Summary
Republican senators are privately pushing to review Tulsi Gabbard’s FBI file amid concerns about her alignment with Russian interests following her nomination as Trump’s director of national intelligence.
Gabbard’s past support for Edward Snowden, who leaked U.S. state secrets, has drawn particular scrutiny, as has her history of echoing Russian talking points on Ukraine and Syria.
While GOP senators are publicly deferring to Trump’s pick, some, including Sens. Mike Rounds and Susan Collins, emphasize the importance of full background checks and hearings to address potential security risks.
Are you thinking of Assange?
no. Assange cares only for Assange.
Snowden cared about Americans once, but was abandoned by his nation to a corrupt government.
he’s an unwilling Russian asset now, think of it like indentured servitude for his life.
Are you able to point to actions that Snowden has taken to negatively impact the interests of the US people or to materially aid Russia?
no, and I don’t have to.
It is my opinion after all.
we’re allowed to share those on here still, right?
edit: did I hurt all the snowbunnie feewings?
Not triggered in the slightest - I thought there might be something to learn. Thanks for clarifying that it was nothing more than the baseless opinion of a fragile moron.
if you were a firearm you would be decommissioned for premature firing.
Your trigger is so loose, a stiff breeze sets it off.
It’d take something a little stronger than the opinion of infamous kid fucker GreenKnight23 to pull my trigger, champ.
I don’t know what’s more pathetic, your delivery or your lack of imagination.
Don’t expect me to report your comments either, your tiny comments of shame will live on to fester and eat away at you.
I won’t even remember your name tomorrow.
You’re going to drop the pretence that you’ve got anything worthwhile to say and sulk off back to your little lair? Try not to fuck any kids on the way out, eh?
You weren’t stating it as opinion, you were stating it as if it’s objective fact.
Very big difference in wording.
I think you might be confused. it’s not your fault.
unless someone provides evidence, it should always be considered an opinion. that’s how the world used to work.
now everyone just reads all comments as facts instead of using their cognitive ability to read and comprehend. it’s not your fault that the Internet made your brain lazy.
You are a child. Or at minimum, very childish.
I recommend swallowing your extremely overinflated pride/ego, and growing up a bit.
big words coming from someone attacking a “child”.
because you couldn’t argue against what I said you decided to attack me personally. seems pretty immature to me.
BTW, that is my opinion. just clarifying so it’s not confused as fact. some people read anything on the Internet and automatically attribute it as fact these days. also an opinion, but I might have some proof around here that could sustain it as a strong theory.
😉
This piece of shit fucks kids.
It’s not unreasonable to ask someone to elaborate or justify their opinion, kiddo.
and it’s not unreasonable for someone to refuse.
Of course not, it just means you’re leaving that particular discussion
I haven’t given it any though till this moment, but the fact that he
To me implies a certain level of Russian collaboration. Purely speculative, granted, but I bet he’s not about to go speaking up for Ukraine or anything.
He sought and received protection from an adversary and I can’t believe that Putin didn’t put a price on that, and feel confident that he had the “currency” to pay.
I believe what he did, he did with good intentions, but after that I think he had to start making some practical decisions in order to save his and his families’ lives.
Would I make those same decisions? Let’s just say, I probably wouldn’t have the courage to blow the whistle in the first place, so it’s kinda a moot point.
Suffice it to say, he paid for his ability to stay in Russia. Who’s to say the cost to US security?
The question of whether someone works for a government is not really a matter of opinion
I’ll give you a legitimate response since I’ve got the time while taking the Browns to the Super Bowl.
opinions are varied and limitless as the ideas that feed them. One can have opinions on opinions!
so, when the neurons in your brain were firing on all cylinders to come up with your question, did you actually think that one couldn’t have an opinion on something as menial and useless as, “whether someone works for a government”?
I have many opinions, some are rather good, others not so much.
for example, my opinion of you isn’t very good.
Removed by mod