Senate Confirms Mike Pompeo as CIA Director…

The Senate has just voted to confirm Representative Mike Pompeo as CIA Director.  This represents the third intelligence and security nomination confirmed –  General Kelly (DHS) and General Mattis (DoD) receiving earlier confirmations.

mike-pompeo

WASHINGTON – The Senate has confirmed Rep. Mike Pompeo, a Kansas Republican, to be President Donald Trump’s CIA director.  The vote tally is 66-32, with a significant number of Democrats voting no. Two senators are delayed by weather. (link)

Two republican senators Tom Cotton (Yes) and Rand Paul (No) outline the dynamic within the overall DC intelligence outlook from the GOP.  Neither are 100% correct; each distinct outlook has both merit and concern.

In the space between the two Senators, we can identify the fundamental position of President Trump toward this nomination.  The “deep state” is dangerous, even when it is necessary; however, liberty must not be sacrificed upon the alter of security.

.

Tom Cotton comes from a background firmly grounded in a strong military approach toward our enemies.  Cotton highly supported Mike Pompeo:

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Senator Rand Paul, did not support Pompeo:

rand-paul“I voted against the new CIA Director because I worry that his desire for security will trump his defense of liberty.

More than ever before, oversight of the secretive world of intelligence is critically important.

Programs are authorized, money is spent, and operations are carried out in the name of the American people, yet only a few members of Congress are even allowed to know what is happening in the dark corners of these U.S. intelligence programs.

Most of Congress was surprised to learn that the U.S. government was collecting all of our phone records in bulk. Most of what our intelligence community does is shielded from the rank and file of Congress. Only eight legislators are privy to the full extent of the surveillance state. (read more)

There is a valid position being espoused by Senator Rand Paul within his concerns.

Freedom and Security can often be at odds, and we must tread carefully while we travel upon this path.   President Donald Trump has continually expressed a firm approach toward national security.  President Trump also has shown keen insight in understanding the Deep State.

In addition, President Trump has been the recipient of the worst form of domestic conflict created by politicization of the CIA and Intelligence Community, via John Brennan and James Clapper.

The negative long-term impacts of the Patriot Act were arguably created an overreaction to the events of Sept. 11th 2001.  The deep state absorbed our fear and the responding reaction from DC, and benefited by engorging itself.  We should never turn away from the valid voice of Rand Paul’s position.

We need strong guardians on the wall; scary men skilled in war are necessary for our security.  We also need the ability to stop the blood letting before we cross the line into blood-lust.  Righteousness requires internal meters, controls and safety valves.

General Mattis is the perfect representative image of this approach in conduct and action.

With a citizen president holding office, our role as thoughtful voters is more important than ever.   We have an executive office team attempting to punch holes within the walls of the DC echo-chamber so they can continuously hear the voice of all Americans.

We are all, essentially, in the space between Tom Cotton and Rand Paul.  Thankfully, we can debate the substance of the issues and know our voices are being heard.

trump-rand-paul

trump eagle 8

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Cultural Marxism, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, ISIS, Islam, media bias, Mike pence, Military, NATO, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Russia, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

356 Responses to Senate Confirms Mike Pompeo as CIA Director…

  1. snaggletooths says:

    I am happy Pompeo was confirmed but am really anxiously awaiting Jeff Sessions confirmation truly feel Sessions just can not be replaced.

    Liked by 37 people

    • SteveInCO says:

      Yes. Sessions is THE MOST IMPORTANT of the bunch; though many others are not far behind. He’s in Tier 0, and SecDef, SecState, SecTreas and a few others are Tier 1.

      Liked by 20 people

      • Fe says:

        Totally agree. Sessions is my #1, then T-Rex

        Liked by 7 people

        • SteveInCO says:

          There are three or four departments I’d rotally eliminate and a bunch of others thay naybe do one imporrant thing and the rest garbage, but state, defense and justice aren’t on that list.

          Liked by 3 people

          • All American Snowflake says:

            I hear ATF is scheduled for demolition. Should be after the Great Fast & Furious Gun Walk. I suppose they intend to incorporate ATF business in FBI and/or CIA.

            Liked by 9 people

            • SteveInCO says:

              I’m looking forward to actually rolling back some gun laws.

              Liked by 5 people

              • All American Snowflake says:

                As long as “rolling back” doesn’t conflict with the 2nd Amendment concerns, I’m in.

