From: Dutch <>
Subject: Re: A weak 'President'
Full headers:
Subject: Re: A weak President
References: <>
From: Dutch <>
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: 8bit
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <G1inC.36489$fQ7.36293@fx13.iad>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 20:47:34 UTC
Organization: UsenetServer -
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:47:33 -0800
X-Received-Bytes: 3970
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1540163722
X-Original-Bytes: 3787
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/5/2018 12:01 PM, da pickle wrote:
> 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 silly.
>>> 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.

Your attempt to reduce the issue down to a matter of political opinions 
is desperate and unconvincing. A list of startling words and actions by 
this president in just the past few days has been presented and you have 
failed to explain or rationalize a single one of them. You can't, they 
are all inexplicable. All you're doing is throwing up a smokescreen.