"People think that at the top there isn't much room. They tend to think of it as an Everest. My message is that there is tons of room at the top."--Margaret Thatcher
 |
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Delivers Remarks at 2026 Independent Women's Policy Summit - The Last Refuge:
"On May 7, 2026, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard addressed the 2026 Independent Women’s Policy Summit in Washington, D.C. Given her current position at the tip of the IC accountability spear, it is worth reviewing DNI Gabbard’s remarks."
Transcript: "... I have found too often in my time in politics, now that has spanned over 20-something years, my time serving in the military in different capacities, you know, the challenge and opportunity of leadership is a perpetual one. I find it now in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Intelligence Community across the board. And too often, what I see, especially in some of our young women and girls, but even some of the moms groups that I’ve met over the years, is a concern or question around not being qualified to lead.”
“Whether it’s running for office or taking on an organization, or going and testifying before Congress or before a school board meeting, people who haven’t done it before, never imagined themselves to be in this position, often say, “Well, you know, someone else can do it. Someone else will be better to do it. Someone else is more experienced. Someone else has the right qualifications and meets that criteria, for example, to be a candidate for office.”
And my response to them is always to focus on the most important characteristic that we should all look for in a leader, and that we should strive for in the leaders whom we choose to elect and that we choose to support. And that characteristic is someone who cares. If you care about serving and making a positive impact on your community, your state, your country, you will therefore then care about telling the truth.
You’ll care about standing up for what is right. And the courage that we see, especially in this vitriolic political environment that we are in, that courage is necessary because of the radical responses that we all get when we do very simple, common-sense things like stand up for the truth and speak the objective truth.
And obviously, the foremost example, and the one that’s been really gratifying to see the progress around, is the truth of the biological difference between men and women and girls and boys, and that, you know, girls should be able to play sports against girls. It’s a perfect case study. I think the fundamental issue is so much greater than this example because this whole fight and this whole challenge is impacting a generation. But when you look at what’s really at stake, the existence and acceptance that there is such a thing as objective truth is really the issue. And so this is the current fight over this, and the progress that’s been made here in the US and around the world with a lot of these international sporting entities is truly incredible. But it all drives down to the implications of what happens when we live in a society that rejects the existence of objective truth.
 |
| Tulsi Gabbard speaks at a rally against gender affirming care at War Memorial Plaza in Nashville , Tenn., Friday, Oct. 21, 2022 |
It erodes and removes the guardrails that must exist in our society, that there is such a thing as truth, that we expect our lawmakers and our leaders to understand that there is such a thing as truth, and that we expect our media to understand that there is such a thing as truth. How does a journalist, a true, honest journalist, which is a rare breed these days–I know we have a few in the room, thank you for being here. How does a journalist report on the truth if they, the journalist or their outlet, reject the existence of truth?
You can apply this almost universally across the board, but all of this comes back to courage. When we care about each other, when we care about our country, when we care about the consequences of the decisions being made by policymakers, when we care about our Constitution, our fundamental freedoms, the bedrock of this republic that we are citizens of, that is the qualification that we need to step up and lead and to make that difference.
I went through my own version of facing these constant challenges and questions in the ways that I have tried to and chosen to serve over the last few decades, where people constantly told me, “You are too young. You are not qualified. You don’t have an Ivy League degree. You don’t have a degree at all,” back in the day. But I– I’m grateful to my parents for this, they homeschooled us– I’m the fourth of five kids. They instilled this ethic of service and being the solution to a problem that you see, that no matter the detractors who came my way, even those who meant well, who said, “Oh, you know, you’re too young to run for Congress.”
I was 31 at the time. “You’re too young to run for Congress. You know, the other guy who’s running, he’s got all the money, he’s got all the endorsements, he’s gonna win. Just hang back and try again in 20 years,” And they thought they were giving me good advice and were being helpful. And I smiled, and this is Hawaii, so I said, “Thank you, aloha.” And then proceeded to ignore their very helpful feedback.
But they were looking at all of the wrong things. They were looking at what they viewed as, like, the political resume, the political establishment requirements, rather, and fundamentally forgetting the most important thing, which is we step up to serve the people, period. And in my race for Congress, that was the big difference. I was running against a candidate who was highly funded, had all the endorsements, and nearly a hundred percent name recognition. He had just run a statewide race and lost. And my seat was essentially a statewide seat. He thought he was gonna win the big final debate night that we had.