                Like

              • Just about all of them? The US Constitution clearly states “shall not be infringed”.
                IMO the US should have nationwide constitutional carry, zero licensing, zero registration & nationwide reciprocacy.
                The only restrictions should be requiring citizenship, not a felon/violent criminal, not a mentally incompetent person. Prohibited from courthouses & few other places police are present to protect the public.

                Liked by 4 people

                • SteveInCO says:

                  Yes, just about all of them. 🙂

                  I’d extend to allowing legal residents to own. They’re not a problem.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • I’d disagree with non citizen residents owning/possessing handguns.
                  Allow em long guns to go deer & duck hunting, but they should earn citizenship & complete an NRA approved pistol class prior to owning a handgun. LOL I’d sign up everybody to the NRA.

                  Like

                • SteveInCO says:

                  Seems like an urterly arbitrary restriction to me.

                  Quite aside from tge fact that NO fundamemtal right shoukd be contingent on a training class.

                  Like

                • There’s no way to reply to your comment “Quite aside from the fact that NO fundamental right should be contingent on a training class.” so I’m sliding it up here.

                  Merely a safety proficiency class taught by NRA certified instructors, no test or disqualification. Merely to ensure basic function & safety.

                  Like

                • SteveInCO says:

                  Kudos to you for figuring out that you have to reply to me somewhere to make sure I’ll see it, instead of going all the way to the top level, where I won’t see it unless I go read the thread again–and there’s so much activity on this board it’s impossible to revisit things. So with that said:

                  You’re either making it a requirement (don’t own a gun until you’ve taken the class) or you’re not. Which is it? If it’s a requirement, then no matter how much you minimize it, you’re still putting a prerequisite on a fundamental right. No one needs to train to exercise their religion or freedom to speak out. Is this right fundamental, or not?

                  That’s not to say I don’t highly recommend training.

                  Like

            • Alcohol and tobacco firearms agency in the FBI? No. CIA? NO!
              Dept of Ag? Maybe.

              Like

            • boojum says:

              As someone somewhere once said: Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be a convenience store, not a Federal agency.

              Liked by 3 people

          • WSB says:

            I think State should be shuttered completely just to clean it out, open a new Department of Foreign Affairs. There seem to be some very dangerous elements in there.

            Liked by 12 people

          • Fe says:

            Yes agreed. Education dept is the one that gets under my skin. I’ve seen what is does to teachers and their dang precious tenure and turns many into voting for Dems just to keep what they have. It needs to go. Make schools great again and STOP the brainwashing. My two oldest granddaughters (ages 12 & almost 10) are homeschooled to keep the govt out of their education. On the flip side, my two youngest granddaughters (ages almost 6 and 3-1/2) are in public schools, very good ones but it worries me (well the little one is in a private daycare and they learn a lot). Both my son and DIL are smart and they’ll keep their eye on it. I wish they’d put them in private Christian schools (they can afford it), but I’m just the grandma, lol. I monitored everything my kids were being taught growing up, that’s why they’re both conservatives even after they graduated from college 😁

            Liked by 10 people

            • SteveInCO says:

              Someday I’ll havr to tell you how I got through University of Colorado Boulder without having to deal with hard core classroom indoctrination.

              Yes Education dept is in the worthless list.

              I’ll be damned if I can think of a positive thing the Labor department does. At least Agriculture inspects food though that could be provatized.

              Liked by 5 people

            • SteveInCO says:

              Oh, and I almost forgot. Please thank you grandkids’ parents for homeschooling, on my behalf.

              Liked by 4 people

              • Fe says:

                I will. My daughter is doing such a phenomenal job. They are also part of a homeschooling co-op group meeting at a church once a week.

                Liked by 3 people

                • SteveInCO says:

                  The co-ops help a lot.

                  Sirprising (to some) fact, there are secular homeschoolers too, mostly libertarians who don’t want the socialist indoctrination. As Mrshall Fritz said, government schools are the reproductive organs of the state.

                  Liked by 3 people

                • Joe Knuckles says:

                  We did that with my son. The community feeling we got out of it was incredible. It was almost like an old time small town school, with kids of all ages meeting together once a week. We also had field trips and social activities. And that was right here in the heart of the SF Bay Area.

                  Liked by 4 people

            • WSB says:

              I would shut that down in five seconds. Allow DeVos to remain a cabinet member but only just that. Allow her a staff and visits to 50 states to assist their programs, ripping out the teachers unions, Common Core and reeducation. Sorry to teachers, but yes.

