Trump Backs Theory Brennan 'Worried About Staying Out Of Jail'

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Trump sourced the comments to Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent and current Florida congressional candidate. On "Fox and Friends," Bongino said:

"John Brennan is panicking... John Brennan has disgraced himself. He's disgraced the country. He's disgraced the intelligence community. He is the one man largely responsible for the destruction of Americans' faith in the intelligence community and in some people at the top of the FBI.... Breenan than started this entire debacle with Trump. We now know Brennan had pretty detailed knowledge of the dossier. Walk you through this real slow: He knows about the dossier. He denies knowledge of the dossier. He briefs the the Gang of 8 up on the Hill about the dossier, hich they then used to demand the FBI start an investigation on trump. It is that simple. This guy is the genesis of this whole debacle."


https://www.dailywire.com/news/30872/all-eyes-brennan-after-former-cia-director-joseph-curl
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Trump sourced the comments to Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent and current Florida congressional candidate. On "Fox and Friends," Bongino said:

"John Brennan is panicking... John Brennan has disgraced himself. He's disgraced the country. He's disgraced the intelligence community. He is the one man largely responsible for the destruction of Americans' faith in the intelligence community and in some people at the top of the FBI.... Breenan than started this entire debacle with Trump. We now know Brennan had pretty detailed knowledge of the dossier. Walk you through this real slow: He knows about the dossier. He denies knowledge of the dossier. He briefs the the Gang of 8 up on the Hill about the dossier, hich they then used to demand the FBI start an investigation on trump. It is that simple. This guy is the genesis of this whole debacle."


https://www.dailywire.com/news/30872/all-eyes-brennan-after-former-cia-director-joseph-curl

Dan Bongino has a point. Brennan is slime. But we must remember he was working for slime.
McCabe, Mueller, they were all under Obama's guidance in this.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
I don't understand how slimeballs like Brennan and his ilk can get caught lying their faces off time and time again...and yet still get unlimited access to the left-wing media to spew yet more lies!
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
For what it's worth I don't believe any other President other than the Muslim, Obama ,would have ever appointed a Muslim to lead the CIA.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
For what it's worth I don't believe any other President other than the Muslim, Obama ,would have ever appointed a Muslim to lead the CIA.

Are you suggesting there should be a religious test for elected and high-ranking appointed positions?
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
I don't understand how slimeballs like Brennan and his ilk can get caught lying their faces off time and time again...and yet still get unlimited access to the left-wing media to spew yet more lies!

You forgot the :sarcasm: emoticon.

I mean, seriously?
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Are you suggesting there should be a religious test for elected and high-ranking appointed positions?

I am suggesting we don't need people running the CIA who believes infidels should be killed or enslaved.
If Muslims want to be a part of civilization they need to modernize their Koran, and come into the 21st century.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
I am suggesting we don't need people running the CIA who believes infidels should be killed or enslaved.
If Muslims want to be a part of civilization they need to modernize their Koran, and come into the 21st century.

The vast majority are. Being a Muslim is not a problem, being terroristic in one's beliefs and actions is a problem.

You can't complain that all gun owners are lumped together as "bad" when there's a mass shooting, or all white people are "bad" because slavery existed centuries ago in our country and then lump all Muslims together because of the bad ones.

Whether Brennan is a Muslim or not is immaterial unless his religion is detrimental to his ability to have performed his job. Whether Obama was a Muslim or not is immaterial - scratch that, I actually believed in 2009 that Obama having Muslim roots was actually a GOOD thing, because it made him the best positioned politician in the world to help calm the problems with the fundamentalist Muslim terrorists. It didn't work out that way, but it had the potential to have worked out that way.

My point remains, you can't judge people based solely on their religion, race, sex, etc. Every person is an individual and the Christian thing to do is judge none of them, because you are not the Judge, God is. The Christian thing to do is love your enemy and your friend alike. It's ok to have enemies in a secular world like government relations - render unto Cesear and all that, we don't live in a theocracy - but you really should not do it in your personal life if you are a Christian. If you are an American who believes in the Constitution, both the first amendment and Article VI should stop you from having any issues with religion as it applies to positions within government.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
You can't complain that all gun owners are lumped together as "bad" when there's a mass shooting, or all white people are "bad" because slavery existed centuries ago in our country and then lump all Muslims together because of the bad ones..

I wish the Muslim nations from which so many of these people come from were as vigorous in fighting terrorists as we are.

It's kind of like when you saw a bully as a kid get picked on and bullied through no fault of their own.
You KNOW it's not fair - but you don't do anything, because part of you agrees with it.

The general silence or inertia regarding terrorism is hard NOT to see as tacit approval.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
I wish the Muslim nations from which so many of these people come from were as vigorous in fighting terrorists as we are.

