On Wednesday, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) decided she’d use some colorful language to attack President Trump for his remarks concerning Saudi Arabia after the CIA concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman ordered the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Trump had said, “If we abandon Saudi Arabia, it would be a terrible mistake.” He added, “We may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran.”
As The Washington Examiner pointed out, Gabbard has some shaky ground she’s standing on, considering she met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in January 2017 and later publicly doubted claims that Assad had used chemical weapons on his own citizens. Gabbard’s defense of Assad came in the face of the U.S. and its allies agreeing that Assad had indeed used chemical weapons on his own people. Additionally, Syria is in league with Iran, a vehement foe of Saudi Arabia.
Gabbard’s vulgar attack on Trump triggered Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) to fire back, “And how would you describe your fondness for Assad? Asking for the 500,000 Syrians he murdered … including the 50,000 children who gasped their last breath because of him.”
The Washington Post said of Gabbard’s trip to meet Assad:
The actual source of the funding for the trip is murky, too. But there’s no doubt the Assad regime facilitated it. Not only did the group get an audience with the president, but they also received access to sensitive areas under the protection of government forces. In several arranged meetings, Syrians told Gabbard that Assad is a benevolent ruler fighting terrorists and that the U.S. policy of opposing him is unjust. Upon her return, Gabbard referenced those Syrians in interviews and op-eds to reinforce her long-held opposition to what she calls the U.S. “regime change” policy in Syria. She also asserted there are no moderate rebels in Syria and that the United States is funding and arming al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. Neither is true, but both match the talking points that the Assad regime has been pushing for the entirety of the war.
When Gabbard was asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper if she had reservations about having met with Assad, she answered, “Whatever you think about President Assad, the fact is that he is the president of Syria. In order for any peace agreement, in order for any possibility of a viable peace agreement to occur there has to be a conversation with him. My commitment is on ending this war that has caused so much suffering to the Syrian people, to these children, to these families, many of whom I met on this trip … (The Syrians) asked me, ‘Why are the United States and its allies supporting these terror groups which are destroying Syria, when it was al Qaeda that attacked the United States on 9/11, not Syria.’ I didn’t have an answer to them.”