              Like

          • teajr says:

            “I will tell you, it is three agencies of government when I get there that are gone. Commerce, Education, and the — What’s the third one there? Let’s see……OOPS.” LoL

            Liked by 4 people

          • Somewhere in Dixie says:

            State, Defense, Justice and Commerce. The rest can be eliminated together with all the unconstitutional alphabet agencies.

            Like

        • Remington says:

          I head tonight that the good Senator Feinstein is looking to push out the Sessions vote another week. So they can “better evaluate” the data. BS, just ANOTHER delay by the party of scum

          Liked by 2 people

      • Somebody says:

        Maybe they’re holding back Sessions confirmation in case they need his vote on the others?

        I don’t understand why McConnell is letting the D’s drag this process out.

        Liked by 6 people

        • SteveInCO says:

          Agreed, I don’t understand either.

          Liked by 5 people

        • WSB says:

          There seems to be something procedural that McConnell cannot change. However, I do not see him voicing his objection. Benefit of the doubt…is McConnell just used to this as normal business?

          Liked by 3 people

        • Jason says:

          have read the d’s can filibuster, so Rs negotiate on roll-out times for voting to avoid potentially longer delays? Do think the abscence of McConnel or other Rs pushing back on delay for delay sake is disappointing but SOP for GOP I guess

          Liked by 3 people

          • Bull Durham says:

            Finally, the answer. UNIPARTY.

            I’m amazed that people are going brain-numb so quickly.
            I read it every day here. Party ideology, narrow view of things. The old losing positions.

            What did we just battle? UniParty!

            Stay awake, folks. If it’s government, it’s one step from tyranny. And it is corrupt, fast.
            If the person is sworn in, are they sworn to defend the Constitution or their ideology?

            Actions, not words. Follow their actions. Their words are not worth much.

            Pres. Trump is unique. No ideology. If he delivers and succeeds, it will be because he does not relent on the most basic concepts of the campaign. His speech on the 20th was profound.
            But these appointees really matter. They must totally, always fight to get what Pres. Trump has promised.

            Two fronts to watch in this war. The known enemies of the Left, MSM, Liberal Cult, Globalists. And the Deep State and UniParty frontmen/women. They work in unison.

            Both fronts are against the Movement, both are not Patriotic. Both are your enemies, your children’s enemies, your faith’s enemy. And they have launched, together, a Color Revolution to dislodge and discredit Pres.Trump and negate all he is trying to do for the USA.

            Notice, nothing he is doing is for the Government. He is working for our national Economy and all Americans trying to make a living and create a good, safe life for themselves and one another.

            He will try to reform the Government. He will try to Drain the Swamp. But his full vision does not speak to Government, and it is important to understand that is not his mission.
            Government is a corporate tool. He will try, through his appointees to use the corporate tool.

            What is wrong is humans. What is corrupt is humans. What is evil is humans. What we hate about DC is humans. It is the human component that is criminal and deviant and traitorous to us and to the nation.

            Do not lose track of the singular vision of MAGA. That America is our country. It is not the Federal or State government. It is the Rule of Law codified in the Constitution. We own the Constitution. We own this nation. The Government as an organic construct is never on our side of anything. And the UniParty is government gone very bad.

            Liked by 10 people

          • Athena the Warrior says:

            Occam’s Razor is definitely the Uniparty.

            Liked by 1 person

        • furtive says:

          His loyalties are not with Trump…UNI-Party, n’est-ce pas?

          Like

      • ediegrey says:

        Absolutely agree, Jeff Sessions is crucial. The other side know it, hopefully they cannot stop him, God willing.

        Liked by 1 person

    • All American Snowflake says:

      I’d personally like Trey Gowdy as AG. Gowdy for AG!!!

      Like

      • Somebody says:

        I much prefer Jeff Sessions for a variety of reasons

        Liked by 13 people

      • Steve says:

        When Trey Goody took on the Bengazi investigation he didso knowing that the “Gang of 8” was as complicit as HRC, and that he would not be allowed to actually accomplish anything except smack Hillary about the head and shoulders with a sock full of wet sh*t.
        Good work on that and all, but not hero stuff.

        Liked by 14 people

        • All American Snowflake says:

          But, but, but Gowdy has cat class and has cat style. Family of the lion…. felis concolor.

          Like

          • Trey Gowdy would immensely impress me if he arrested Obama for espionage, sedition, fraud, forgery & deport him back to Indonesia because he isn’t & never was a US citizen.

