From: da pickle <>
Subject: Re: A weak 'President'
Full headers:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 14:01:10 -0600
Subject: Re: A weak President
References: <>
From: da pickle <>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 14:01:09 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 180305-2, 03/05/2018), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Message-ID: <>
Lines: 46
X-Trace: sv3-b7JrX59yl6x9/oGo93dnuCxtx+i1DuN1ZX2sIVxXuCj0BH9qTM1GegxUre6ZQKTYiGQ+2j5xq7gNe4F!3Vkj9vo4KKX9tPcZ7ppUhJkC/FFKDVri64+L05yUVW9waRpdHZLK5AkxZiHhuVHYL8ZHnkI4Rv7s
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3946
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/5/2018 1:13 PM, risky biz wrote:
> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 6:13:30 AM UTC-8, da pickle wrote:
>> On 3/4/2018 2:43 PM, Dutch wrote:
>>> On 3/4/2018 4:57 AM, da pickle wrote:
>>>> The whole subject of the thread is an article about John Brennan
>>> The subject is not *about* John Brennan, that is just another
>>> transparent diversion. The subject is the instability of the current
>>> POTUS, a topic raised by Nicolle Wallace in an interview with John Brennan.
>> Is there some other opinion about the President presented in the article
>> other than the opinion of John Brennan?
>>> The telling thing here is that you cannot factually refute a single
>>> point Brennan makes in the interview, so you choose to attack his
>>> credibility. I add numerous points which further illustrate the
>>> instability and unsuitability of this president and you attack my
>>> credibility. When are you going to wake up and realize that it is the
>>> credibility of your president that matters? When are you going to
>>> finally realize that this presidency constitutes a global crisis?
>> Brennan states his opinion.  You apparently agree with his opinion
>> without more.  You have not supported your opinion with anything more
>> than your opinion and neither has he.  Everyone knows your opinion.
> You can safely bet that most Americans recognize John Brennan's description of Donald Trump as an
accurate description of the behavior they can see themselves. Your brilliant idea that this should
be 'balanced' by the input of devotees of Donald Trump who choose to ignore his behavior is just
>> You may think your opinion is the only opinion worth considering, but
>> you could be wrong.
>> You are so biased that you cannot see your own bias any more.
>> You are the reflection of those that hated Obama so much that they could
>> not see even one thing about his presidency that was worthwhile.

Your shouted opinion of your opinion does not raise it's validity at 
all.  People of faith are always quite sure of their beliefs.

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.