somehow I doubt the WEF is all that powerful in actuality. There are centuries-old institutions at play, WEF is basically just a think-tank (albeit probably one of the most powerful).
>John Radcliffe gets confirmed as C_a director
>Pompeo gets his security details removed!
I don't trust either of them.
agreed, he's just another zionist puppet.
disappointment mad dog was such a flop, but it's not the first or last time i've been disappointment with "leadership".
>why Radcliffe he has been fine
trust is earned. been burned enough times to withhold judgement. taking a "wait-and-see approach".
same response as above.
>is there anything to back this bs up or is it just a cartoon number?
kek imagine trusting "le D.O.G.E. clock"
>WEF assets are half of Canada's parliament.
and AIPAC assets are all of America's.
Never said the WEF wasn't influential. Just don't think they are literally the global power that every other org answers to.
>One of the good ones from the 2016 admin
look, I hope you're right anon.
>Addressing the Senate Intelligence Committee, Ratcliffe called the statute “indispensable” for national security, noting that it provides over half of the actionable foreign intelligence used by the president. However, he acknowledged concerns about civil liberties and emphasized the need for robust safeguards.
>Section 702 allows U.S. intelligence agencies to collect communications from foreign targets but incidentally captures Americans’ data without a warrant. Ratcliffe highlighted the CIA’s compliance rate of 99.6% in handling so-called “U.S. person queries.” He opposed requiring warrants to access the database, arguing that the delay could jeopardize national security operations.
https://www.scworld.com/brief/ratcliffe-supports-section-702-amid-fisa-renewal-debate
GM
>back to the office is unnecessary bullsh*t.
agreed. I don't want a federal workforce entirely concentrated in one metro. seems more representative if the jobs that can be done remote are open to that possibility. I know there are fed building all over the country, but the vast majority are in DC. Don't we want some programmer in Nebraska to be able to work for the Feds w/o uprooting his/her entire family to move to DC?
It's not really about that though - it's about getting people to quit and not having to fire them. Reducing the federal workforce isn't a bad thing, but I don't like the idea that all our federal workers are going to be forced to be DC-urbanites.
>PayPerView
anon will throw a fit if these are not livestreamed for free and over public airwaves
>He made no bad calls.
what are your thoughts on section 702 anon? see: >>22425029
>The only fucked up questionable person in this scenario is you.
you seem overly aggressive - I am engaging in good faith.
>They never watched Ratcliffe eviscerate the deep state in the congressional hearing.
anon, I never said he hasn't done some good things. I simply said I don't yet trust him and am withholding judgement. It wouldn't be the first time Trump appointed a seemingly "good guy" to a position to eventually get burned. Mattis, Wray, Barr, Pompeo, Gina, etc.
>Go after the employers next, you know they’re avoiding taxes somehow.
o7
if they're willing to cheat on labor, they're damn sure willing to cheat on taxes.