            Liked by 3 people

            • progpoker says:

              What about the $200MM he gave to the Palestinians on the way out the door??
              How is the punk allowed to give OUR money away??

              Liked by 2 people

            • Why would he do that when he endorsed Rubio, who is simply an anchor baby? Even LESS Constitutionally qualified than O.B.A.M.A. (although his mother wasn’t of age to confer citizenship when the Indonesian was born).

              Like

              • Gowdy isn’t going to arrest anybody, especially not Obama or the Clintons & I’ll surely remain unimpressed with Gowdy because he reminds me of an actor playing a role.
                Unless it can be proven that Gowdy was aware of Rubio’s’ birth status prior to giving his endorsement, then “at this point what does it matter?” LOL.

                I’d disagree that Rubio is less constitutionally qualified than Obama, IMO they’re equally ineligible to be POTUS. Obama’s mother was the wife of a British subject at the time of his birth, similar to Ted Cruz mother she would’ve been required to first renounce her US citizenship prior to marrying a subject of Britain. So it’s reasonable to assume Ann Stanley wasn’t an American citizen when she birthed Barack jr.
                However if people want to establish degrees of ineligibility then I’d point out that at least Rubio was born upon US soil, raised within the US & apparently assimilated to American pool boy culture. The only things disqualifying Rubio are his non citizen parents owing their allegiance to commie Cuba.

                Obama was foreign born, foreign raised & owing his allegiance to Islam rather than any country. Obama is ineligible on every point across the board.

                Liked by 1 person

        • furtive says:

          Pomoeo was in the committee also. He knew nothing would result….

          Like

      • WSB says:

        Gowdy became very weak and ineffective as head of the Benghazi Committee. He was to told to stand down and did. I know there are very dark forces behind the decision not to open up the weapons trafficking angle, however, I was very disappointed in Gowdy.

        Sessions has so much more experience…you just have not seen him in action in this role yet. And there is no reason Gowdy could not be named Deputy or as a replacement to Sessions when the time is right.

        Liked by 6 people

        • NJF says:

          The only good thing to come out of those hearings was the exposure of the private server.

          I have no idea whether they all knew it or not before hand, but once it became public, the Grifter’s chance for victory was greatly diminished.

          Of course if Yeb had been the nominee nothing may have come of it, but he wasn’t and the server effectively sunk her.

          Maybe not jailhouse sunk, but at least she’s not POTUS, and who knows what her fate will be?

          Liked by 1 person

          • Seriously? Do they really expect us to believe that NO-ONE in Congress had Killary’s e-mail address while she was SOS? Sure, and I’ve got some ocean-front property for sale here in NE – interested?

            Like

        • He also appointed a known MB sympathizer to the Benghazi committee.

          Liked by 1 person

      • You like kabuki trey, eh?

        UNIPARTY.

        Liked by 5 people

      • Bert Darrell says:

        Goodly plays the role of a legislator in the Congress theater but does not deserve an Oscar, IYKWIM.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Nah from what I’ve been able to find out regarding Jeff Sessions, he’s untouchable like Eliot Ness. What America greatly needs is the return of justice, everything else works if society is just & we’re all equal under the law. That’s why Sessions is more qualified than 99.? of Americans.
        They put Sessions through the wringer during the 1986 federal judge confirmation hearings & all they had was Kennedys false accusations of racism, a schizophrenic colleague who telepathically communicated with Dan Rather & the CIA or similar agency. Also a colleague with memory issues who recently admitted he was mistaken about a joke Sessions had allegedly made about pot smoking crooks.

        Stefan Molyneux just uploaded a very good video

        Liked by 2 people

      • furtive says:

        Coward. Overrated

        Like

      • AmyB says:

        Gowdy was not supportive of President Trump when he was running. Why do you think he would be supportive of President Trump’s agenda now? Jeff Sessions stood with President Trump from day one. He may look benign but he will fulfill his role in the “Drain the Swamp Project” more than adequately.

        Liked by 3 people

      • dayallaxeded says:

        Once I would have agreed, but Gowdy has clearly demonstrated that he can be derailed by the Klinton Krime Kartel and in any event is not a “closer.” Coffee and cabinet positions are for closers only!

        Like

    • justfactsplz says:

      That is the one that I am anxious about too. Sessions just has to be confirmed.

