Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
SaintsInDome2006

Admiral McRaven's Message

Recommended Posts

Quote

William H. McRaven, a retired Navy admiral, was commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014. He oversaw the 2011 Navy SEAL raid in Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden.

William McRaven: If good men like Joe Maguire can’t speak the truth, we should be deeply afraid

***********

Edmund Burke, the Irish statesman and philosopher, once said: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Over the course of the past three years, I have watched good men and women, friends of mine, come and go in the Trump administration — all trying to do something — all trying to do their best. Jim Mattis, John Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Sue Gordon, Dan Coats and, now, Joe Maguire, who until this week was the acting director of national intelligence.

I have known Joe for more than 40 years. There is no better officer, no better man and no greater patriot. He served for 36 years as a Navy SEAL. In 2004, he was promoted to the rank of rear admiral and was chosen to command all of Naval Special Warfare, including the SEALs. Those were dark days for the SEALs. Our combat losses from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were the highest in our history, and Joe and his wife, Kathy, attended every SEAL funeral, providing comfort and solace to the families of the fallen.

But it didn’t stop there. Not a day went by that the Maguires didn’t reach out to some Gold Star family, some wounded SEAL, some struggling warrior. Every loss was personal, every family precious. When Joe retired in 2010, he tried the corporate world. But his passion for the Special Operations soldiers was so deep that he left a lucrative job and took the position as the president of the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, a charity that pays for educating the children of fallen warriors.

In 2018, Joe was asked to be the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, a job he knew well from his last assignment as a vice admiral. He accepted, but within months of his arrival came the announcement of Coats’s departure as director of national intelligence. Maguire didn’t seek to fill the job; he was asked to do it by the president. At first he declined, suggesting that Sue Gordon, Coats’s deputy, would be better suited for the job.

But the president chose Maguire. And, like most of these good men and women, he came in with the intent to do his very best, to follow the rules, to follow the law and to follow what was morally right. Within a few weeks of taking the assignment, he found himself embroiled in the Ukraine whistleblower case. Joe told the White House that, if asked, he would testify, and he would tell the truth. He did. In short order, he earned the respect of the entire intelligence community. They knew a good man was at the helm. A man they could count on, a man who would back them, a man whose integrity was more important than his future employment.

But, of course, in this administration, good men and women don’t last long. Joe was dismissed for doing his job: overseeing the dissemination of intelligence to elected officials who needed that information to do their jobs.

As Americans, we should be frightened — deeply afraid for the future of the nation. When good men and women can’t speak the truth, when facts are inconvenient, when integrity and character no longer matter, when presidential ego and self-preservation are more important than national security — then there is nothing left to stop the triumph of evil.

***********

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 4
  • Love 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Edmund Burke, the Irish statesman and philosopher, once said: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Thanks for posting the entire thing Saints.  I've been thinking about that quote a lot lately.

Watching how passively most Americans -- even the ones opposed to Trump -- are reacting the dismantling of democratic norms and law has been eye-opening.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah but I think this guy’s wife’s cousin’s brother-in-law once attended a Hillary speech, so....

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, nothing beats this. Character. Integrity. Doing the right thing when it's hard. Especially when it's hard.   Every time I see someone here that I have come to believe is an intelligent and reasonable post their vote is for sale to trump because 401K, etc,. ... I'm stunned.  There is no issue greater than this one.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Thanks for posting the entire thing Saints.  I've been thinking about that quote a lot lately.

Watching how passively most Americans -- even the ones opposed to Trump -- are reacting the dismantling of democratic norms and law has been eye-opening.

And we’ve seen a steady stream of true patriots criticize the President.....for good reason.....what is the reply from his supporters?  How can anyone defend Trump when patriots like this are so disturbed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good men and women should speak the truth.  That wasn't why he was asked to step down though.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

And we’ve seen a steady stream of true patriots criticize the President.....for good reason.....what is the reply from his supporters?  How can anyone defend Trump when patriots like this are so disturbed?

But Trump is an American Hero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Good men and women should speak the truth.  That wasn't why he was asked to step down though.  

Why was he then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Why was he then?

Because Trump had to hear a misrepresented intelligence conclusion in an open setting and was not briefed the actual findings by McGuire, who reports to him.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Max Power said:

Because Trump had to hear a misrepresented intelligence conclusion in an open setting and was not briefed the actual findings by McGuire, who reports to him.  

