Jump to content



Photo

Brennan


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#81 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 06:29 AM

McRaven slayed.

How many good men, true American Heroes are you stupid motherfuukers going to have to agree to slander just to justify the fact that Trump is an incompetent demented selfish immature ######?

20 some odd other intelligence Heroes Have step forward tonight on top of mcraven. For fucksake, Trump is making Nixon look positively sane.

The best part is? The tighter the vice, The Nuttier Trump gets.

Definitely go check out mcraven statement. Freaking legendary. And if you don't know who the fuuck that is? He's a guy who organized the bin Laden raid among many other things.

And Trump is fighting with Omarosa. Jesus.

 

http://www.foxnews.c...-before-us.html

 

McRaven has a screw loose. He wanted Seals to announce themselves before breaching a building......... :doh:

 

https://pbs.twimg.co...UGyVAAAfgc7.jpg


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#82 wiffleball

wiffleball

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 66,863 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 06:53 AM

Wow yeah, you figured it out. All of Washington for the last 40 years has been scheming against Donald Trump.

Yeah, that's probably the most likely scenario.


got to love how the same people that were calling Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame seditious and treasonous are taking literally the other side of extreme.

You guys are literally that far gone that it's more palatable for you to believe the virtually impossible than the patently obvious.

Seriously, when Fox News comes out and has to refute one of their own who is clearly in the bag and you STILL choose to believe the ridiculous tinfoil? Wow.

Say Hi to Koresh for me.
Users currently on :ignore: BudBro,Flahawker

#83 wiffleball

wiffleball

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 66,863 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 07:00 AM

 
http://www.foxnews.c...-before-us.html
 
McRaven has a screw loose. He wanted Seals to announce themselves before breaching a building......... :doh:
 
https://pbs.twimg.co...UGyVAAAfgc7.jpg


And like I said, so it begins. Now trying to Slander and smear and belittle a true American hero. Yet again.

How many of these guys will you lay at the foot of an incompetent loon like Trump? How did he so easily get in your head to make you pull a full 180 on everything you allegedly held dear less than 2 years ago?
Users currently on :ignore: BudBro,Flahawker

#84 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 07:04 AM

And like I said, so it begins. Now trying to Slander and smear and belittle a true American hero. Yet again.

How many of these guys will you lay at the foot of an incompetent loon like Trump? How did he so easily get in your head to make you pull a full 180 on everything you allegedly held dear less than 2 years ago?

 

Do you see your hypocrisy? McRaven was removed by other true American heroes for putting true American heroes lives at risk for the sake of being P.C. Since you trust McRaven based solely on his service then you should trust those that had him removed.

 

Class dismissed.


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#85 mobb_deep

mobb_deep

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 19,360 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 09:39 AM

And quit this bullshit of "silencing his critics".

Brennan is free to make an idiot of himself on Twitter and CNN all he wants. He just no longer has access to classified intel, which is perfectly understandable given his horrific track record during and after his time with the CIA.


Why does the president get access to classified intel, when all he does it make and idiot of himself on Twitter all day?

And contrary to what you somehow convince yourself to believe, this is 100% about silencing his critics. Every single thing Trump does and decision he makes is either about 1) retaliating against somebody who hurt his fragile feelings, or 2) fattening the pockets of someone who stroked his tender ego.

Sangre Por Sangre


#86 Mr. Hand

Mr. Hand

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 1,785 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 09:42 AM

Why does the president get access to classified intel, when all he does it make and idiot of himself on Twitter all day?
And contrary to what you somehow convince yourself to believe, this is 100% about silencing his critics. Every single thing Trump does and decision he makes is either about 1) retaliating against somebody who hurt his fragile feelings, or 2) fattening the pockets of someone who stroked his tender ego.


https://www.national...nce-revocation/

#87 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 10:21 AM

Why does the president get access to classified intel, when all he does it make and idiot of himself on Twitter all day?

And contrary to what you somehow convince yourself to believe, this is 100% about silencing his critics. Every single thing Trump does and decision he makes is either about 1) retaliating against somebody who hurt his fragile feelings, or 2) fattening the pockets of someone who stroked his tender ego.