      Liked by 9 people

    • skifflegirl says:

      Just this very moment as I’m reading this thread, an ad comes on the tv about Jeff Sessions record and urges ALL AMERICANS to call their senators at 202-224-3121 and tell them it’s time for real reform and to CONFIRM JEFF SESSIONS (ConfirmSessions.com). The ad says it was paid for by 45Committee.

      What a coincidence!

      Liked by 10 people

    • MW says:

      I’m convinced, absolutely convinced, that Trump has a strategy to get him through. He’s a strategic genius.

      Liked by 5 people

    • sDee says:

      absolutely crucial: SESSIONS

      Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      The Fear Factor is off the charts.
      Democrats seek delay on Sessions’ confirmation vote for Attorney General
      http://whnt.com/2017/01/23/democrats-seek-delay-on-sessions-confirmation-vote-for-attorney-general/

      Liked by 2 people

    • Kevin Sherlock says:

      Pompeo is a much more honorable USMA grad than Betrayus and McQuisling.

      No one is perfect, but at least Pompeo cares.

      Rand Paul would make a great Federal Reserve chairman or audit driver.

      Mr. Trump is getting top flight talent, not all who agree with him in all things, but are on board with him where he sees they can help him.

      Kudos also to Mr. Trump for inviting in the union chiefs. He’s doing the right thing for American workers … and has the most energy and desire to help blue-collar people since Theodore Roosevelt. And he’s almost as confrontational as Andrew Jackson.

      Prayers to God for Mr. Trump’s health, mind, soul, and heart. And for his family, his people, and for us his supporters and red-bleeding Americans.

      And prayers of thanksgiving for Mr. Trump and his people, and for the opportunity we got to put them to work for us and for the younger people who come behind us.

      Liked by 3 people

    • “We will know that our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false” ~ by CIA Director Wm Casey, Feb 1981 in White House briefing as reported by Barbara Honegger

      Review Operation Paperclip, Mockingbird, Gladio, Zero Footprint, and more. Accept that the CIA has always worked for the monopolist elite, and seldom in the interest of America, Truth or humanity. Drain this toxic Foggy Bottom swamp.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I’m not entirely certain that this is good. We must never allow the government to enhance security at the expense of our liberties. This one worries me a bit.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Eric Kennedy says:

      You are saying you don’t want a Trump selection to head the CIA? Weird comment.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Joan says:

      Where have you read that that is what Trump plans to do?

      Like

      • WSB says:

        I think the comment is more about Deep State, which sometimes has a mind of its own, i.e. Clinton and the Blumenthal angle.

        I do not know if Obama was involved in that, but Cheryl Mills seems to have been…Clinton’s group was running a clandestine operation parallel to the Obama Admin. Just a hunch, but that is what it sounds like from the back and forth emails.

        Liked by 4 people

    • A.D. Everard says:

      I trust Trump’s choices all the way. He is working FOR Americans and their well-being. I don’t expect him to get it wrong on anything important.

      Liked by 3 people

    • rsanchez1990 says:

      I don’t think anyone was arguing that we should sacrifice liberty for security. When sundance says President Trump has a firm approach towards national security, that has always been securing against foreign threats, in terms of Islamic terrorism and a porous border. Sundance also pointed out that Trump has been a target of the worst excesses from crooked leaders in the intelligence community.

      In this context, intelligence on Islamic terrorists is good, but domestic surveillance is bad. The police state definitely needs to be pared back. When President Trump spoke to the CIA rank and file, he told them their focus should instead be on gathering intelligence on Islamic terrorism and other foreign enemies of the United States, good intelligence that will help the military function more efficiently.

      This is not sacrificing our liberties, this is securing them against foreign enemies. Drawing back the police state spawned by the Patriot Act secures our liberties from domestic enemies. I expect we’ll hear from President Trump on the latter at some point.

      Liked by 3 people

      • furtive says:

        He ranted against 🍎 for not unlocking phones 📱 for Comey!!
        He needs a crash course in the 4th Amendment for Dummies.

        Like

        • rsanchez1990 says:

          I do think that we should limit the government’s power to decrypt information to incriminate Americans. However, in that particular case, the iPhone belonged to a terrorist with ties to foreign Islamic terrorist organizations, and we all know that President Trump feels very strongly against Islamic terrorism (and that he’s no dummy).

          The FBI managed to crack the phone before the issue could be decided legally, but I do think the issue should be decided legally in the future.

          Like

          • WSB says:

            If I am not mistaken, that iPhone belonged to the government agency the asailant was working for, so it was not his own phone.there was no reason to not open that. More red flag false news.

