Jump to content

The coup thread. Fuck the traitors to the Constitution.


Willfully Horn

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

You would if you were a person in your right mind and also loyal to the Russian Federation. 

Bottom of the barrel goldfish harvesting. She’s more loyal to her country than you by a long long measure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Anastasis said:

I’d like to hear your critique and what you disagree with.  

I disagree with the notion that the United States poses more of a threat to global security than its adversaries.

She seems to hold that opinion or is at least sympathetic to it.

I want her nowhere near our intelligence apparatus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Dennison said:

I disagree with the notion that the United States poses more of a threat to global security than its adversaries.

She seems to hold that opinion or is at least sympathetic to it.

I want her nowhere near our intelligence apparatus.

You should watch the testimony. 

5 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

There is nothing less surprising than Ana simping for fucking Tulsi Gabbard. Jesus

Are any of you able to articulate exactly what it is that she did that you don’t like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Dennison said:

And you seem to believe that the United States exists in a world with no enemies.

Surly liberals love the lies that led us into Iraq and establishment cons like Brennan and Clapper. It’s really been an amazing transformation to watch. Rolling in to straight up neocon platitudes. 

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Do you think it was truthful?

Do you think it was untruthful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I'd like to hear why Ana thinks Tulsi Gabbard should be the Director of National Intelligence.

Watch the testimony. In particular the opening statement and her response to Kelly’s questioning at the end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Surly liberals love the lies that led us into Iraq.

This is the biggest motherfucking crock of revisionist shit. The only significant, sizable opposition to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was from the left. Sorry that your liberal neighbors only kept their No War signs up for 10 years or whatever but you're a low down, witless, lying troll that's quick to fling petty insults like duh, duh goldfish brain. You have 24,000 posts on this website. That is a sad pathetic waste of time for someone that has ever in his life said to anyone else, "go touch grass." Fuck off.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Surly liberals love the lies that led us into Iraq and establishment cons like Brennan and Clapper. It’s really been an amazing transformation to watch. Rolling in to straight up neocon platitudes. 

Do you think it was untruthful. 

I think she stated a lot of intentions that are at odds with her history.  So can't be proven as lies.

In other words, her testimony was tailored to win confirmation.  Which, of course, all such testimony is, but like most things Trump-related, turned to 11.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bojack said:

This is the biggest motherfucking crock of revisionist shit. The only significant, sizable opposition to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was from the left. Sorry that your liberal neighbors only kept their No War signs up for 10 years or whatever but you're a low down, witless, lying troll that's quick to fling petty insults like duh, duh goldfish brain. You have 24,000 posts on this website. That is a sad pathetic waste of time for someone that has ever in his life said to anyone else, "go touch grass." Fuck off.

What do you disagree with with that tulsi had said ever. But in particular in her opening statement. Funny where all those left voices went. Hollow bullshit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think she stated a lot of intentions that are at odds with her history.  So can't be proven as lies

Happy to discuss if you want to unpack the details. Otherwise this is just a throw away. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Anastasis said:

What do you disagree with with that tulsi had said ever. But in particular in her opening statement. Funny where all those left voices went. Hollow bullshit. 

Nearly everyone who works for Trump is scum.   She's an opportunist who is interested in more power damn the consequences.   That's most politician for the most part but the path this country is headed down should worry people like you.   Because sooner or later, you or yours end up on their "list" of undesirables who should be punished or scorned.   And you'll go along with it because of your "both sides" bullshit.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Sounds like you need some cope. 

Sounds like you need you to fuck the fuck off you fucking fuck.  There's no reason to engage with you because all you want to do is be a fucking contrarian.    

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bojack said:

That is a sad pathetic waste of time for someone that has ever in his life said to anyone else, "go touch grass." Fuck off.

Weathers great outside. Like perfect. Go touch grass. 

Just now, David Dennison said:

I'm starting to think Ana isn't really interested in unpacking the details.

I’ll provide some video when I get back from a flag football game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully that video will include the parts where she wouldn't answer questions about Edward Snowden and whether U.S. intelligence officials could trust her given her views about Snowden and his leaks.