 

Are you aware: that Brennan is near the center of the illegal spying that occurred on Trump? That he's done it before with the Senate? That to retain his classification he's supposed to conduct himself as if he were still in the CIA?

 

And if Trump had the ability to silence his critics, only Fox News would be left.

 

https://www.theatlan...-senate/384003/


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#88 mobb_deep

mobb_deep

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 19,360 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 10:36 AM

 
Are you aware: that Brennan is near the center of the illegal spying that occurred on Trump? That he's done it before with the Senate? That to retain his classification he's supposed to conduct himself as if he were still in the CIA?
 
And if Trump had the ability to silence his critics, only Fox News would be left.
 
https://www.theatlan...-senate/384003/


Im aware that you choose to believe that. Im also aware that a large number of officials from both sides of the aisle have spoken against Trump on this. Think Im going to agree with their assessment over some random dude on the internet.

Sangre Por Sangre


#89 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 10:38 AM

Im aware that you choose to believe that. Im also aware that a large number of officials from both sides of the aisle have spoken against Trump on this. Think Im going to agree with their assessment over some random dude on the internet.

 

Just like you agree/agreed with the Joint Intelligence Analysis in Jan 2017?   :doh:

 

Nice track record there. 


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#90 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:01 AM

Im aware that you choose to believe that. Im also aware that a large number of officials from both sides of the aisle have spoken against Trump on this. Think Im going to agree with their assessment over some random dude on the internet.

 

So you're saying Brennan DIDN'T spy on the Senate?

 

https://www.theguard...senate-staffers

 

Denied it vehemently then apologized later for it. And you're stating it's unbelievable that he spied on Trump? :wacko:


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#91 SenatorRock

SenatorRock

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 2,735 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:25 AM

Brennan is feeling the heat, backtracking on his treason comments. What a ######.

https://www.breitbar...mitted-treason/

On Fridays broadcast of MSNBCs Rachel Maddow Show, former CIA Director John Brennan stated that he didnt mean President Trump committed treason when he referred to the presidents performance at the Helsinki summit as nothing short of treasonous.


Muh free speech. I guess Trump is doing a poor job of silencing Brennan if he was on Madcow's show last night.

#92 mobb_deep

mobb_deep

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 19,360 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:29 AM

 
So you're saying Brennan DIDN'T spy on the Senate?
 
https://www.theguard...senate-staffers
 
Denied it vehemently then apologized later for it. And you're stating it's unbelievable that he spied on Trump? :wacko:


Im not saying any of that. I dont even know who Brennan is, let alone what he did/didnt do.

1) I dont follow any of this stuff closely. Definitely not close enough to read a bunch of boring links.

2) Juding from the presidents temperment, tendency to be petty and unhinged, and timing of the events, its more than likely his decision was personal and retaliatory.

3) I will always trust the opinions of 60+ people, over one guy who lies more than any president in modern history.

Sangre Por Sangre


#93 Mr. Hand

Mr. Hand

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 1,785 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:34 AM

Im not saying any of that. I dont even know who Brennan is, let alone what he did/didnt do.
1) I dont follow any of this stuff closely. Definitely not close enough to read a bunch of boring links.
2) Juding from the presidents temperment, tendency to be petty and unhinged, and timing of the events, its more than likely his decision was personal and retaliatory.
3) I will always trust the opinions of 60+ people, over one guy who lies more than any president in modern history.


Classic liberal....spouting off about stuff they have no clue about.

#94 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:35 AM

Brennan is feeling the heat, backtracking on his treason comments. What a ######.

https://www.breitbar...mitted-treason/

On Fridays broadcast of MSNBCs Rachel Maddow Show, former CIA Director John Brennan stated that he didnt mean President Trump committed treason when he referred to the presidents performance at the Helsinki summit as nothing short of treasonous.


Muh free speech. I guess Trump is doing a poor job of silencing Brennan if he was on Madcow's show last night.

 

Yeah; apparently he's beginning to realize that pulling of the security clearances actually means the noose is getting tighter.


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#95 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:39 AM

Im not saying any of that. I dont even know who Brennan is, let alone what he did/didnt do.

1) I dont follow any of this stuff closely. Definitely not close enough to read a bunch of boring links.