            Liked by 3 people

          • furtive says:

            That “terrorist” was an American who is entiltled to his 4th amendment. Did it ever occur to you that the Feds needed to see what he had on that phone that would incriminate the traitors in the CIA/DHS/FBI??

            That guy was a patsy, just like all of ’em stateside under “comrade Brennan” ( CIA staff reference)

            Let’s count how many domestic terror attacks occur in 2017 in the USA. No obama holdovers, then no attacks.

            That phone was onlocked by the geeks at Best Buy-that how competent our agencies’ employees are.
            Obama scandals? How about treason:-providing material support to create a terror attack?

            Like

            • rsanchez1990 says:

              If that terrorist did have something that would incriminate the alphabet agencies, taking the phone to geeks at Best Buy would have been WAY too risky. The FBI already had the phone, they would have simply destroyed it if they feared that what was on it would incriminate themselves.

              Like

    • JohnPaulJohnes says:

      Displeasure with the nomination is clear, and perfectly, but your discontent is a little vague to understand why.

      If your channeling Benjamin Franklin’s famous quote
      “those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”, this is one of the most incorrectly characterized quotes in US history.

      Franklin wrote that letter on behalf of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the colonial governor during the French and Indian War.
      The letter was to add ammunition to the struggle between Assembly and the Governor over funding for security on the frontier, where the Assembly wanted to tax the lands of the Penn family, which ruled Pennsylvania from afar, to raise money for defense against French and Indian attacks.
      The Governor kept vetoing the efforts of the Assembly on behalf of the Penn family.
      It was not about ceding liberty from the government, it was about legislators being asked to cede their liberty to tax the lands, under their rights of jurisdiction.
      The definition of liberty here was “self-governance of a legislature in the interests of citizen security.”
      The governor was accusing the Assembly of stalling on appropriating money for frontier defense by insisting on including the Penn lands in its taxes.
      The Penn family later offered cash to fund defense of the frontier, as long as the Assembly would acknowledge that it lacked the power to tax the family’s lands.

      Franklin was complaining of the choice facing the legislature between being able to make funds available for frontier defense and maintaining its right of self-governance, and he was criticizing the governor for suggesting the “Assembly” should be willing to give up the latter to ensure the former.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Sunshine says:

      Enhance security: Massive surveillance through PROFILING.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Phil aka Felipe says:

    “Thankfully, we can debate the substance of the issues and know our voices are being heard.” UNTIL they ARE NOT HEARD.

    “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” STAY VIGILANT, MY FRIENDS!

    Liked by 10 people

  4. Pam says:

    Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram
    15 Ds aye on Pompeo:
    Donnelly
    Feinstein
    Hassan
    Heitkamp
    Kaine
    King
    Klobuchar
    Manchin
    McCaskill
    Reed
    Schatz
    Schumer
    Shaheen
    Warner
    Whitehouse

    Liked by 6 people

  5. beaujest says:

    I trust the top of his class West Point grad !

    Liked by 5 people

  6. MakeAmericaGreat says:

    Excellent way to end the day

    Liked by 6 people

  7. Did Rand has reservation over this specific person, or was it reservations of the position and agency in general?

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Well dayam, Who would Rand Paul rather to have as Director of the CIA?

    Liked by 4 people

  9. SteveInCO says:

    I’d rather be arguing with Rand over this sort of issue, than with some leftist loon. His concern, at least, is valid in a general sense.

    Liked by 14 people

    • Illegal says:

      Rand could be serving an important function. He is giving voice to what Trump has said in the past about the agency. Sometimes you need to come in through the backdoor.

      Liked by 4 people

  10. I agree with Rand on much of what he says, but who does he think should be appointed as Director of the CIA? Therein is where I differ from him; someone is going to be appointed and I dare say none of them would meet his criteria for the position. As long as there is a CIA, there is going to be someone who accepts and supports their mission running it, and it ain’t Edward Snowden.

    So, I would like to hear who Rand would support as director of the CIA. I love a good philosophic speech as much as anyone, but it doesn’t mean anything if you can’t put the belief system into practical action.

    I personally think the CIA is out of control and, particularly, it is not supposed to operate within the United States. but we know it does. I personally think Edward Snowden is a hero, but he is never going to be CIA director. So…I guess I will take a wait and see position with this cause I really do trust Prez Trump to make wise decisions.

