President Donald Trump

[The Feral Slasher]

Here's exactly what I wrote... Not an endorsement of Brennan, but an endorsement of the Admiral and the 14 others who have come out publicly against Trump policies.

So I would expect others who read it to accept the clarification in the next post. And no, you sidetracked the discussion because that's what people do on the internet...I'm guilty of it myself. I would defy anyone to find a thread that is linear in it's progress, they all go meandering depending on the poster and what he/she desires.

You pretty clearly called the post which characterized Brennan as a blend of Jesus Christ and George Washington brilliant. you didn't say the admiral was brilliant and you certainly didn't mention 14 others, but whatever, if you don't want to own what you post I'll just not waste my time.

[Hornsby]

You pretty clearly called the post which characterized Brennan as a blend of Jesus Christ and George Washington brilliant. you didn't say the admiral was brilliant and you certainly didn't mention 14 others, but whatever, if you don't want to own what you post I'll just not waste my time.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see "

LOL...you're a hoot Slasher, have a great week!

[Sour Masher]

Strange side-tracking on Brennan imo. I assume just about everyone who has ever held the position of CIA Director has blood on his hands and skeletons in his closet. Some more than others, obviously, and as I've said, Brennan isn't the ideal stone thrower in the glass house of government, but what he says about Trump is true, and like the other former intelligence and military leaders, he has the background knowledge to speak to how Trump's antics are dangerous on the world stage.

Believing what he says is true is not the same thing as lauding him as a great human being. Court cases often take as credible the testimony of murders and thieves, if their testimony is believed to have merit. I made the Canseco analogy before as well--it is a logical fallacy to assume a flawed messenger necessarily means his message is flawed, and I don't recall Hornsby or anyone focusing on calling Brennan are great man, just that his message has merit on Trump. I'm sure, if you dug enough, you'd find flaws with many of Trump's critics--especially former intelligence and military personnel. Brennan should not be lionized, but his message can still have merit, like Canseco's did. It is more important to me, given Trump is the current POTUS, to determine if Brennan's specific criticisms, informed by his former position, are valid or not. I believe they are. If we want to remind ourselves, while we weigh his message, that he too represents dark aspects of our government, that is also a conversation worth having, but I don't know why anyone would think both things can't be true--that a former head of the of CIA may be uniquely positioned to understand Trump's flaws and that he himself is a flawed man with blood on his hands?

[The Feral Slasher]

Strange side-tracking on Brennan imo. I assume just about everyone who has ever held the position of CIA Director has blood on his hands and skeletons in his closet. Some more than others, obviously, and as I've said, Brennan isn't the ideal stone thrower in the glass house of government, but what he says about Trump is true, and like the other former intelligence and military leaders, he has the background knowledge to speak to how Trump's antics are dangerous on the world stage.

Believing what he says is true is not the same thing as lauding him as a great human being. Court cases often take as credible the testimony of murders and thieves, if their testimony is believed to have merit. I made the Canseco analogy before as well--it is a logical fallacy to assume a flawed messenger necessarily means his message is flawed, and I don't recall Hornsby or anyone focusing on calling Brennan are great man, just that his message has merit on Trump. I'm sure, if you dug enough, you'd find flaws with many of Trump's critics--especially former intelligence and military personnel. Brennan should not be lionized, but his message can still have merit, like Canseco's did. It is more important to me, given Trump is the current POTUS, to determine if Brennan's specific criticisms, informed by his former position, are valid or not. I believe they are. If we want to remind ourselves, while we weigh his message, that he too represents dark aspects of our government, that is also a conversation worth having, but I don't know why anyone would think both things can't be true.

LOL, I simply pointed out how ridiculous the "brilliant" comment was...I should have left it at that but was told I wasn't doing a good job of making my point, so i obliged. Rest assured, my sidetracking in this thread is over.

Regarding your second point in bold, below is the post that Hornsby labeled brilliant, it is pretty much the exact opposite of what you say in bold above - it only discusses how great Brennan is and says nothing about Brennan's position regarding Trump.

"The retired Navy admiral writes to President Trump: Former CIA director John Brennan, whose security clearance you revoked on Wednesday, is one of the finest public servants I have ever known. Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don’t know him."

[Sour Masher]

I missed that quote--my bad.

To the larger point of how many posts have now been devoted to Brennan--FS, you strike me as a fellow who doesn't think too highly of government elites. I don't argue against that position. Is your position that Brennan is so especially unique in his character that he merits special mention and distinction from his peers? Maybe he does, and I am too cynical in my belief that most of them are tainted by at least some horrible decisions, positions, and deeds. And I don't blame most of them too much for that, because I think those stains come with the positions they hold.

I'm of the mind that while, certainty, there is a range of moral integrity within those who serve at the highest levels of the intelligence and military communities, in the US, and all over the world, the vast majority of those folks have made decisions that have harmed more human beings than even the most prolific of serial killers. I think the vast majority of them do these things because they are often choosing the lesser of evils and/or serving the great good, or at least they believe that to be true (even when it is not, and, to be clear, I'm not arguing that Brennan's actions or positions while CIA head were righteous). Death, corruption, and bureaucratic callousness are endemic to the positions they hold. Maybe that is a good conversation to have, but it seems weird to single-out Brennan as being a tainted messengermand send so much time dscussing him here. Aren't all that serve in these positions tainted, to a degree?