It's kind of like when you saw a bully as a kid get picked on and bullied through no fault of their own.
You KNOW it's not fair - but you don't do anything, because part of you agrees with it.

The general silence or inertia regarding terrorism is hard NOT to see as tacit approval.

I can't argue that - it's a very valid point in my humble opinion.

My concern was not so much for the other nations as it was for blanket religious discrimination. Brennan may or may not be Muslim, but that should not be a disqualifying factor (and apparently wasn't, since he got the job). Since I can't say what his religion is for sure, I certainly can't say for sure his religion impacted his job performance.

Today, right now, even as we speak, there are millions of people enslaved around the world. Are you and I complicit in that because we are not actively working to change that? Is the US government? There is no question that North Korea and Cuba and Venezuela and many other nations torture their citizens - is that Sam and This' fault? Is it tacit approval of the US government to do so because we have not taken over those countries and toppled their governments?

The argument could be made, and it would have the same level of validity. But, that said, the same could be said of Switzerland in pretty much everything. We can't judge by inaction nearly as much as we can assess and adjudicate actual actions.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
The vast majority are. Being a Muslim is not a problem, being terroristic in one's beliefs and actions is a problem.

You can't complain that all gun owners are lumped together as "bad" when there's a mass shooting, or all white people are "bad" because slavery existed centuries ago in our country and then lump all Muslims together because of the bad ones.

Whether Brennan is a Muslim or not is immaterial unless his religion is detrimental to his ability to have performed his job. Whether Obama was a Muslim or not is immaterial - scratch that, I actually believed in 2009 that Obama having Muslim roots was actually a GOOD thing, because it made him the best positioned politician in the world to help calm the problems with the fundamentalist Muslim terrorists. It didn't work out that way, but it had the potential to have worked out that way.

My point remains, you can't judge people based solely on their religion, race, sex, etc. Every person is an individual and the Christian thing to do is judge none of them, because you are not the Judge, God is. The Christian thing to do is love your enemy and your friend alike. It's ok to have enemies in a secular world like government relations - render unto Cesear and all that, we don't live in a theocracy - but you really should not do it in your personal life if you are a Christian. If you are an American who believes in the Constitution, both the first amendment and Article VI should stop you from having any issues with religion as it applies to positions within government.

You have your opinion I have mine.
Being a Christian does not mean I have to ignore the fact that when Muslim populations reach a point in the countries they invade their attitude changes drastically as do their demands.
I do not have to ignore the stories of rapes and demands coming from the Netherlands and Germany where they have invaded.
I see what is happening in no-go area's in France and England and their presence in parts of the US.
I see Farrakhans bunch of racist haters calling themselves Muslim.

You be a good Christian as to your definition of it.
Me? I face reality. If Muslims believe in their Koran let them stay in the ####holes where it rules.
Don't bring it here.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I
The argument could be made, and it would have the same level of validity. But, that said, the same could be said of Switzerland in pretty much everything. We can't judge by inaction nearly as much as we can assess and adjudicate actual actions.

Don't agree, because no other nation has so vigorously and openly opposed those regimes as the United States - short of war - and they've committed acts of war against US.
We shut down all economic activity with Cuba - even though all of our "allies" did no such thing.

I liken the situation to the Irish and the terrorism of the 60's and 70's in Northern Ireland - and earlier.
Were all Irish terrorists - or financially supporting the IRA? Of course not - but they still more or less agreed with the goal.

I get that you cannot lump all people from some group and make them culpable for the sins of a fraction -
I used to argue with a guy online who would bring up the latest bull#### Pat Robertson said - and say that conservatives all agreed with him,
because they didn't denounce him every time he spoke. I tried to say that I didn't know, didn't care and had not the time
to counter every stupid thing Pat Robertson said, because I'd never have time for anything else.

Plus - I didn't think of him as conservative - just crazy. Liberals have those too.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
You have your opinion I have mine.
Being a Christian does not mean I have to ignore the fact that when Muslim populations reach a point in the countries they invade their attitude changes drastically as do their demands.
I do not have to ignore the stories of rapes and demands coming from the Netherlands and Germany where they have invaded.
I see what is happening in no-go area's in France and England and their presence in parts of the US.
I see Farrakhans bunch of racist haters calling themselves Muslim.

You be a good Christian as to your definition of it.
Me? I face reality. If Muslims believe in their Koran let them stay in the ####holes where it rules.
Don't bring it here.

You're talking about a small percentage of the Islamic people. I can not disagree with a thing you said about it happening, because it has. But, that is not a Muslim issue, that is a "those particular people" issue.

