When Rep. Tulsi Gabbard chose not to support President Trump’s impeachment in the dramatic Wednesday evening vote on two articles of impeachment, the Hawaii Democrat was merely taking a position held by almost half the country . But for failing to toe the party line and support the hyperpartisan impeachment of the president in the absence of any criminal allegations, Gabbard earned herself the ire of the Democratic Party’s establishment. It responded, once again, by smearing the liberal combat veteran as a traitor to the country.

The left-wing Democratic activist Charlotte Clymer accused Gabbard of being indifferent to treason. Meanwhile, the establishment flak and ex-Hillary Clinton acolyte Neera Tanden seized on the congresswoman’s vote to say that she “called Tulsi Gabbard two years ago,” referencing her long-standing campaign to paint the veteran as a Russian asset and traitor. Even the formerly conservative Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin chimed in after Gabbard’s vote, saying, “Gabbard shows her stripes.”

To top it off, #TulsiCoward and #TulsiIsARussianAsset both trended on the internet hellhole known as Twitter. A quick scroll reveals thousands of tweets penned by enraged liberals and Democrats online, all echoing Clinton’s now-infamous smear that Gabbard is a traitor and puppet of Vladimir Putin.

I've spent way too much of my life trying to educate/alert people to how alarmingly awful my US Rep Tulsi Gabbard #tulsicoward is. She's compromised ppl. Like kompromat compromised. Like international money laundering compromised. I covered this 2 yrs ago. https://t.co/2kK18pz1cr — Chrissy G (@realchrissyg) December 19, 2019

So you sit on a fence and do nothing. You are the worst kind of democrat one that can't make a decision and when she does make a decision it's based on ridiculous rhetoric. You are the kind of candidate the Republicans want in the Democratic party. #IMPEACHMENTVOTE #TulsiCoward — Jim Hogan (@impulse1234) December 19, 2019

Tulsi is not progressive, she has support from Neo Nazis, she supported conversion therapy (there's evidence her views didn't actually change), and oh now, she voted "present" on impeachment.



She has the freedom to her views but she is no progressive. #TulsiCoward — Gay YIMBY (@gayyimby) December 19, 2019

REMEMBER:



On one of the most momentous days of our country's modern history, @TulsiGabbard refused to hold the traitorous "president" accountable for his crimes.#TulsiCoward#TulsiIsARussianAsset#FuckTulsi#NeverTulsi https://t.co/wRgfVqZjl6 — ❄️ 𝕄𝕒𝕞𝕒 𝕊𝕟𝕠𝕨𝕗𝕝𝕒𝕜𝕖 ❄️ (@northeast_mama) December 19, 2019

As my Washington Examiner colleague Kaylee McGhee argued persuasively , Gabbard’s vote of “present” on the articles of impeachable is perfectly reasonable and well-warranted. But even if it weren’t, one misguided vote wouldn’t justify liberal mobs attacking the congresswoman and smearing her as a traitor.

First, though, it’s important to understand that there’s nothing wrong with how Gabbard voted. As she explained it in a statement:

I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing. I also could not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country. My vote today is a vote for much needed reconciliation and hope that together we can heal our country.

This is spot-on. Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president was not “perfect,” as his sycophantic defenders insist. In fact, it was extremely improper for him to request that a foreign leader look into his political rival, Joe Biden. However, it also isn’t worth impeaching Trump over and preempting the 2020 election, especially because the Democrats failed to articulate any actual meaningful crimes in their articles of impeachment.

And it’s not as if Gabbard has gone easy on Trump or Republicans. She supports censuring the president and has dragged hyperpartisan Republican defenders as having “abdicated their responsibility to exercise legitimate oversight” and “blindly do[ing] the bidding of their party’s leader.”

So even liberals who disagree with the congresswoman’s vote on impeachment should acknowledge that it’s a reasonable position to hold. Yet regardless, smearing Gabbard is disgusting and uncalled for.