(08-17-2018 09:16 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:16 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:04 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:00 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  If he is defending Brennan then there is nothing I need to hear at this point.

Brennan is an unapologetic communist and his attacks on the presidency have hurt the office and the CIA, far more than they are hurting Donal Trump.

Brennan simply speaks the truth; and that truth does, indeed, hurt Donald Trump.

He's a well-documented liar, mr mensa. He also does not hide the fact that he is a communist and you do not hide the fact that you support such people. Oh the irony. People supporting open communists are up in arms about Russian meddling. lol

You probably would have supported Charles Manson if he had spoke out against Trump.

Brennan was never a communist, much less an admitted communist... that I know.

The question of whether he lied to congress is a matter of intepretation of information that I don't have enough insight on the subject matter to determine.

Translation: I really don't want to know the truth so I won't bother to investigate because it doesn't matter to me if he lied, he hates Trump, that's good enough reason to believe every word he says.

(08-17-2018 09:23 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:16 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:16 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:04 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:00 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  If he is defending Brennan then there is nothing I need to hear at this point.

Brennan is an unapologetic communist and his attacks on the presidency have hurt the office and the CIA, far more than they are hurting Donal Trump.

Brennan simply speaks the truth; and that truth does, indeed, hurt Donald Trump.

He's a well-documented liar, mr mensa. He also does not hide the fact that he is a communist and you do not hide the fact that you support such people. Oh the irony. People supporting open communists are up in arms about Russian meddling. lol

You probably would have supported Charles Manson if he had spoke out against Trump.

Brennan was never a communist, much less an admitted communist... that I know.

The question of whether he lied to congress is a matter of intepretation of information that I don't have enough insight on the subject matter to determine.

Translation: I really don't want to know the truth so I won't bother to investigate because it doesn't matter to me if he lied, he hates Trump, that's good enough reason to believe every word he says.

I guess I'll need you to tell me what definative Brennan lie you're referring.

(08-17-2018 09:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:23 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:16 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:16 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:04 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Brennan simply speaks the truth; and that truth does, indeed, hurt Donald Trump.

He's a well-documented liar, mr mensa. He also does not hide the fact that he is a communist and you do not hide the fact that you support such people. Oh the irony. People supporting open communists are up in arms about Russian meddling. lol

You probably would have supported Charles Manson if he had spoke out against Trump.

Brennan was never a communist, much less an admitted communist... that I know.

The question of whether he lied to congress is a matter of intepretation of information that I don't have enough insight on the subject matter to determine.

Translation: I really don't want to know the truth so I won't bother to investigate because it doesn't matter to me if he lied, he hates Trump, that's good enough reason to believe every word he says.

I guess I'll need you to tell me what definative Brennan lie you're referring.

From the WaPo no less, though, in all fairness to them, they were going after the Bush administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...470baa7ff5

Just reaffirms my opinion that security clearances aren't necessary once a person is out of whatever position previously required said clearance. If this guy is asking for his to be revoked, that obviously means even HE doesn't think he needs it.

(08-17-2018 09:44 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:23 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:16 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:16 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  He's a well-documented liar, mr mensa. He also does not hide the fact that he is a communist and you do not hide the fact that you support such people. Oh the irony. People supporting open communists are up in arms about Russian meddling. lol

You probably would have supported Charles Manson if he had spoke out against Trump.

Brennan was never a communist, much less an admitted communist... that I know.

The question of whether he lied to congress is a matter of intepretation of information that I don't have enough insight on the subject matter to determine.

Translation: I really don't want to know the truth so I won't bother to investigate because it doesn't matter to me if he lied, he hates Trump, that's good enough reason to believe every word he says.

I guess I'll need you to tell me what definative Brennan lie you're referring.

From the WaPo no less, though, in all fairness to them, they were going after the Bush administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...470baa7ff5

I do think he intentionally stretched the truth on civilian deaths and drone strikes. The Obama administration appears to gave expanded the definition of what constitutes an enemy combatant in order to continue to use drones to conduct surgical strikes.

