• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"I Ran the C.I.A. Now I'm Endorsing Hillary Clinton"

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Suspended
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
64,076
Reaction score
62,238
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Opinion piece by Michael J. Morell.

Excerpt:

In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief. These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law. The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump’s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated. Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States. In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation. . . . Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0



If the negligent use of a private email server, uncovered only after seven Benghazi investigations, was anywhere near as bad as the right wants it to be, I suspect this person - who served under six presidents - would not be writing such an opinion piece. In addition, he notes (1) Clinton's involvement in the raid that nailed Bin Laden and general experience near the executive during her tenure, (2) Trump playing into jihadist hands with calls to bar all muslims and similar pointlessly inflammatory statements.

Of course, this appears in the NYT, is negative of Trump, and contains information from an expert, so it will be ignored out of hand by Trump's willing minions.
 
If Trump wins and is then killed Kenedy style will it be worth having an investigation?

Who shot him? The nearest person with a gun.
 
I support giving weapons, money, equipment and training to terrorists, and I'm endorsing Hillary Clinton.
 
Opinion piece by Michael J. Morell.

Excerpt:

In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief. These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law. The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump’s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated. Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States. In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation. . . . Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0



If the negligent use of a private email server, uncovered only after seven Benghazi investigations, was anywhere near as bad as the right wants it to be, I suspect this person - who served under six presidents - would not be writing such an opinion piece. In addition, he notes (1) Clinton's involvement in the raid that nailed Bin Laden and general experience near the executive during her tenure, (2) Trump playing into jihadist hands with calls to bar all muslims and similar pointlessly inflammatory statements.

Of course, this appears in the NYT, is negative of Trump, and contains information from an expert, so it will be ignored out of hand by Trump's willing minions.

..and another "poison pill" thread...
 
But hey, Putin is ex-KGB and he endorsed Trump.

If you bought the ticket, take the ride.

:drink
 
Opinion piece by Michael J. Morell.

Excerpt:

In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief. These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law. The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump’s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated. Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States. In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation. . . . Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0



If the negligent use of a private email server, uncovered only after seven Benghazi investigations, was anywhere near as bad as the right wants it to be, I suspect this person - who served under six presidents - would not be writing such an opinion piece. In addition, he notes (1) Clinton's involvement in the raid that nailed Bin Laden and general experience near the executive during her tenure, (2) Trump playing into jihadist hands with calls to bar all muslims and similar pointlessly inflammatory statements.

Of course, this appears in the NYT, is negative of Trump, and contains information from an expert, so it will be ignored out of hand by Trump's willing minions.

Isn't it illegal for the CIA to try to influence elections. I know the Clintons allowed Arkansas to be used by the CIA at Mena and facilitating the Iran/Contra arms illegalities. This past series of events joined the Clintons, Bush, and the CIA at the hips. The CIA infiltrated Mass Media on a grand scale, proven 1977 by the Church Committee. The CIA only worked outside the USA by law and was joined at the hips with the Who's Who of International Corporatism. Voila, suddenly the CIA can operate inside the USA and finds its' joined at the hips Who's Who of Corporatism to be a strong alliance into USA govt operations to influence events. Expand Mass Media control. CIA gets its' own Army/Special Forces/PMCs. Big Corporatism wants Globalization and the NWO and now has the CIA as its' ally. CIA agents common as horse turds in Media, in State Department, in Venture Capital and Hedge funds and foreign privatization nets. NED, as one of many front organizations to infiltrate foreign governments to instigate insurrections. And CIA should have a say in USA elections????? We have found the turd in the punch bowl.
 
In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security.

Oh that's rich, Clinton's national security experience is in being negligent, careless and a failure.
 
Yawn.......... Will the nothing burgers ever end?
 
Morell is a Clinton suck puppy. He helped change the Benghazi hearings.
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said that Morell accompanied Susan Rice during a closed-door meeting in November and defended Rice while attempting to divert the discussion to the confusion surrounding the events. He said Morell blamed the FBI, and when Graham later called them to verify, they “went ballistic.” Within 24 hours, Morell changed the statement and admitted the CIA had changed the talking points.

No surprises here.

[Watch] CIA Connection to Hillary Clinton, Altered Benghazi Talking Points ⋆ UFP NEWS
 
Isn't it illegal for the CIA to try to influence elections. I know the Clintons allowed Arkansas to be used by the CIA at Mena and facilitating the Iran/Contra arms illegalities. This past series of events joined the Clintons, Bush, and the CIA at the hips. The CIA infiltrated Mass Media on a grand scale, proven 1977 by the Church Committee. The CIA only worked outside the USA by law and was joined at the hips with the Who's Who of International Corporatism. Voila, suddenly the CIA can operate inside the USA and finds its' joined at the hips Who's Who of Corporatism to be a strong alliance into USA govt operations to influence events. Expand Mass Media control. CIA gets its' own Army/Special Forces/PMCs. Big Corporatism wants Globalization and the NWO and now has the CIA as its' ally. CIA agents common as horse turds in Media, in State Department, in Venture Capital and Hedge funds and foreign privatization nets. NED, as one of many front organizations to infiltrate foreign governments to instigate insurrections. And CIA should have a say in USA elections????? We have found the turd in the punch bowl.