I find this difficult to believe.  You're saying McGuire reports to trump, and trump didn't know what McGuire was going to say.  Why do you believe this, is this your experience also?  I work with a lot of people.  We talk with each other.  McGuire has been navigating military politics for years.  You don't think he talked with other people?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I read Admiral McRaven's book 'Make your bed'.  It's maybe an hour read.  I recommend it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Max Power said:

Because Trump had to hear a misrepresented intelligence conclusion in an open setting and was not briefed the actual findings by McGuire, who reports to him.  

Do you have a credible link claiming this to be the case?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Do you have a credible link claiming this to be the case?

 

Fox news has stated it on air multiple times--Trump got upset in the manner in which he found out, not what was briefed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jm192 said:

Fox news has stated it on air multiple times--Trump got upset in the manner in which he found out, not what was briefed. 

So no...no credible link?

Trump claiming something is not a credible action...nor is apparently fox claiming it on air.  There have been several things pushed on here recently that have not hit anywhere but places like redstate and other highly questionable sources.  And posted as if they were fact...and not what is likely just Trump's claims about what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

So no...no credible link?

Trump claiming something is not a credible action...nor is apparently fox claiming it on air.  There have been several things pushed on here recently that have not hit anywhere but places like redstate and other highly questionable sources.  And posted as if they were fact...and not what is likely just Trump's claims about what happened.


I'm sure I could google and find what Fox or someone else has said.  As you've stated you won't accept it, it's not worth the effort.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

So no...no credible link?

Trump claiming something is not a credible action...nor is apparently fox claiming it on air.  There have been several things pushed on here recently that have not hit anywhere but places like redstate and other highly questionable sources.  And posted as if they were fact...and not what is likely just Trump's claims about what happened.

Also:  Trump claiming it doesn't matter.  But the person who leaked the story claiming it does. 

So really whoever gives the info that fits your narrative gets the umbrella of credible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Zerp said:

I find this difficult to believe.  You're saying McGuire reports to trump, and trump didn't know what McGuire was going to say.  Why do you believe this, is this your experience also?  I work with a lot of people.  We talk with each other.  McGuire has been navigating military politics for years.  You don't think he talked with other people?

That is the claim.  McGuire's people briefed the house committee and the briefer reported that Russia wanted Trump.  Turns out that wasn't what the intelligence actually said.

This classified briefing then gets leaked to the MSM.  (Probably by Adam Schiff, but that is only speculation).  So now the Media is running with an incorrect narrative. I can see why Trump would be upset with McGuire because McGuire didn't brief Trump on the situation before hand.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

So no...no credible link?

Trump claiming something is not a credible action...nor is apparently fox claiming it on air.  There have been several things pushed on here recently that have not hit anywhere but places like redstate and other highly questionable sources.  And posted as if they were fact...and not what is likely just Trump's claims about what happened.

CNN broke the story. 

  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jm192 said:


I'm sure I could google and find what Fox or someone else has said.  As you've stated you won't accept it, it's not worth the effort.

 

 

Just now, jm192 said:

Also:  Trump claiming it doesn't matter.  But the person who leaked the story claiming it does. 

So really whoever gives the info that fits your narrative gets the umbrella of credible.

Yes...I could google it...the point is when people make assertions and accusations here, they should provide a link...especially when asked.  Its not up to me to do the homework for other people.  If I post an assertion or claim something as fact...I expect to be asked where I got it, if I didn't already provide it.  And I do so.  Its that simple.

And no...credible is pretty easy to determine.  Donald Trump making a claim is not credible because of the incredible amount of lies he has told when making such claims.  Credible as in a place not listed as far right biased with dubious grasp on factual reporting.  We have entire threads about this and determining what is credible.  Right now...the searches I have done...show its not coming from very good sources.  So I asked someone to back up their claim...rather than make excuses...lets let the poster I asked respond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

CNN broke the story. 

Ok...still not seeing where they said as you claim or not finding the link...could you please provide one?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well written letter.  Disappointing to hear, much like the rest of the news surrounding the inner workings of the Trump presidency.  But the GOP controls the Senate, so :shrug: guess nothing can be done about the continued erosion of the fabric of American government.  Too bad so sad, MAGA, elections have consequences, etc. etc. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Umm...yeah, not at all what I stated or inferred on this and that last example and the use against of OMB is pretty sad.  Please just bow out and let Max answer the question directed to him.

Sorry for pointing out your own confirmation bias. 

Someone in that room told the News about the events.  The news reported it and the only conclusion allowed is that Trump didn't like what was said and wanted to suppress it. 