(08-17-2018 10:00 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:44 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:23 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:16 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Brennan was never a communist, much less an admitted communist... that I know.

The question of whether he lied to congress is a matter of intepretation of information that I don't have enough insight on the subject matter to determine.

Translation: I really don't want to know the truth so I won't bother to investigate because it doesn't matter to me if he lied, he hates Trump, that's good enough reason to believe every word he says.

I guess I'll need you to tell me what definative Brennan lie you're referring.

From the WaPo no less, though, in all fairness to them, they were going after the Bush administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...470baa7ff5

I do think he intentionally stretched the truth on civilian deaths and drone strikes. The Obama administration appears to gave expanded the definition of what constitutes an enemy combatant in order to continue to use drones to conduct surgical strikes.

Indeed. You can never trust even the youngest of those mofo's.


Heck, Obama even tossed in an American citizen for good measure.

(08-17-2018 10:14 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:00 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:44 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:23 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Translation: I really don't want to know the truth so I won't bother to investigate because it doesn't matter to me if he lied, he hates Trump, that's good enough reason to believe every word he says.

I guess I'll need you to tell me what definative Brennan lie you're referring.

From the WaPo no less, though, in all fairness to them, they were going after the Bush administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...470baa7ff5

I do think he intentionally stretched the truth on civilian deaths and drone strikes. The Obama administration appears to gave expanded the definition of what constitutes an enemy combatant in order to continue to use drones to conduct surgical strikes.

Indeed. You can never trust even the youngest of those mofo's.


Heck, Obama even tossed in an American citizen for good measure.

Were you opposed to surgical drone strikes in Pakisitan? I wasn't, though I know many were... particularly fellow Democrats.

(08-16-2018 08:04 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:00 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  If he is defending Brennan then there is nothing I need to hear at this point.

Brennan is an unapologetic communist and his attacks on the presidency have hurt the office and the CIA, far more than they are hurting Donal Trump.

Brennan simply speaks the truth; and that truth does, indeed, hurt Donald Trump.

Actually that remains to be seen.

On both parts of your statement.

(08-17-2018 10:36 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:14 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:00 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:44 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:39 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I guess I'll need you to tell me what definative Brennan lie you're referring.

From the WaPo no less, though, in all fairness to them, they were going after the Bush administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...470baa7ff5

I do think he intentionally stretched the truth on civilian deaths and drone strikes. The Obama administration appears to gave expanded the definition of what constitutes an enemy combatant in order to continue to use drones to conduct surgical strikes.

Indeed. You can never trust even the youngest of those mofo's.


Heck, Obama even tossed in an American citizen for good measure.

Were you opposed to surgical drone strikes in Pakisitan? I wasn't, though I know many were... particularly fellow Democrats.

I wasn't, still am not. Though it does appear some of those strikes turned out to be 100% wrongful targeting. To claim that no civilians were ever killed in those strikes was, well, Brennanish.

I was against Obama killing the American citizen. You?

(08-17-2018 10:42 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:04 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:00 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  If he is defending Brennan then there is nothing I need to hear at this point.

Brennan is an unapologetic communist and his attacks on the presidency have hurt the office and the CIA, far more than they are hurting Donal Trump.

Brennan simply speaks the truth; and that truth does, indeed, hurt Donald Trump.

Actually that remains to be seen.

On both parts of your statement.

the former = 0

the latter is DJT > dickhead

the leftover msm snide is mere fodder.....

(08-16-2018 08:34 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:33 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:08 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-16-2018 08:04 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Brennan simply speaks the truth; and that truth does, indeed, hurt Donald Trump.

[img] .@TuckerCarlson speaking of John Brennan: “How did somebody so obviously limited intellectually get to be CIA Director in the first place?” Now that is a really good question! Then followed by “Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut is a FAKE War Hero...” So true, a total Fake! 5:45 PM - 16 Aug 2018 [/img]

Tucker Carlson couldn't hold John Brennan's intellectual piss bucket.

he couldn't even debate Jon Stewart, so low bar there

so jon stewart carries piss buckets....