I remember we were in two different green rooms right next to each other, about to walk out in the debate. I’d known him forever. It’s Hawaii, you know, we know everybody. And as he walked out two minutes before me, he was singing a song. He’s a former basketball player, probably like 6’8”. And he looked back over his shoulder at me as I was about to walk out, singing the Black-Eyed Peas song. And he looked at me, and he was like, “Tonight’s gonna be a good night.”
And I smashed him in the debate… because he took it for granted. He took the people for granted. He took me for granted. And so he didn’t prepare. I am a prepper. I did the work, and I came with the goods, and I was running on a very clear platform based on substance and how I could best serve my community. So, fast forward, I had like 3% name recognition when we started this race. Five months before the election, I had, I think, 20% in the polls. He had 60%. And there were a couple of other candidates who kind of had broken out the rest of the margins. He was already interviewing staff that he planned to hire for his office in Congress at that point in time. And then I ended up winning the race and beating him by a 22% margin.
We spent the same amount of money, but arguably, on paper, he was the candidate who was definitely going to win. As he was interviewing his future staff, I was going island by island, holding town halls, knocking on doors, standing outside the supermarket, introducing myself to people, and saying, “I’m interviewing for a job to work for you. How can I serve you? What do you care most about? Here’s what I care about and here’s what I stand for.” And I point to this story often as I’m talking to folks who are thinking about running for Congress, who are thinking to themselves, like, “How can I get involved? I don’t even know where to start.” And usually always going back to, “Well, I don’t have the resume that’s required. I don’t have the money. I can’t self-fund. I don’t know how to pick up the phone and call a donor to ask for support.
And I tell them my story because it’s a real one. Because that was me. That was me. And when we focus on having that servant’s heart guiding us, inspiring us, giving us that courage every single day, and focusing on those whom we are trying to serve and positively impact, this goes back to the vision that our founders had for our country. Truly, how do we have a government of, by, and for the people?
We have real people, not those who’ve been handpicked by the powers that be. We have real people who care and who want to serve, who are stepping up and responding to one of my favorite verses in the Bible from Isaiah 6:8, when the Lord says, “Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?” “Here I am, Lord, send me.” He didn’t ask for a resume. He didn’t say, “Well, are you qualified?”
He said, “Who will go for us?” He said, “Here I am, send me.” And that, to me, is the fundamental question. It’s one that I ask and reflect on myself on a daily basis: how can I best serve? How and where can I make that most positive impact? And continuously reflecting on that throughout my life, it’s taken me in a lot of different interesting directions. It’s taken me in different political positions.
I started out in the State House when I was 21 years old, and then to Congress. When I got elected to Congress, the Democratic Party somehow rolled out the red, red carpet. I was named a, you know, the rising star. CNN was talking about who was gonna play me in the movie. True story. I was like, “I don’t know what’s going on here.” Vogue Magazine wanted to do a spread and, like, all of this stuff.
And I was like, “Hmm, this is interesting. How can I use any of these opportunities as a platform to be able to make the positive impact that I wanted to make?” The problem with them was that they really thought I was gonna be a puppet for them, and that whatever they were dangling in front of me was somehow going to entice me into allowing them to control what I was there to do. It didn’t last long.
Within a few months, then-President Obama was coming to Congress and wanted to start a new war in the Middle East, this time in Syria. And I was the first Democrat, that’s maybe the only one, I don’t remember, but the first Democrat who came out publicly and opposed his request and gave very specific reasons why. I was on the House Foreign Affairs Committee at the time, which was based on my own experience of having deployed to the Middle East twice and understanding the implications of what he was asking Congress to approve.
And the fact that the very most basic questions that we should always ask, especially when you’re talking about sending our men and women in uniform into harm’s way, is what is the objective?
At that time, John Kerry was the Secretary of State, and he came before the committee, and I came in with an open mind, saying, “Hey, if this is something we have to do to secure our nation, we have to take a hard look at it.” But when I asked what was the objective, they said, “Oh, well, we wanna go in and deliver a punch in the gut to the Syrian regime. Not a pinprick, not a decapitation. We wanna deliver a punch in the gut.”
I was like, “Okay, that’s not a clear objective. How does that serve our best interests as a country? How does that secure our nation? How does that make the American people more safe? And what’s the plan?” I asked. “When they punch back, or their friends punch back?” “Oh, we don’t think they will.” Like, also not a good plan. “We don’t think they will.”
But by taking that step and asking the tough questions, doing the work, and coming out in opposition to President Obama’s request at that time, the red carpet was quickly rolled up and taken away. I got a very quick call from the White House saying, “How dare you go against your president?” They had no questions and no statements to make about the substance of the issues and questions that I had raised. And that was the first of many examples that would follow over the eight years that I was in Congress, where I realized that they weren’t actually interested.