Edit: I'll add that understand that your initial post was to correct the notion that Brennan is a saint. It was a fair correction to make. I'm just commenting on how much digital ink is now being spent on Brennan in a thread on Trump.

[Hornsby]

LOL, I simply pointed out how ridiculous the "brilliant" comment was...I should have left it at that but was told I wasn't doing a good job of making my point, so i obliged. Rest assured, my sidetracking in this thread is over.

Regarding your second point in bold, below is the post that Hornsby labeled brilliant, it is pretty much the exact opposite of what you say in bold above - it only discusses how great Brennan is and says nothing about Brennan's position regarding Trump.

"The retired Navy admiral writes to President Trump: Former CIA director John Brennan, whose security clearance you revoked on Wednesday, is one of the finest public servants I have ever known. Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don’t know him."

Again, you sidetrack the point...I'm sure your not posting the pertinent part of the Admiral's post was just an oversight...but I'll post it because it basicly WAS the whole point.

Therefore, I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.

THAT sir, is the brilliant part of the post...

[The Feral Slasher]

I missed that quote--my bad.



Edit: I'll add that understand that your initial post was to correct the notion that Brennan is a saint. It was a fair correction to make. I'm just commenting on how much digital ink is now being spent on Brennan in a thread on Trump.

Yes, my initial post was simply to point out that labeling Brennan a saint only weakens the argument and isn't at all brilliant. Everything after that was a colossal waste of time that we are all stupider for having participated in.

[The Feral Slasher]

Again, you sidetrack the point...I'm sure your not posting the pertinent part of the Admiral's post was just an oversight...but I'll post it because it basicly WAS the whole point.



THAT sir, is the brilliant part of the post...

Wow, that is brilliant, just amazing. A truly compelling argument . It changed my opinion entirely.

[Hornsby]

Wow, that is brilliant, just amazing. A truly compelling argument . It changed my opinion entirely.

it truly fills my heart with joy that we can accomplish that...you know, changing someone's opinion on the internet is a rare thing indeed. I can die a happy man now...

[Sour Masher]

I know this is an old joke, but I've just found it, and it does such a great job of capturing how annoying Trump's rambling wordy incoherence is to me, I had to share this on point parody/joke:

A reporter asks Trump, "Mr. Trump, what's two plus two?"

Mr. Trump replies "I have to say a lot of people have been asking this question. No, really. A lot of people come up to me, and they ask me. They say, 'What's 2+2'? And I tell them, look, we know what 2+2 is. We've had almost eight years of the worst kind of math you can imagine. Oh, my God, I can't believe it. Addition and subtraction of the 1s the 2s and the 3s. It's terrible. It's just terrible. Look, if you want to know what 2+2 is, do you want to know what 2+2 is? I'll tell you. First of all the number 2, by the way, I love the number 2. It's probably my favorite number, no it is my favorite number. By the way, if you check the polls, I'm winning. Especially when it comes to the #2. It's probably like the number 2 but with a lot of 0s after it. A lot. If I'm being honest, I mean, if I'm being honest. I like a lot of zeros. Except for Marco Rubio, now he's a zero that I don't like. Though, I probably shouldn't say that. He's a nice guy, but he's like, '10101000101,' on and on, like that. He's like a computer! You know what I mean? He's like a computer, let me tell you. I don't know. I mean, you know. So, we have all these numbers, and we can add them and subtract them and add them. TIMES them even. Did you know that? We can times them OR divide them, they don't tell you that, and I'll tell you, no one is better at the order of operations than me. You wouldn't believe it. So, we're gonna be the best on 2+2, believe me."

[Fresno Bob]

Canseco's "Juiced" is 100% worth reading IMO

[revo]

Yes my friends, he is calling John Dean, who exposed Richard Nixon’s criminal conspiracy, a RAT. I mean, you gots to be f—-ing kidding me.

[DMT]

Yes my friends, he is calling John Dean, who exposed Richard Nixon’s criminal conspiracy, a RAT. I mean, you gots to be f—-ing kidding me.

SCOTUS and corporate tax breaks dude, it's all good!

[B-Fly]

Trump has to be sweating today, as Michael Cohen is reportedly taking a plea deal and the Manafort jury inquired what they should do if they can't reach unanimity on one of the 18 counts against him. He's got a MAGA rally in West Virginia this evening. We can assume he'll be ramping up the partisan-witch-hunt rhetoric.

Edit to add: Looks like their jury question was misleading and they may be hung on 10 of 18 counts. We'll see if the judge makes them continue deliberating or takes a partial verdict on the remaining 8 counts.

[OaklandA's]

Edit to add: Looks like their jury question was misleading and they may be hung on 10 of 18 counts. We'll see if the judge makes them continue deliberating or takes a partial verdict on the remaining 8 counts.

Not a good day for Trump. Manafort found guilty on 8 counts, and Cohen pleads guilty to 8 counts, including this:

"The prosecutor told the judge the purpose of the payments was to ensure that the individuals did not disclose 'alleged affairs with the candidate.' Besides the $130,000 payment, Cohen admitted to making an illegal contribution of $150,000, which was how much McDougal received from the National Enquirer’s publisher to quash her story.

In acknowledging the charges against him, Cohen said he was directed to violate campaign law at the direction of a candidate for federal office. At the same candidate’s direction, he said he paid $130,000 to somebody to keep them quiet, which was later repaid by the candidate. "

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-21/michael-cohen-appears-in-court-over-hush-payments-plea-update