So that person's version is right because it's what you want to hear.  Pretty Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the past 3 years, it’s been the same story: Trump behaves irrationally, someone in a position of responsibility calls him out, and Trump’s defenders rush in to find excuses. 

This is why I often compare Donald Trump to the late Al Davis. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

For the past 3 years, it’s been the same story: Trump behaves irrationally, someone in a position of responsibility calls him out, and Trump’s defenders rush in to find excuses. 

This is why I often compare Donald Trump to the late Al Davis. 

It's "Trump says something"  The Liberal media reports it with the spin necessary to make it look crooked.  You guys circle like sharks after the chum bucket has been dumped. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Sorry for pointing out your own confirmation bias. 

Someone in that room told the News about the events.  The news reported it and the only conclusion allowed is that Trump didn't like what was said and wanted to suppress it. 

So that person's version is right because it's what you want to hear.  Pretty Simple.

My bias was asking someone for a link...a credible link.  Thus far...zero link has been provided.  So all we have right now is the word of Donald Trump that I have seen...and yes...he is not credible when denying things or making claims for why he did something...that based on his extensive history of lying about such things.  Im sorry if that bothers you...move on.  Nowhere did I claim whose version is right because what I want to hear...nowhere.  I made no real point about what was actually true...just that Trump's version is not credible on its own.  So again...please stop unless you are here to provide a link which has been requested.  This is not moving the conversation anywhere other than you trying to take jabs at me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jm192 said:

It's "Trump says something"  The Liberal media reports it with the spin necessary to make it look crooked.  You guys circle like sharks after the chum bucket has been dumped. 

Yep.  Sure.  That’s what happened here.  That’s what happened every time.  Ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sho nuff said:

Ok...still not seeing where they said as you claim or not finding the link...could you please provide one?  

Sure, I posted Jake Tapper's Twitter response to the situation here.

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/753528-the-russia-investigation-mueller-over-the-course-of-my-career-ive-seen-a-number-of-challenges-to-our-democracythe-russian-govts-effort-to-interfere-in-our-election-is-among-the-most-serious/?do=findComment&comment=22516435

This is the CNN Link posted yesterday repeating it. 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/politics/intelligence-briefer-russian-interference-trump-sanders/index.html

Now do you want to take a guess how far I had to dig to find this link on CNN?  It wasn't on the front page.  I had to search Trump and it was the 35th result or 4 pages deep.  So CNN  will run with a bad narrative on page 1 that makes Trump bad.  Then an article that states what actually happened is pushed to back real quick.  

So go right on ahead and bash sites like RedState, but they got it right on their first run of the story.  CNN did not.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great letter.  I am extremely frightened at what Trump is doing to the IC community.  I'm sure he will use every tool at his disposal to win 2020.  Does this Admiral have a book he is promoting?  I'd love to read more of his takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jm192 said:

It's "Trump says something"  The Liberal media reports it with the spin necessary to make it look crooked.  You guys circle like sharks after the chum bucket has been dumped. 

At least 95% of what shocks me personally about Trump comes directly from his own lips. 

As for the media, they rarely if ever get it wrong. Usually what happens is the media reveals something bad, Trump’s people and his allies strenuously deny it, then a few days later Trump himself admits it, and you guys say “so what?” Rinse and repeat. 

Edited by timschochet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Right.  So nothing Trump ever says will be credible to you.  So there's no point.  If someone says Trump killed Obama, and Obama is standing right there in front of Trump--doesn't matter because Orange Man bad.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/432698-poll-65-percent-americans-say-trump-is-not-honest

So no Trump is not a credible source

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Sure, I posted Jake Tapper's Twitter response to the situation here.

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/753528-the-russia-investigation-mueller-over-the-course-of-my-career-ive-seen-a-number-of-challenges-to-our-democracythe-russian-govts-effort-to-interfere-in-our-election-is-among-the-most-serious/?do=findComment&comment=22516435

This is the CNN Link posted yesterday repeating it. 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/politics/intelligence-briefer-russian-interference-trump-sanders/index.html

Now do you want to take a guess how far I had to dig to find this link on CNN?  It wasn't on the front page.  I had to search Trump and it was the 35th result or 4 pages deep.  So CNN  will run with a bad narrative on page 1 that makes Trump bad.  Then an article that states what actually happened is pushed to back real quick.  

So go right on ahead and bash sites like RedState, but they got it right on their first run of the story.  CNN did not.  

