Will POTUS BIDEN let Russian Thug Putin get away with Murder in Ukraine?

On Monday, September 2, 1901, Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt, then Vice President, gave a speech from the Grandstand at the Minnesota State Fair in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, with about 10,000 people present, in which he outlined his foreign policy and stated in part, that,

“A good many of you are probably acquainted with the old proverb:
‘Speak softly and carry a big stick — you will go far.’
If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility,
a big stick will not save him from trouble;
and neither will speaking softly avail,
if back of the softness there does not lie strength, power.”

Theodore Roosevelt and Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., c.1916 September 26.

He entitled that hour-long speech “National Duties.”

Just four days after Roosevelt’s speech at the MN State Fair, President William McKinley was shot by an assassin in Buffalo, NY, and when he died a week later, Roosevelt then assumed the Presidency.

“Big Stick Diplomacy” characterized his leadership as President.

As POTUS, Theodore Roosevelt was also the surprise winner of the 1906 Nobel Peace Prize after using his “Big Stick” diplomacy to broker a peace treaty to end the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905).

Earlier this month, before the Russian thug Putin ordered Russian troops to invade Ukraine, then start shelling the capitol Kiev and other cities, I had written to POTUS BIDEN via the White House website, a letter which has similarly been shared with others.

That message, and the explanatory introduction, follow below.

---

America needs a leader with that kind of moxie, AGAIN!

But, to be certain, diplomacy ONLY works when BOTH/ALL involved parties are diplomatic, and seek the use of diplomacy to case, or ward off, strife & conflict.

The Russian thug Putin is neither diplomatic, nor honest. He ONLY understands BRUTE FORCE, which is why Option Number 5 is THE BEST CHOICE.

Reports circulating internationally say that the Russian people are VERY ANGRY at thug Putin’s actions, thereby also making Option Number 2 viable.

IF POTUS BIDEN WOULD take the “Big Stick” approach to this matter, his tenacity would yield successful results, I’m almost certain.

Despite the fact that Ukraine is not presently a NATO member nation, all it’s bordering neighbors are. And to the extent that we “drop the ball” at this CRITICAL moment in history — by whatever means — our NATO allies will remember it forever, as the moment when the United States, as the solitary beacon of freedom & democracy in the world, turned a cold shoulder to the suffering of others from a despot of Communism, and corrupt totalitarian thug — Vladimir Putin.

—//—

To my great dismay, a longtime and dear friend told me that POTUS BIDEN is

Remember When Hillary Said Russians Are Grooming Tulsi Gabbard As 3rd Party Spoiler?

Ed. note: This entry was written shortly after HRC made her remarks, found transcribed herein, but remained unpublished. As of publication today, Wednesday, 11 March 2020, Tulsi Gabbard remains a candidate to be the Democratic Party’s Presidential Nominee, though her viability as a candidate is practically non-existent, while Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are the two major candidates remaining in the race.

Tulsi Gabbard, Official Portrait

In the recent edition of the podcast “Campaign HQ with David Plouffe,” (Google podcast link) the former 2008 Obama campaign adviser interviewed Hillary Clinton on a wide range of topics, primarily about strategy and tactics that Trump and Republicans will most likely use in an attempt to defeat the 2020 Democratic party presidential nominee.

In the hour-long, often-rambling podcast, guest Hillary Rodham Clinton, whom was the 2016 Democratic nominee for POTUS, a former U.S. Secretary of State, and a former United States Senator from New York, obliquely and surreptitiously accused Tulsi Gabbard, a current Major in the Hawaii Army National Guard, current Hawaii U.S. Representative (D-CD2), and Iraq War Veteran, of being a “Russian asset.”

The shocking incredulity which Hillary accuses a fellow Democrat of being – an open traitor to our nation, not merely a “faithless” candidate – could possibly be taken seriously, if not at face value – but for at least two things:

Tulsi Gabbard, Promotion to Major

1.) Tulsi Gabbard is a Major in the Hawaii National Guard, and as such, has sworn an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…”;

2.) Tulsi Gabbard is an Iraq War Veteran, and;

3.) Tulsi Gabbard is a current Representative for Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District, and in that capacity has similarly sworn an oath of fealty – fidelity to and support of the Constitution.

