishing an ‘official’ religion and from unduly favoring one religion over another. Any reference to God, per se, is an entirely different issue. Whom Do We Trust? Religious sentiment heightened throughout the dark days of the U.S. Civil War, as hundreds of thousands of soldiers died. A clamoring arose for the U.S. to acknowledge the deity, and subsequently the Secretary of the Treasury mandated that the words, “In God We Trust” appear on various Federal Reserve notes and on all coinage. www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pages/in-god-we-trust.aspx  In 1956, “In God We Trust” became the official motto of the U.S. Today, this phrase, and the words “one nation under God” in the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance,…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week