Thanks...and yes...i will bash RedState because of their numerous mistatements of facts and biased and downright bogus reporting.

CNN seems to have just gone with the sources...and thats fine.  Though, the part about what Trump knows is just from his own claims of "they didn't tell it to me like that"...which is what lead to McGuire being fired.  Less so because of his own actual actions it appears.

Also...it appears there was not a single thing showing pierson intentionally misled anyone, more just added her opinions after being grilled by lawmakers (dems and reps).  A conclusion which isn't all without merit but the intel stops just short of saying they prefer him.    My fault as I was searching for items on McGuire (since that was who was being discussed).

As for CNN and where it was run...why would it be on page one right now?  Seriously? And you claim it states what actually happened...but when other articles are talking about unnamed sources...they get thrown out when they are negative about Trump (this is not me saying I don't believe this person overstated things and gave her opinion...be clear on that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it amazing how all Trump supporters ALWAYS take his side over respected, career diplomats and patriots?

What exactly has Trump done to deserve such blind faith?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

Isn't it amazing how all Trump supporters ALWAYS take his side over respected, career diplomats and patriots?

What exactly has Trump done to deserve such blind faith?

It’s Trump vs an unknown source.  The facts are not in dispute.  Trump yelled at the guy telling him.  The Washington post and NYT ran with it saying this is why Trump yelled.  Trump says “no this is why i yelled.” 

No one is making it Trump vs Mguire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

 

Also...it appears there was not a single thing showing pierson intentionally misled anyone, more just added her opinions after being grilled by lawmakers (dems and reps).  A conclusion which isn't all without merit but the intel stops just short of saying they prefer him.    My fault as I was searching for items on McGuire (since that was who was being discussed).

As for CNN and where it was run...why would it be on page one right now?  Seriously? And you claim it states what actually happened...but when other articles are talking about unnamed sources...they get thrown out when they are negative about Trump (this is not me saying I don't believe this person overstated things and gave her opinion...be clear on that).

Pierson is trained to not let political bias seep into those briefs.  She made a mistake letting her opinion out.  That reflects poorly on her and her boss, McGuire.  Her conclusion is without merit since the Intelligence doesn't support it.  

Why wouldn't CNN want people to know that Trump isn't Russia's preferred candidate?  That is pretty major news.  CNN wants to keep the narrative going.

Look at page 1 right now.  They literally have a story about how much money Chuck Schumer spends on cheesecake a year.  CNN continues to push Russian disinformation exactly the way Russia hoped it would.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jm192 said:

It’s Trump vs an unknown source.  The facts are not in dispute.  Trump yelled at the guy telling him.  The Washington post and NYT ran with it saying this is why Trump yelled.  Trump says “no this is why i yelled.” 

No one is making it Trump vs Mguire

But it will end up that way, always does.  It becomes Trump vs all the people he hired and then fired.  Trump vs patriots who've served multiple presidents.

It always ends the same.  Trump supporters will simply ignore the multiples of people who come out against Trump and call them deep staters and never Trumpers.

I just wonder what Trump has done to gain such a passionate following?  Over clearly competent and respected patriots like Kelly, McMaster, Tillerson.  Add Vindeman to an almost endless list. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

But it will end up that way, always does.  It becomes Trump vs all the people he hired and then fired.  Trump vs patriots who've served multiple presidents.

It always ends the same.  Trump supporters will simply ignore the multiples of people who come out against Trump and call them deep staters and never Trumpers.

I just wonder what Trump has done to gain such a passionate following?  Over clearly competent and respected patriots like Kelly, McMaster, Tillerson.  Add Vindeman to an almost endless list. 

 

I doubt Trump at times.  I doubt the media at times.  I question what the media has done to earn such a blind following.  

The question at hand is WHY did Trump yell at McGuire?  The Washington post and NYT offer 1 reason.  Trump offers another.  

But many choose to accept the “Trump bad” version before ever hearing anything he says.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jm192 said:

I doubt Trump at times.  I doubt the media at times.  I question what the media has done to earn such a blind following.  

The question at hand is WHY did Trump yell at McGuire?  The Washington post and NYT offer 1 reason.  Trump offers another.  

But many choose to accept the “Trump bad” version before ever hearing anything he says.

I could go on and say we have way way more examples of Trump Bad than Trump Thoughtful and well reasoned, but it really doesn't matter at this point. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

I could go on and say we have way way more examples of Trump Bad than Trump Thoughtful and well reasoned, but it really doesn't matter at this point. 