2) Juding from the presidents temperment, tendency to be petty and unhinged, and timing of the events, its more than likely his decision was personal and retaliatory.

3) I will always trust the opinions of 60+ people, over one guy who lies more than any president in modern history.

 

And I've just provided link(s) where Brennan's lied and spied. Those are facts and if you were informed (which you admit you're not) you'd know the Joint Intelligence Analysis was a pile of sh!t that Brennan/Clapper/Comey cobbled together.

 

Brennan's called the President treasonous among other things and that violates the terms of his keeping his security clearances. Period.

 

He's free to keep launching salvos at Trump but those come with a cost just like anyone else. 


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#96 Hardcore troubadour

Hardcore troubadour

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 33,894 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:41 AM

Of all of these scumbags, I want Brennan the most. I would gladly volunteer to be on his firing squad and not lose a wink of sleep. Probably go out for a nice dinner after.

#97 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 18 August 2018 - 11:46 AM

Of all of these scumbags, I want Brennan the most. I would gladly volunteer to be on his firing squad and not lose a wink of sleep. Probably go out for a nice dinner after.

 

I'd eat his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#98 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 19 August 2018 - 10:32 AM

http://thehill.com/h...n-and-of-itself

 

Clapper stating Brennan's 'rhetoric is becoming an issue'.


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#99 cbfalcon

cbfalcon

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 18,423 posts

Posted 19 August 2018 - 10:47 AM

Considering Trump told us why he revoked Brennans security clearance and why he is considering revoking more of his critics clearances, it seems like a waste of time for so many of you to work so hard to develop fake reasons for his doing so.
I like steak

#100 12th Man

12th Man

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 2,973 posts

Posted 19 August 2018 - 10:51 AM

 
I'd eat his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.

Be careful guys. MDC wont like these taunts.

#101 Hardcore troubadour

Hardcore troubadour

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 33,894 posts

Posted 19 August 2018 - 11:55 AM

http://thehill.com/h...n-and-of-itself
 
Clapper stating Brennan's 'rhetoric is becoming an issue'.


Brennan is obviously having some sort of mental breakdown. Has been for a while. Good job out of the president taking his SC away. Who knows what he would do?

#102 drobeski

drobeski

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 60,301 posts

Posted 19 August 2018 - 04:42 PM

Is it true that 12 of the 19 9/11 hijackers visas were signed by this muslim commie ?

#103 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 06:27 AM

Is it true that 12 of the 19 9/11 hijackers visas were signed by this muslim commie ?


Fake News. It may only be 10.

BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#104 KSB2424

KSB2424

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 34,886 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 09:23 AM

I dont understand how revoking security clearances for FORMER employees is in anyway a first amendment issue. I keep hearing this.

Disclaimer: I have no focking idea what I'm talking about.

"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." – Albert Einstein

Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

 

***2018 EdEx Cup Champion***


#105 TimmySmith

TimmySmith

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 09:26 AM

I dont understand how revoking security clearances for FORMER employees is in anyway a first amendment issue. I keep hearing this.

How else are they going to divulge sensitive information to the press?  


“We’ve fulfilled far more promises than we’ve promised,” the president said. “I call it promises plus.”

 


#106 KSB2424

KSB2424

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 34,886 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 09:36 AM

Considering Trump told us why he revoked Brennans security clearance and why he is considering revoking more of his critics clearances, it seems like a waste of time for so many of you to work so hard to develop fake reasons for his doing so.

 

 

Serious question.  Why should FORMER employees have security clearance in the first place?  We all know Trump is petty, and the reasons he does things, but that's not my question.


Disclaimer: I have no focking idea what I'm talking about.

"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." – Albert Einstein

Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

 

***2018 EdEx Cup Champion***


#107 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 09:58 AM

Brennan took up with Obama, Hillary, et al and they took they're shot at Trump and missed. Now it's Trump's turn and he's making sure to pull the fangs out of these snakes before going in for the kill.

 

Caveat Emptor.......... 


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#108 cbfalcon

cbfalcon

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 18,423 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 11:50 AM

 

 

Serious question.  Why should FORMER employees have security clearance in the first place?  We all know Trump is petty, and the reasons he does things, but that's not my question.

 

The explanations given is pretty straightforward.

