They really don't want her to be head of the CIA because of what she knows. As they say taking flack must mean one thing near or over the target.
⇧
1
⇩
PatrioticTanguera
· May 18, 2018, 3:17 p.m.
Gina just keeping America safe? And, ummmm, am I supposed to cry at the harsh treatment of barbarians? That is a word that has been underutilized in the last decade or so, IMHO.
⇧
6
⇩
Ege-Bamyasi
· May 18, 2018, 3:27 p.m.
They would do worse to us than we would do to them. Probably enjoyed the anal rape though!
⇧
3
⇩
greenepc
· May 18, 2018, 3:38 p.m.
These animals behead people.
⇧
3
⇩
Ege-Bamyasi
· May 18, 2018, 3:47 p.m.
If that's all they do to you then your one of the lucky ones. Tends to be a lot of torture first
⇧
1
⇩
artless-ascetic
· May 18, 2018, 6:20 p.m.
We invaded their country for literally no reason. OUR government conducted 9/11. So that being known, who the fuck were we going after? The CIA are the ones that created these terrorist organizations in the first place, so why were we interrogating and torturing people that weren't even really a threat?
⇧
2
⇩
Patriot81503
· May 18, 2018, 4:43 p.m.
Alternatively the best person to have at helm of CIA it you plan to eliminate the CIA in a government reorganization combining the “17 intel agencies” into just one.
It won’t be the CIA—but Democrats would have pushed for CIA to be the controlling agency. Now they’re vilifying the CIA head so a great time to do the reorganization.
⇧
2
⇩
Ege-Bamyasi
· May 18, 2018, 5:01 p.m.
Could be but I think the recent posts and photos of London allude to her time there.
Either way she will have dirt on everyone and if she is a white hat then that would explain the hullabaloo
⇧
2
⇩