Tulsi Gabbard has resigned as President Donald Trump’s director of national intelligence, saying she needed to leave office as her husband battles cancer.
  • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    0·
    14 days ago

    I think, she has a very small set of sincerely held beliefs, one of them being that the US should completely disengage from all foreign entanglements.

    I think that she tried to seek opportunities to gain influence and power in the Democratic Party to enforce those goals, she was disillusioned and saw no route for her self there, so she pivoted to maga because it looked easier to advance to a position of power within. She was willing to say and do anything to get that position where she could pursue her deeply held belief, and she got there, and found that by the very nature of the easy power, she had completely given up any autonomy to act upon her beliefs.

    Now, it’s pretty clear that this is not the beginning of a political movement she can harness, but the death of one that used her, she’s stepping away to not be associated with the worse to come. Maybe she’ll be able to salvage a career of some sort, but really, the best she can hope for is not be noted in history text books as a key player in the clusterfuck coming.

  • fodor@lemmy.zip
    0·
    15 days ago

    Yeah she doesn’t wanna keep testifying under oath. Might get her in legal trouble, all that lying. Her reputation is already destroyed tho.

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world
      0·
      14 days ago

      Something has been up with her for a while. She’s been unusually quiet, and she showed up at that FBI raid in Atlanta for some reason. Maybe it’s been stuff going on with her husband that has kept her out of the spotlight, or maybe that’s just the nature of the position as top spook.

      Whatever, she’s still a traitor and a Russian spy.

    • prenatal_confusion@feddit.org
      0·
      15 days ago

      They just rotate personnel. Can’t build a good case against one person as easily if you have to put it into context of predecessors crimes.

      • ferrule@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        14 days ago

        Actually there is a substantial amount of RICO case law. You can’t walk in and then claim you only broke the law because someone in th org previously did something making it illegal. These people are often the ones that flip and turn state’s witness.

          • ferrule@sh.itjust.works
            0·
            14 days ago

            What the mob was doing was keeping all the different parties oblivious of what each other were doing. If you ever hear “the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing” that is where it comes from. What RICO did was say as a group you all committed a crime. You can’t curtail the law by having 10 people do 10 different steps and then say they are all innocent as no one individual did it all.

            Those laws got stronger as criminals got smarter. To the point where using an unsuspecting 3rd party could implicate the 3rd party. If I wrote a letter to a hit man and then put that letter in another letter and sent it to you saying “can you please mail this for me but don’t open it” you and I and the hitman could all be charged with the killing. They can make the case you should have recognized this was shady and not helped.

    • Zeppo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      15 days ago

      A Reuters article I read did not say that. It claimed troomp said she “did a great job”.

            • Zeppo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              0·
              15 days ago

              Do you really think I’m not aware of the implications here and the fact that president and every member of his admin are chronically dishonest? All I’ve done is note what different outlets are reporting. Thanks though, I’ll try to “use my brain”.

              • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
                0·
                15 days ago

                You seem to be unaware of what I was asking, whether intentional or not I’m not sure.

                • Zeppo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  0·
                  15 days ago

                  Pretty obviously you were implying that it was not due to her husband’s health, but rather that Trump wanted her out, as the supposed insider said. Sure, I believe that. I’d even go further and ask who gave this probably Russian agent’s husband rare bone cancer.

            • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
              0·
              15 days ago

              I’m not sure the reports do conflict. What the reports say do conflict, but at their base level, they are just reports of what different people are claiming.

      • stringere@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        15 days ago

        I don’t know a way to get around the paywall here, but it seemed to be the same as other articles (Reuter reports that Fox reports…)

        https://www.reuters.com/world/us/gabbard-resigns-trumps-national-intelligence-director-fox-news-digital-reports-2026-05-22/

        https://www.removepaywalls.com/

        https://www.removepaywalls.com/https://www.reuters.com/world/us/gabbard-resigns-trumps-national-intelligence-director-fox-news-digital-reports-2026-05-22/

        • Zeppo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          0·
          15 days ago

          That just links to an archive.today of it. I tried doing it myself on that site before posting that, and it kept trying and didn’t work. I checked that site also and they didn’t have any other solutions. I guess someone got it to work.