 

- Brennan and the like worked a lot of topics, situations, and "cases" that were left open or are ongoing. If someone currently working a situation or case sees something develop and wants to get some thoughts  from Brennan (or someone similar), they can do so. If I'm in week 2 on a specific situation, I'd welcome being able to call up the guy that worked said situation for a decade. Of course, now that Brennan doesn't have the clearances necessary, they can no longer do so.

 

- Also, a lot of these guys go on to work security type jobs for big companies. Having knowledge in regards to current cyber threats for example better equips these people to better protect fortune 500 companies and whatnot, which does help us the people obviously.

 

If we want to stop allowing that sort of thing, so be it, as long as we know there is a downside. But it should be for all former agents, as opposed to us only revoking clearances for the ones most critical of Donald Trump.


I like steak

#109 TimmySmith

TimmySmith

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 11:51 AM

Serious question.  Why should FORMER employees have security clearance in the first place?  We all know Trump is petty, and the reasons he does things, but that's not my question.

Obama signed an Exec Order, one of the last things he did, with regard to security clearances.

 

http://1yxsm73j7aop3...ce-Rules-EO.pdf

 

But in short, you must have a reason to maintain a security clearance and you must demonstrate it continually.  One CANNOT remove the SC of an active Intelligence Agent.  Assuming Brennan was an active contractor, he would be subject to the rules of a contractor, and be under "continuous vetting".


“We’ve fulfilled far more promises than we’ve promised,” the president said. “I call it promises plus.”

 


#110 KSB2424

KSB2424

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 34,886 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:04 PM

 

The explanations given is pretty straightforward.

 

- Brennan and the like worked a lot of topics, situations, and "cases" that were left open or are ongoing. If someone currently working a situation or case sees something develop and wants to get some thoughts  from Brennan (or someone similar), they can do so. If I'm in week 2 on a specific situation, I'd welcome being able to call up the guy that worked said situation for a decade. Of course, now that Brennan doesn't have the clearances necessary, they can no longer do so.

 

- Also, a lot of these guys go on to work security type jobs for big companies. Having knowledge in regards to current cyber threats for example better equips these people to better protect fortune 500 companies and whatnot, which does help us the people obviously.

 

If we want to stop allowing that sort of thing, so be it, as long as we know there is a downside. But it should be for all former agents, as opposed to us only revoking clearances for the ones most critical of Donald Trump.

 

Maybe I'm naive but are you saying a current CIA / FBI person can't talk to Brennan now or something?   Like just talking to him about past experience is off limits?   I guess I was under the impression no longer have clearance means Brennan doesn't have access to new information / intel / whatever.    Which makes sense to me since he's been retired for almost two years.

 

Also, I work for a big company (private), does that give me the "right" to know classified information to help me in my career?


Disclaimer: I have no focking idea what I'm talking about.

"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." – Albert Einstein

Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

 

***2018 EdEx Cup Champion***


#111 drobeski

drobeski

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 60,301 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:19 PM

 
The explanations given is pretty straightforward.
 
- Brennan and the like worked a lot of topics, situations, and "cases" that were left open or are ongoing. If someone currently working a situation or case sees something develop and wants to get some thoughts  from Brennan (or someone similar), they can do so. If I'm in week 2 on a specific situation, I'd welcome being able to call up the guy that worked said situation for a decade. Of course, now that Brennan doesn't have the clearances necessary, they can no longer do so.
 
- Also, a lot of these guys go on to work security type jobs for big companies. Having knowledge in regards to current cyber threats for example better equips these people to better protect fortune 500 companies and whatnot, which does help us the people obviously.
 
If we want to stop allowing that sort of thing, so be it, as long as we know there is a downside. But it should be for all former agents, as opposed to us only revoking clearances for the ones most critical of Donald Trump.

your boy did a great job with the Russian cyber security threat.
You should continue to carry his water.

#112 cbfalcon

cbfalcon

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 18,423 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:26 PM

 

Maybe I'm naive but are you saying a current CIA / FBI person can't talk to Brennan now or something?   Like just talking to him about past experience is off limits?   I guess I was under the impression no longer have clearance means Brennan doesn't have access to new information / intel / whatever.    Which makes sense to me since he's been retired for almost two years.