    Liked by 10 people

  11. Marygrace Powers says:

    Every choice President Trump makes is strategic
    for this point in time/Pompeo is his choice for good reason/

    Liked by 2 people

  12. WSB says:

    So I understand Paul’s concern; however, it seems to me that there needs to be a reign on our clandestine services. His statement has as much concern about the gang of eight, oversight, governance and that the overall system as has been stretched. Maybe the system needs to change more than who the CIA Director is.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Yay Yay Yay & Yay! Just Trust Trump! Yay!

    Liked by 3 people

  14. R-C says:

    ” The vote tally is 66-32, with a significant number of Democrats voting no…”

    That should read: “…with an insignificant number of democrats voting ‘no’…” They failed to stop the confirmation, making them insignificant.

    Liked by 7 people

  15. James Yerian says:

    Rand Paul is an idiot.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Eric Kennedy says:

    It sounds like the Tillerson full vote will be next week? Are there any who may be confirmed before that? I haven’t seen anything on Twitter the other picks.

    Like

  17. Yet still Cotton was a member of the Sea Island Anti-Trump cabal meeting…i am glad he voted Yay, but trusting will be a long slog. He has shown his true colors….what is he up to now? Hmmmmmm

    Liked by 10 people

  18. Bubba says:

    I don’t know enough about Pompeo to make a judgement. However, considering the scope of the problems in the intelligence community (17 agencies), Any one man is not going to be able to fix it. There has to be a clandestine plan implemented by operational assets to root out the corruption, the evil, the criminality. The CIA Director is just a figurehead. A shiny object. The real fixers will not be publicized.

    Liked by 4 people

    • NC PATRIOT says:

      Who is running the DOJ while we wait for Sessions to be confirmed? Lynch is out right now isn’t she? (As well as other O’s appointees at the top? I hope.

      Liked by 2 people

    • rsanchez1990 says:

      I think the military is a big part of the real fixers. Remember when President Trump spoke at the CIA headquarters, he mentioned the military first thing and the generals that are with him. The intelligence black hats are a very powerful faction in the deep state. The military white hats are also a very powerful faction, and Trump will need them if he wants to drain the deep end of the swamp.

      Liked by 3 people

      • paper doll says:

        You beat me to it…indeed it was just about the first thing he said and frankly it’s why we have President Trump imo. That was the one thing NWO could not get past or fix

        Like

    • Sentient says:

      I’m with Bubba. The Deep State isn’t Brennan & Clapper. By definition it’s secret and extensive. President Trump should assume that every word spoken, texted or typed inside the White House will be monitored by the Deep State. Mike Flynn @ NSA might help suppress the usurpers, but any action will have to be clandestine, as Bubba says. They’re going to have to go analog, and by that I mean use methods Bin Laden used to avoid being detected: human couriers carrying no cell phones (trackable) and using no technology to communicate. Donkey carts may stick out in DC, but they could use pre-EDR cars.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. R-C says:

    By the way, I’m noticing something which I expected–but which I hope isn’t a long-term phenomenon, or a ‘trend’:

    Who are the republican senators balking at Trump’s nominees? Two of them former contenders for the republican nomination: Rubio and Paul. I fully expected the failed republican contenders in the Senate to rise up and flex their ‘muscles’ against Mr. Trump, in a demonstration of their ‘relevance’.

    Rubio’s already caved on Tillerson, and here is Rand Paul, standing against…whatever it is he’s standing against. Whatever. Pompeo is IN, and that’s that. The IC will be happy with that choice.

    Liked by 6 people

  20. citizen817 says:

    Liked by 3 people

    • SteveInCO says:

      Honestly the only thing that gives me misgivings is that head clown Chuck and Diane Fe%nste%n voted for him.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Bull Durham says:

        Pompeo is hardcore neocon. How that changes under Trump and Flynn will take time to see.

        The key to all non-trade foreign policy is Flynn. Everything regarding relations with nations for cooperation is about Pres. Trump’s vision for Peace through Strength. At first, that is about ISIS-AQ-Taliban. We have seven live wars going on, and dozens in secret we use PMCs and Special Forces.

        Then, there is the geopolitical shift from USA as unipolar superpower, the Hegemon, to a multi-polar three-nation sharing of global responsibility among US-Russia-China. Some of that is nuclear MAD strategy, some is wealth, some is regional positioning.

        Flynn is key to much of the judgment, arrangements and analysis of all the pieces and facts that comprise the reality and intentions of the US and others.

        If Pompeo goes along smoothly, good. I’m watching.

