The New York Times just published a ridiculous piece smearing Tulsi Gabbard as a "Putin propagandist" and, essentially, a Russian asset. Not until six paragraphs down do they finally fess up and admit there's absolutely ZERO evidence she ever collaborated with Russian intelligence.

So, what is their justification for making such deranged insinuations? For agreeing with mainstream conservative foreign policy positions that Americans just overwhelmingly voted for!

For agreeing with 50+ years of foreign policy orthodoxy (before Biden) that Ukraine should NOT be a part of NATO.

For agreeing with famed University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer that reckless NATO expansionism provoked Russian aggression.

For agreeing with Senator JD Vance, who the American people just elected, that our foreign policy goals should be peace through strength, ending wars, and putting a stop to America's sordid history of military adventurism.

For agreeing that the foreign policy of Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Victoria Nuland, and the Intelligence Community establishment has been a catastrophic disaster.

For agreeing with history that our intel agencies were wrong about Iraq and WMDs, wrong about Syria, wrong about Libya, and wrong about Iran.

For opposing the idiocy that has sunk more than $200 billion into a Ukrainian quagmire and out us on the brink of WWIII.

The NYT says Tulsi Gabbard is a danger to the intel community. They're right. She will finally bring the war machine to heel and ensure they're serving the interest of America first rather than sowing chaos and bloodshed abroad.

CONFIRM TULSI GABBARD.