,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Does anyone else find it odd that Gabbard's video about the Mueller report says that it's a good thing Mueller found no collusion, otherwise it could have precipitated a Civil War? 
I mean, it's a good thing because having a non-colluding president is a good thing. But what's the deal with the "whew, good thing Trump's supporters didn't rise up and shoot people when their man was proven to have colluded with Russia and impeached?"
It reminds me of the alt-right argument from 2016 that any American criticisms of Russia would provoke a war with that country, while Trump's praise of Russia would preserve peace.
Or let me put it this way. If Mueller's report proved collusion and Trump supporters engaged in violence, that wouldn't be a Civil War. It would be called "people doing crimes for which they should be prosecuted."
What's troubling here is the way Tulsi seems to be normalizing massive civil unrest...as in, "of course people unhappy about the outcome of a legal process will engage in Civil War." Um, no. That's not an "of course." Tho it IS something a nation's adversaries would wish for.
Everything else she says in that video makes perfect sense, but this one passage really took me up short.
I mean, if I voted for someone and then later discovered that they had secretly worked with a hostile foreign power to game the election, I wouldn't call for Civil War. I'd be yelling "impeach the bastard!" Isn't that the "of course" response to such a situation?