You know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Christians also do those things. You know that Christians used Christianity to allow for rapes and abuses of slaves and others. That was not a Christian problem, that was a "those particular people" problem for not understanding Christianity (like, for example, a Christian that can say reality allows them to hate whole groups of people for the actions of a few - or of any, honestly, since in Matthew 5 Jesus says 21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’
22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
...
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?
47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.


You can personify hate for others, or you can act as Jesus spoke to act. :shrug: It is, of course, entirely up to you.
 

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
You can personify hate for others, or you can act as Jesus spoke to act. :shrug: It is, of course, entirely up to you.

You and the other Christians can turn the other cheek.

I’ll keep a few extra mags loaded for you for when it doesn’t work out.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
You and the other Christians can turn the other cheek.

I’ll keep a few extra mags loaded for you for when it doesn’t work out.

Again, if my family or I are threatened specifically, I will defend myself and my family. That's not the question here.

The question here was whether or not we can blanket-report that a Muslim is bad, and should not be a government official, based on nothing more than the allegation of being Muslim. We are not talking about threatening actions, or actual mis-behavior, we're talking about a guy who people claim converted to Islam, and therefore is bad based on just that.

I am not going to tolerate that without challenging it.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
You and the other Christians can turn the other cheek.

I’ll keep a few extra mags loaded for you for when it doesn’t work out.

The passages TP quoted are often misinterpreted as complete passivism; that are not to use any sort of force that might result in harm to someone else. Turn the other cheek is not meant to mean completely become defenseless even unto your death or severe harm. Every one of those tenets are meant for Christians to use every opportunity to minister the Gospel. Jesus said to his disciples just before He was arrested: "He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." - Luke 22:36. Even Jesus knew there was a time for self defense.

So, how do you love your enemy? Can someone actually kill someone they claim love? The love Christians have for every person is that they get saved. That's how you love your enemy. But, if you are going to harm me, I will defend myself. I might turn the other cheek, but I will not turn so you can stab me in the back.
 

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
There are religions and philosophies that are genuinely benign, even beneficial to their societies.

Then there are those that are not.

1400 years of murder, rape, torture, theft and destruction in the name of Allah and still going strong around the world on ANY given day or night.

Don't have to take my word for it. Just watch the news.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
The passages TP quoted are often misinterpreted as complete passivism; that are not to use any sort of force that might result in harm to someone else. Turn the other cheek is not meant to mean completely become defenseless even unto your death or severe harm. Every one of those tenets are meant for Christians to use every opportunity to minister the Gospel. Jesus said to his disciples just before He was arrested: "He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." - Luke 22:36. Even Jesus knew there was a time for self defense.

So, how do you love your enemy? Can someone actually kill someone they claim love? The love Christians have for every person is that they get saved. That's how you love your enemy. But, if you are going to harm me, I will defend myself. I might turn the other cheek, but I will not turn so you can stab me in the back.

Exactly. And, in that Luke story, the very first chance after that where his disciples would try to USE that sword, Jesus stopped them.

The passages are meant to say, in my opinion, exactly what they say - love and pray for your enemies as well as your friends and families. People who are sinning certainly need your love and your prayers more than people who are not. Don't let simple things be a problem and create a fight - go that extra mile. But, I see nothing in there or in other passages of the Bible that imply to take that to the extreme. The last line I quoted, Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. is a perfect (ha) example of what I am saying - God eventually smites his enemies. But, it can take centuries before it gets to that point.

And, if you're not into the religious aspects of it, our Declaration of Independence has a similar concept built into it. Do you overthrow a government because you are over-taxed? Or because they are taking away this or that inherent right you have? "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long-established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly, all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are suffer-able, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right - it is their DUTY - to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." [Sappy, that means you should put up with it and try and change it for as long as you can, but when it gets to be too much you have to fight back.]

So, count me in the "let other people be" category. When they're actually trying to hurt me, or mine, I will fight back.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
You're talking about a small percentage of the Islamic people. I can not disagree with a thing you said about it happening, because it has. But, that is not a Muslim issue, that is a "those particular people" issue.

You know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Christians also do those things. You know that Christians used Christianity to allow for rapes and abuses of slaves and others. That was not a Christian problem, that was a "those particular people" problem for not understanding Christianity (like, for example, a Christian that can say reality allows them to hate whole groups of people for the actions of a few - or of any, honestly, since in Matthew 5 Jesus says 21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’
22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
...
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?
47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.


You can personify hate for others, or you can act as Jesus spoke to act. :shrug: It is, of course, entirely up to you.

That's all in the new Testament. In the old testament God was not so generous.
Plagues on the Egyptians.Sodom and Gamorrah,
Jericho
The first born at the Passover.
An eye for an eye.

I am for a little of both.,
 
Top