And we have plenty examples of biased media but that doesn’t matter either

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Right.  So nothing Trump ever says will be credible to you.  So there's no point.  If someone says Trump killed Obama, and Obama is standing right there in front of Trump--doesn't matter because Orange Man bad.

it's not because "Orange Man Bad".  Assuming this is irrational and purely because people don't like Trump for whatever reason completely ignores the past 3 years of lying about little things.  When you lie about little, petty things, there is no way you can be trusted about important things. 

The very first thing Trump did once he was in office was lie about crowd size, and pressure government agencies to lie on his behalf.  It was so stupid, but it happened.  And it didn't stop.  If we can't trust Trump to talk about crowd size or where hurricanes were supposed to hit, how can we trust him WRT why someone was fired?

And this has nothing to do with biased media.  Obvious lies are obvious.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jm192 said:

It’s Trump vs an unknown source.  The facts are not in dispute.  Trump yelled at the guy telling him.  The Washington post and NYT ran with it saying this is why Trump yelled.  Trump says “no this is why i yelled.” 

No one is making it Trump vs Mguire

The most important fact is this: Trump simply does not tell the truth. Hasn't for years. Somewhere north of 15,000 false claims just since taking office, and people still jump to defend him when he gets called out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

 

It always ends the same.  Trump supporters will simply ignore the multiples of people who come out against Trump and call them deep staters and never Trumpers.

 

 

You neglected to mention the best part: in a couple of days Trump will give an interview and he’ll admit to the worst charges against him, contradicting what he said before. And then the defenders will come in here and smirk and laugh and say “so what?” 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kal El said:

The most important fact is this: Trump simply does not tell the truth. Hasn't for years. Somewhere north of 15,000 false claims just since taking office, and people still jump to defend him when he gets called out.

So there’s no need to discuss it.  Trump has and will lie on everything in your eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jm192 said:

So there’s no need to discuss it.  Trump has and will lie on everything in your eyes.

Until I see him say something that is verified by a credible news source(network news does not count), why should I believe a word he says?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is interesting.  at least once a week i take step back and consider the possibility that Trump is a misunderstood guy that simply misspeaks occasionally and the media spins every story in a negative light for him.  after all that's certainly a possibility.  it's also possible that he's a narcissistic sociopath and a pathological liar.  as i consider the two extremes, i usually rationalize that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, maybe exactly in the middle.  that seems like the highest probability.

then 20 minutes later he tweets or says something so awful i realize which one is right again.  see you next week.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Pierson is trained to not let political bias seep into those briefs.  She made a mistake letting her opinion out.  That reflects poorly on her and her boss, McGuire.  Her conclusion is without merit since the Intelligence doesn't support it.  

Why wouldn't CNN want people to know that Trump isn't Russia's preferred candidate?  That is pretty major news.  CNN wants to keep the narrative going.

Look at page 1 right now.  They literally have a story about how much money Chuck Schumer spends on cheesecake a year.  CNN continues to push Russian disinformation exactly the way Russia hoped it would.  

Her opinion doesn't mean ot was political bias.  Not every opinion is based on politics.

Also the intel stops short of it...but that doesn't mean it doesn't maker her opinion without merit either.
 

Also...we don't know that Trump and Sanders aren't their preference.  The intel isn't saying it that way either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I weep for Joe McGuire, and in my view, Trump's excuse for firing him is complete and utter, self-serving BS.  This is all about a lack of perceived "loyalty" and for putting light on Russia once again interfering in our elections to benefit Trump.  Trump wanted that buried.  So Trump replaces McGuire with his and Nunes' patsies, and PRESTO, the narrative shifts to promote the theory that the Russians are interfering in our elections to benefit Bernie the evil socialist.  Come on people, quit being so naive.  The propaganda machine is running overdrive.    

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jm192 said:

So there’s no need to discuss it.  Trump has and will lie on everything in your eyes.

Honestly, I don't understand how a rational person could trust anything Trump says without independent verification. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, moleculo said:

Honestly, I don't understand how a rational person could trust anything Trump says without independent verification. 

It’s pretty simple - they don’t but they don’t care because they view the alternative as worse.  I disagree with that approach myself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Punxsutawney Phil said:

Great letter.  I am extremely frightened at what Trump is doing to the IC community.  I'm sure he will use every tool at his disposal to win 2020.  Does this Admiral have a book he is promoting?  I'd love to read more of his takes.

'Make your bed'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.