 

 

 

 

Brennan was the director of the CIA. Common sense tells me that a lot of his knowledge was in regards to issues that are classified. So no, a current CIA/FBI agent wouldn't be able to discuss those topics with Brennan now. If they did, they'd be sharing classified info with someone not authorized to see said info. They could go to jail at that point.

 

A current agent could still talk to him about non classified stuff, but that isn't where his input would be valuable I'd think.

 

 

Also, I work for a big company (private), does that give me the "right" to know classified information to help me in my career?

 

 

I agree with this.


I like steak

#113 SenatorRock

SenatorRock

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 2,735 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:47 PM

 
 
Brennan was the director of the CIA. Common sense tells me that a lot of his knowledge was in regards to issues that are classified. So no, a current CIA/FBI agent wouldn't be able to discuss those topics with Brennan now. If they did, they'd be sharing classified info with someone not authorized to see said info. They could go to jail at that point.
 
A current agent could still talk to him about non classified stuff, but that isn't where his input would be valuable I'd think.
 
 
 
I agree with this.


Funny, Hillary was caught sharing classified intel on her home server with people who did not have clearance.

Does that mean we should lock her up?

#114 SenatorRock

SenatorRock

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 2,735 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:48 PM

Flashback Monday, member when the Brennan led the charge to take away people's clearance on 2013?

I don't recall anyone screaming at the sky about first amendment rights or an enemies list.

https://www.breitbar...ity-clearances/

#115 Hardcore troubadour

Hardcore troubadour

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 33,894 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:49 PM

He wasn't any good at his job, so there's that to consider.

#116 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 12:51 PM

If we want to stop allowing that sort of thing, so be it, as long as we know there is a downside. But it should be for all former agents, as opposed to us only revoking clearances for the ones most critical of Donald Trump.

 

Part of the conditions for retaining the clearance is acting as if he's a still a member of the CIA. Calling your President treasonous is NOT what someone employed by the CIA would do. 

 

Brennan is neck deep in the FISA spying operation and if you STILL don't believe that, you're riding the same short bus along with Sho and wiff. 


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#117 drobeski

drobeski

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 60,301 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 01:08 PM

 
Part of the conditions for retaining the clearance is acting as if he's a still a member of the CIA. Calling your President treasonous is NOT what someone employed by the CIA would do. 
 
Brennan is neck deep in the FISA spying operation and if you STILL don't believe that, you're riding the same short bus along with Sho and wiff. 

he'll never get it, he's a withher4everer

#118 Hardcore troubadour

Hardcore troubadour

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 33,894 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 01:18 PM

If the Russians cost Hillary like the left claims, why aren't they mad at the guys who knew about it, let it happen and did nothing, like Brennan and Obama?

#119 Filthy Fernadez

Filthy Fernadez

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 22,614 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 03:55 PM

https://www.theepoch...gn_2628435.html

 


BRENNAN: When I left office on January 20th of 2017, I had unresolved questions in my mind about whether or not any of those U.S. persons were working in support of the Russian efforts.
 
MADDOW: And those were referred—those concerns about specific U.S. persons—referred to the FBI.
 
BRENNAN: We call it incidental collection in terms of CIA’s foreign intelligence collection authorities. Any time we would incidentally collect information on a U.S. person, we would hand that over to the FBI because they have the legal authority to do it. We would not pursue that type of investigative, you know, sort of, leads. We would give it to the FBI.
 
So, we were picking things up that was of great relevance to the FBI, and we wanted to make sure that they were there—so they could piece it together with whatever they were collecting domestically here.
 
That’s not how incidental collection is supposed to work. More importantly, the collection described by Brennan doesn’t sound incidental. The surveillance sounds targeted.

 

Oops Mr. Brennan; unforced error.  


BBC for the most part is pretty damn good.


#120 Baker Boy

Baker Boy

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 5,213 posts

Posted 20 August 2018 - 06:42 PM

Flashback Monday, member when the Brennan led the charge to take away people's clearance on 2013?
I don't recall anyone screaming at the sky about first amendment rights or an enemies list.
https://www.breitbar...ity-clearances/


From your link:

At last count, more than 4.9 million people held clearances, of whom over 1.4 million were cleared for access at the “Top Secret” level.