If what Hillary surreptitiously claimed, suggested, or intimated (she did not mention Rep. Gabbard by name) were true (which it is not), Tulsi would be an open traitor – and she is not.

The seriousness of such charges are not to be taken lightly, which is also why, in large part, that they’re incredulous. Hillary’s claims are not even specious, they are fully unjustified, and wholly unwarranted. And so, they should not, and cannot be taken seriously.

Most American journalistic and media outlets have hardly taken notice, save for a nominal categorical mention on Twitter, and a CBS Evening News report by Norah O’Donnell, and one, or two other stories, including Fox News Tucker Carlson’s brief interview with Tulsi Gabbard about the ordeal shortly after it came to light.

Even Chuck Todd, the marshmallow-soft replacement for the late, take-no-prisoners attorney/host Tim Russert on NBC’s once-revered Sunday newsmaker program Meet the Press, only had a passing interaction on the subject with South Bend, Indiana “Mayor Pete” Buttegieg, who is also a Navy Iraq War Veteran and Democratic candidate to be the party’s Presidential Nominee. Their brief exchange follows:

CHUCK TODD: Before I let you go, I was curious if you had any reaction to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton implying that Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard might be a Russian asset.

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG: What I’ll say is, I’m not going to get into their dispute. What I will say is we know right now –

TODD: Is that appropriate?

BUTTIGIEG: Well, I suppose when you become a private citizen you can say whatever you want. But…

TODD: I understand that, but she’s a sitting member of Congress. She served.

BUTTIGIEG: Well, I certainly honor her service. As we saw in the debate, I also have strong disagreements with her on topics like Syria. But the bigger issue here is Russia is working to interfere with our elections right now. And we know a big part of how they’re going to do it is exploiting divisions among the American people, with their information operations. We’ve got to become a harder target and as president, I will make sure using all of our tools, diplomatic, economic, and security there is enough deterrence that Russia, or any country, would never again calculate that it is in their interest to mess with our democracy.

TODD: I just wonder if you are comfortable at all – I mean, throw a charge out there making her deny it. That’s a Trumpian move.

BUTTIGIEG: Well, we got to focus on the task at hand right now. And that includes making sure that this presidency comes to an end. That is my focus. That, and what happens after this presidency comes to an end.

TODD: So, you’re comfortable with Hillary Clinton’s critique of Tulsi Gabbard and how she went about it?

BUTTIGIEG: No, I’m not. I’m also not getting in the middle of it because we as a party and as a country have to focus on the future.

NBC’s Chuck Todd was asking “Mayor Pete” Buttegieg about the exchange with David Plouffe and Hillary Clinton in which she spoke about the possibility of another unexpected potential outcome like 2016 (in which the Vladimir Putin-run Russian government significantly meddled online using false narratives and “bots” to alter the outcome according to their wants, thereby getting Donald Trump elected), and the likelihood of Trump’s re-election in conjunction with the possible strategy and tactics they’ll use against the Democratic nomine.

The pertinent part comes about 35 minutes into the one-hour interview. After her controversial remarks, the podcast took a break. In context, and in pertinent part, she said the following:

Strategy Advice 101 for @Griffith2014

Alabama is a deeply “red” state (some say “redneck,” which may also be accurate), which is to say, that the state has historically voted Republican for the past several years; all of the state’s top office holders are Republicans, and both houses of the legislature are similarly controlled by Republicans.

The website 270ToWin.com had this remark about the state’s political alignment: “Alabama became a GOP stronghold starting in 1964, voting for Democrats only in 1968 and 1976 (for native son George Wallace and Jimmy Carter, respectively). The initial shift was largely in response to white conservative voter uneasiness with the civil rights legislation that was passed in the mid-1960s, which was effectively exploited by the Republicans’ “Southern Strategy.” In 2012, Mitt Romney beat Barack Obama by about 22%, almost identical to John McCain‘s margin of victory in 2008.”

Frankly, the Democratic party in Alabama has been virtually decimated, and there are very few candidates identifying themselves with the party. Many state office-holders are running unopposed, including other Federal seats, including incumbent United States Senator Jeff Sessions.

Taking a clue from the George Wallace playbook (Wallace was a STRONG and almost constant campaigner), there are 67 reasons why I wouldn’t give Parker Griffith a strong chance at winning the governorship.

For example, has he