It is however, not illegal for private citizens to endorse a candidate. Morell is a retiree who is not in a government post.
 
Morell will be running the CIA if Clinton is elected.

And Putin will be running it if Trump is elected.

See how easy it is to make **** up about the future?
 
It's a strange culture here in the US where people dismiss experts because it doesn't confirm their bias. I guess it's too PC to trust credible sources.
 
And Putin will be running it if Trump is elected.

See how easy it is to make **** up about the future?

I am making nothing up. Pundits said while Morell testifying said he had the inside track for the job if Clinton runs and wins. I guess when you only hear half the story that is what happens
 
Isn't it illegal for the CIA to try to influence elections.
Morrell no longer runs the CIA. He's a private citizen, and can endorse whomever he likes.


I know the Clintons allowed Arkansas to be used by the CIA at Mena and facilitating the Iran/Contra arms illegalities.....
The Vincent Foster Memorial Conspiracy Theory Subreddit is thataway ---->
 
Opinion piece by Michael J. Morell.

Excerpt:

In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief. These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law. The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump’s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated. Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States. In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation. . . . Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0



If the negligent use of a private email server, uncovered only after seven Benghazi investigations, was anywhere near as bad as the right wants it to be, I suspect this person - who served under six presidents - would not be writing such an opinion piece.

....that is incorrect. This is driven not by Clinton's (felonious) negligence with classified information, but by the complete unfitness of Trump for the Presidency.


And he makes good points.
 
I am making nothing up. Pundits said while Morell testifying said he had the inside track for the job if Clinton runs and wins. I guess when you only hear half the story that is what happens

What pundits? Limbaugh, Hannity?
 
Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, and the man who shot Bin Laden Brian Williams?

Got a link to that? Not that I would ever doubt your word...
 
Got a link to that? Not that I would ever doubt your word...

No. I was just comparing Hannity and Limbaugh to their competition. Or the ones you apparently listen to.
 
....that is incorrect. This is driven not by Clinton's (felonious) negligence with classified information, but by the complete unfitness of Trump for the Presidency.


And he makes good points.

The point is that if Clinton's non-felonious (unless one has evidence that the FBI was lying about never having charged anyone in these circumstances without aggravating factors) were that important, the CIA guy would understand and would say so.

In contrast, there's a whole lot of worse things wrong with Trump, hence he says vote Clinton not Trump.
 
The point is that if Clinton's non-felonious (unless one has evidence that the FBI was lying about never having charged anyone in these circumstances without aggravating factors) were that important, the CIA guy would understand and would say so.

The former Director is not commenting on Hillary's (felonious, the FBI merely declined to recommend prosecution) spillages, but Trumps manifest unfitness for office. Hillary is incompetent. Trump is psychotic. He is reacting to the latter, and that no more alleviates the former than it speaks to lies, bribes, or cattle futures.



Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Isn't it illegal for the CIA to try to influence elections.

He's not in the CIA anymore. He was for 33 years. It says all this in the link.




I know the Clintons allowed Arkansas to be used by the CIA at Mena and facilitating the Iran/Contra arms illegalities. This past series of events joined the Clintons, Bush, and the CIA at the hips. The CIA infiltrated Mass Media on a grand scale, proven 1977 by the Church Committee. The CIA only worked outside the USA by law and was joined at the hips with the Who's Who of International Corporatism. Voila, suddenly the CIA can operate inside the USA and finds its' joined at the hips Who's Who of Corporatism to be a strong alliance into USA govt operations to influence events. Expand Mass Media control. CIA gets its' own Army/Special Forces/PMCs. Big Corporatism wants Globalization and the NWO and now has the CIA as its' ally. CIA agents common as horse turds in Media, in State Department, in Venture Capital and Hedge funds and foreign privatization nets. NED, as one of many front organizations to infiltrate foreign governments to instigate insurrections. And CIA should have a say in USA elections????? We have found the turd in the punch bowl.

Therefore, let's ignore it whenever someone in the CIA has an opinion on the quality of a candidate?





Honestly, the things people will say to avoid admitting that the GOP's man is a terrible choice....
 
The former Director is not commenting on Hillary's (felonious, the FBI merely declined to recommend prosecution) spillages, but Trumps manifest unfitness for office. Hillary is incompetent. Trump is psychotic. He is reacting to the latter, and that no more alleviates the former than it speaks to lies, bribes, or cattle futures.

Open the link and read it. He compares both candidates.

If he thought the email thing was a big deal, he'd say so. Because that's how people communicate.
 
Back
Top Bottom