No. Jon Stewart IS a... well, you get the idea.

(08-17-2018 10:44 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:36 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:14 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:00 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 09:44 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  From the WaPo no less, though, in all fairness to them, they were going after the Bush administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...470baa7ff5

I do think he intentionally stretched the truth on civilian deaths and drone strikes. The Obama administration appears to gave expanded the definition of what constitutes an enemy combatant in order to continue to use drones to conduct surgical strikes.

Indeed. You can never trust even the youngest of those mofo's.


Heck, Obama even tossed in an American citizen for good measure.

Were you opposed to surgical drone strikes in Pakisitan? I wasn't, though I know many were... particularly fellow Democrats.

I wasn't, still am not. Though it does appear some of those strikes turned out to be 100% wrongful targeting. To claim that no civilians were ever killed in those strikes was, well, Brennanish.

I was against Obama killing the American citizen. You?

I think Brennan was simply playing the role he needed to play in order to ensure the program continued. I think President Obama needed him to play that role, too.

I don't know about the american citizen.

(08-17-2018 07:37 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:10 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Be careful what you wish for Admiral.

We do love our military heroes.

Yes, we do. They ones that are loyal to the U.S., that is. Not commie sympathizers.

Special ops shoot down Brennan and his defenders: 'You put your politics before us'

(08-17-2018 10:48 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:37 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:10 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Be careful what you wish for Admiral.

We do love our military heroes.

Yes, we do. They ones that are loyal to the U.S., that is. Not commie sympathizers.

Special ops shoot down Brennan and his defenders: 'You put your politics before us'

So, Admiral McRaven is not loyal to the US? DJT is no more "the US" than Al Franken or Arnold Schwarzenegger. McRaven is, unquestionably, more loyal to Brennan than Trump, though.

(08-17-2018 10:54 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:48 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:37 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:10 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Be careful what you wish for Admiral.

We do love our military heroes.

Yes, we do. They ones that are loyal to the U.S., that is. Not commie sympathizers.

Special ops shoot down Brennan and his defenders: 'You put your politics before us'

So, Admiral McRaven is not loyal to the US? DJT is no more "the US" than Al Franken or Arnold Schwarzenegger. McRaven is, unquestionably, more loyal to Brennan than Trump, though.

C’mon—-Trump certainly has his flaws—-but his entire basis for governing is wrapped up in America first. It is the basis of both his trade, domestic, and foreign policy. It even governs his use of force. You can attack Trimp all you wish on various issues—-but if you’re debating who is most pro-American—-Im not sure any president since Teddy Roosevelt is more pro-American than Trump.

That’s why the entire Russia Russia Russia thing is moronic. There have been zero instances of Trump putting other nations interests in front of US interests—and that includes Russian. The only instance that I can think of that comes close—is Syria. In that case we helped the Syrian people, when we had little to gain—and yet we risked war AGAINST Russia to do it.

DJT has never put anything or anyone above himself.

(08-17-2018 11:47 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  DJT has never put anything or anyone above himself.

jfc.....

we know you prefer the former beta cuck in chief....

(08-17-2018 11:47 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  DJT has never put anything or anyone above himself.

Even if true, which I don't agree with, I don't give a rat's ass. Improve the economy, give more Americans of all races a chance to share and participate in the American dream, send notice to our allies that they're going to pull their share of the load, and strike fear in the hearts of our enemies.

Better than this, that's for sure.

(08-17-2018 11:47 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  DJT has never put anything or anyone above himself.

Proof?

(08-17-2018 10:54 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 10:48 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:37 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 07:10 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Be careful what you wish for Admiral.

We do love our military heroes.

Yes, we do. They ones that are loyal to the U.S., that is. Not commie sympathizers.

Special ops shoot down Brennan and his defenders: 'You put your politics before us'

So, Admiral McRaven is not loyal to the US? DJT is no more "the US" than Al Franken or Arnold Schwarzenegger. McRaven is, unquestionably, more loyal to Brennan than Trump, though.

Let's see... he's defending a known communist.

Hmmm.... let me get back to you on that one.