You know, they made a big deal. “I’m a veteran. I deployed twice to the Middle East.” They weren’t actually interested in hearing what I had to say or drawing on the experience that I had. And ultimately it became about their own, their own partisan politics." (transcript continues) ........
video: Tulsi Gabbard at Independent Women 2026 Policy Summit - YouTube
discussed here:
Rest in the Vine: "Fulton County Lawyers Up Against Grand Jury Subpoena" by Coffee & Covid
"...The intercepts reportedly captured two Hezbollah terrorists discussing Gabbard’s 2017 trip to Syria, where they claimed she met with “the big guy.”
The classified material was in the hands of Senate Intelligence Committee Democrats and their staff before it magically appeared in the New York Times hit piece.
Just the News reported:
The Times suggested the reference was taken by some to mean Gabbard had met with a top Hezbollah terrorist leader, a claim she adamantly denied.NSA concluded the leak accurately contained information from one of its intercepts but that Gabbard had not in fact met with Hezbollah leaders.
The spy agency identified potential leakers among Senate Intelligence Committee Democrat staff who had access to the intercept prior to the Times report, sources said.
The referral languished inside the Justice Department for months – with top leaders unaware of the concerns – until FBI Director Kash Patel was alerted to the existence of the referral a few weeks ago.
Tulsi Gabbard has been a wrecking ball to the Deep State. She referred multiple intelligence community leakers to the DOJ earlier this year, calling them out as “deep-state criminals” leaking for partisan purposes to undermine Trump.
She’s barred the IC from sharing classified intel with Five Eyes partners on Ukraine negotiations to protect American interests. And she’s declassified mountains of documents proving Barack Obama and his cronies knew the Russia collusion narrative was a total fraud from day one." .......
 |
| The Herd vs. the Hard |
“… Gabbard, formerly of the Hawaii Army National Guard, served in Iraq in 2004 and revealed in a video that she started to “gray” following her first deployment.And now I like her even more.
“I’ve chosen to keep it as a daily reminder of the terrible cost of war, who pays the price of war, and the importance of peace,” she said. …
And, she raised eyebrows when she appeared to blame the Ukraine war on Biden.” …….
"Here's the thing, and I do mean this with great seriousness.... If you take a close look at it, you realize that every function of the USAID as an institution came from the CIA. The CIA created the mechanics of USAID for CIA purposes and intents. Once you look at USAID as an outreach arm of the CIA, then suddenly everything USAID partnered with can realistically be looked at as a CIA operation with joint partners for CIA intents. This means everything. USAID funding The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which in turn was funding KKK ops, is just one recent example. In actuality it was the CIA directing activity and funding KKK ops. Implications? Remarkable. Just transitioning your thinking process to accept all the USAID activity was a CIA operation completely changes things. It also reconciles things. The Clinton Foundation partnership with USAID. Essentially Bill and Hillary partnered with the CIA. Now, does the lack of accountability for "Clinton Cash" or the pay-to-play make sense? The same thing applies to Joe/Hunter Biden in Ukraine. USAID Administrator Samantha Power traveling Europe organizing political movements inside European and non-European countries. That becomes the CIA organizing 'leftist' political groups, when you accept CIA as the chicken and USAID as the egg. The entire analysis of how govt is structured completely changes under this non-pretending perspective. Now, take recent events into THAT context. The Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a long time Gang of Eight member, becomes the Secretary of State. What changes first? What is the priority first? USAID! USAID is dissolved inside the State Dept. Concurrently, the Directorate of Analysis inside the CIA, the office that connects the NSA to the CIA, is removed from inside the CIA and put under the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The heads of the Directorate of Analysis are removed, and input feeding officials lose their security clearances. At the same time, the ODNI then replaces the CIA and becomes the principal director to assemble the President's Daily Intelligence Brief (PDB). Put together, the political manipulation of the CIA analysis desk is now confronted.The outcome equities of the CIA are fact-checked and confronted (pdb)
That is also true for all the Trump Derangement Syndrome and Trans Madness.
It is tempting to heap scorn but those are our fellow citizens and children of God who have been Professionally-Brainwashed by the Deep State and their Mockingbird Media. We need to try to remember this as we’ll need to walk these people back into sanity one day.
Matthew 25
39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
For You, Lord Jesus.
 |
Isaiah 6 8 Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” And I said, “Here am I. Send me!” |
No comments:
Post a Comment