Tulsi: EU & NATO trying to drag us into a war with Russia. Deep state doesn’t want peace

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

This is how wars are prolonged in the 21st century. Not with declarations. Not with parliamentary votes. But with anonymous intelligence leaks, laundered through Mockingbird media, timed precisely to suffocate diplomacy before it can breathe.

Reuters is a case in point, laundering intel narratives as journalism. It selected the most escalation-friendly interpretation available and wrapped it in the authority of anonymity — six sources “familiar with U.S. intelligence,” one citing a most-recent report from late September, to claim that Vladimir Putin intends not only to seize all of Ukraine, but to "reclaim" parts of Europe. This was not analysis. It was a threat narrative: maximal, apocalyptic, and conveniently untestable. The kind that turns negotiation into appeasement and restraint into treason. The kind that boxes the elected leaders into war without ever asking the public.

That specificity matters. Anonymous intelligence leaks are not neutral artifacts, they are policy instruments. They shape public emotion, narrow political horizons, and manufacture inevitability. Once a population is convinced that continental war is pre-programmed, diplomacy becomes illegitimate by definition. That is how peace is killed without debate.

This pattern is not unique to one newsroom. It is systemic and by design. Across the Western media ecosystem, escalation narratives are routinely laundered through anonymity, authority, and urgency, creating a closed loop in which fear generates headlines, headlines manufacture consent, and consent generates policy momentum that no single elected official appears able to stop. Reuters is not the disease. It is a symptom of a larger architecture that rewards alarm and punishes restraint. Again, all by design.

This is precisely why the response from the sitting U.S. Director of National Intelligence matters.

Gabbard did not hedge. She accused Reuters of pushing “lies and propaganda” on behalf of warmongers, warned that such narratives are being used to “foment hysteria and fear” to block peace, and stated, that they're using intelligence briefings delivered to lawmakers, that Russia seeks to avoid a larger war with Europe and does not possess the desire to conquer all of Ukraine, let alone Europe.

That phrasing is crucial, because it is Reuters’ own reporting of what she said. The contradiction is devastating: the same intelligence community being anonymously cited to inflate the threat is, according to its own Director, delivering a far more restrained assessment behind closed doors.

This exposes the fraud at the heart of the escalation narrative. Even if one assumes Russia’s objectives in Ukraine are maximalist, it does not follow—logically, militarily, or materially, that Russia intends to wage a continental war against NATO Europe. That leap is not intelligence analysis. It is psychological conditioning.

After years of attritional warfare, Russia controls a little more than one-fifth of Ukrainian territory. That reality does not support fantasies of armored divisions rolling toward Paris or Berlin. To insist otherwise is to substitute fear for facts, which is precisely how war is sold.

Now place this alongside Gabbard’s public remarks at the TPUSA Summit, where she stated:

“The deep state is fighting us every step of the way, and it exists within every single federal agency.”

That sentence is not rhetorical. It is a description of institutional behavior. Bureaucracies whose budgets, prestige, and careers depend on permanent confrontation do not quietly accept peace. They resist it, by leaking selectively and out of context, reframing assessments, delaying negotiations, and redefining threats until escalation appears not only necessary, but moral.

But this is where discernment matters, because survival depends on discernment, not vibes. Is Gabbard the real deal, or is she being permitted to play dissident inside a controlled theater? That is not a smear. It is due diligence.

---