You know, important stuff for someone who wants to be the the Director of National Intelligence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Sounds like you need some cope. 

Here you go fucktard...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-gabbard-intelligence-agencies-questions-canada-1.7382303

When Ukraine first came under attack from Russia in February 2022, Gabbard said it marked the Joe Biden administration's failure to acknowledge "Russia's legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine's becoming a member of NATO."

She then said weeks later that it was an "undeniable fact" that there were several U.S.-funded bioweapons labs in Ukraine that could "release and spread deadly pathogens."

The first contention as to the reasons for Russia's aggression deviates from the view of the current U.S. administration and its Western allies, who have provided military aid to Ukraine, while the second reflects Gabbard's susceptibility, in Carvin's words, to "straight-from-the-internet conspiracy theories."

Elsewhere in the world, Gabbard has espoused opinions that have ranged from merely contrarian — she said that Trump meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un was a positive development — to out of left field, questioning Japan's desire to evolve from strictly defensive military capabilities, "given Japan's aggression in the Pacific" in the Second World War.

In January 2017, Gabbard freelanced while a Democratic member of Congress, meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. In April of that year, Gabbard said she was "skeptical" Assad had launched a chemical weapons attack on Syrians, even as the first Trump administration expressed a "very high level of confidence" that was the case.

"Assad is not the enemy of the United States, because Syria does not pose a direct threat to the United States," Gabbard told MSNBC nearly two years later as she plotted a long-shot presidential bid.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Here you go fucktard...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-gabbard-intelligence-agencies-questions-canada-1.7382303

When Ukraine first came under attack from Russia in February 2022, Gabbard said it marked the Joe Biden administration's failure to acknowledge "Russia's legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine's becoming a member of NATO."

She then said weeks later that it was an "undeniable fact" that there were several U.S.-funded bioweapons labs in Ukraine that could "release and spread deadly pathogens."

The first contention as to the reasons for Russia's aggression deviates from the view of the current U.S. administration and its Western allies, who have provided military aid to Ukraine, while the second reflects Gabbard's susceptibility, in Carvin's words, to "straight-from-the-internet conspiracy theories."

Elsewhere in the world, Gabbard has espoused opinions that have ranged from merely contrarian — she said that Trump meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un was a positive development — to out of left field, questioning Japan's desire to evolve from strictly defensive military capabilities, "given Japan's aggression in the Pacific" in the Second World War.

In January 2017, Gabbard freelanced while a Democratic member of Congress, meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. In April of that year, Gabbard said she was "skeptical" Assad had launched a chemical weapons attack on Syrians, even as the first Trump administration expressed a "very high level of confidence" that was the case.

"Assad is not the enemy of the United States, because Syria does not pose a direct threat to the United States," Gabbard told MSNBC nearly two years later as she plotted a long-shot presidential bid.

 

Someone loyal to the Russian Federation would be delighted with all of these things. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Watch the testimony. In particular the opening statement and her response to Kelly’s questioning at the end. 

So rather than post the relevant portion and support your argument, you'll just repeat what you've already said and act like you've answered it

Christ, Annie. This is a message board, not your death panelist job. You're allowed to use your words.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So rather than post the relevant portion and support your argument, you'll just repeat what you've already said and act like you've answered it

Christ, Annie. This is a message board, not your death panelist job. You're allowed to use your words.

Watch. The. Tape. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Asha is a clown show. Kinda funny watching this whole cottage industry re-engage and the goldfish brains lapping it up. 

Care to comment on musk’s actions that lead to her post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

The first and foremost point about her is that she's wholely unqualified to be DNI.   Serving in Congress and the Army doesn't all of sudden make one capable of of being in charge of all U.S intelligence.  Her military service has not been in intelligence but rather public affairs.  This makes her qualifed to the White House press spokeswoman.  Not DNI.   

That should be a full stop right there.   She's not qualified.   Now take her comments on a whole host of things and she's even less so.  

But Ana can go right on with his King Contrarian bullshit and fuck himself.  

NO DEI IN THE DNI!!!

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...