        Liked by 6 people

        • We are blessed to have your and Sundances insights Bull. Truly from the bottom of my heart, thank you for your contributions for our understanding. Invaluable, many thanks!

          Liked by 1 person

        • dayallaxeded says:

          I think we are likely to see at least some RINOs/neo-cons brought into the true USA conservative Trump cadres. The neo-con world is all they’ve known, the only road to any success and power, until now. Some probably even thought they really were opposing and trying to defeat the Demonrats, just like the uniparty manipulators wanted us all to think.

          Once the veils start to lift and they see what the difference is for the nation, all citizens, including themselves, everyone with any soul, ethics, or morality remaining should come into line–not 100% acquiesence, perhaps, but support for the fundamentals of Mr. Trump’s policies and our Constitution.

          Like

  21. anarchist335 says:

    Rand Paul should back the Cabinet that our President has selected. He is getting on my nerves. With friends like Rand, who needs enemies?

    Liked by 3 people

    • WSB says:

      He’s trying to make a Constitutional point while knowing there are enough votes to cover the confirmation.

      Liked by 11 people

    • I understand your point, but I also appreciate Sundance’s when he wrote:

      “There is a valid position being espoused by Senator Rand Paul within his concerns….The negative long-term impacts of the Patriot Act were arguably created an overreaction to the events of Sept. 11th 2001. The deep state absorbed our fear and the responding reaction from DC, and benefited by engorging itself. We should never turn away from the valid voice of Rand Paul’s position.”

      Trump is likely to get 100% of his nominees confirmed in the end (with perhaps 1 or 2 exceptions at the most). Therefore, it’s not a bad thing at all that Rand Paul held true to his Libertarian convictions to remind the nation that we need to ensure that “security” doesn’t lead to “tyranny” via a loss of our Constitutional civil liberties. Thus, I don’t consider RP’s position as obstructionist, for he knew that Pompeo was going to win the confirmation vote anyway. His objection and vote does help our Republic to keep in mind the need to preserve our rights even as we seek to ensure our safety. 🙂

      Liked by 9 people

      • Bull Durham says:

        It is one of the rare agreements I have with Rand Paul and his father.
        You cannot slice and dice Freedom. It is always government’s solution, to take freedom and serve up “security”. You get Tyranny. You never get Liberty from Government.
        The Constitution is set to restrict Government not citizens. Surrender Freedom and you lose it forever. The Patriot Act should be called the Freedom Limitation Act.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Ironically, King George passed a “Patriot Act” that was indeed tyranical, and part of the reason the colonists seceded from his empire, thereby starting the Revolutionary War. I’ve wondered from time to time whether George W. Bush INTENTIONALLY followed King George’s example, or if this was merely happenstance. Regardless, we do need to throw that set of shackles off of us. Thus, like you, this is an area in which I agree mostly with Ron and Rand Paul.

          Thanks for your reply, Bull. 🙂

          Like

    • furtive says:

      Think outside of the box. If his vote made a difference he wouldn’t have opposed.

      Liked by 1 person

  22. Sundance, that’s some great and thoughtful analysis, succinct as it is. I love your contrasting points of needing “scary men” to protect us (security) vis-a-vis the need to set limits against them to prevent blood-lust. Thanks.

    Rich

    Liked by 6 people

  23. truthandjustice says:

    I’ve read where they expect Pompeo to clean it out (I guess drain the swamp there). I’m all for that but don’t know if maybe it should just be abolished and no longer needed as I’ve heard other ex-Intel people say. Another area we must trust Pres. Trump. Maybe that’s in his plans later or something.

    Liked by 1 person

    • R-C says:

      I’m an ‘ex-intel people’, and I would strenuously, vehemently oppose shutting down the agency.

      What I would abolish is the ‘Director of National Intelligence’ (AND its entire attendant bureaucracy), which is nothing more than a political post that puts a political spin on intelligence information.

      I would also take a hard look at the 16-some-odd federal intel agencies that now exist. Perhaps some of those can be done away with.

      For decades, the DCI handled the role of ‘top intel chief’ just fine.

      Liked by 5 people

      • rsanchez1990 says:

        I agree on the ODNI. The reason the intelligence community is a community is because of the ODNI, and outsourcing a lot of the functions of the CIA.

        I have to disagree on the DCI handling the role just fine. We’ve had some real bad apples going through that position, with Allen Dulles the worst one.

        Like

        • Bull Durham says:

          The CIA was born of a bad marriage of OSS and Richard Gehlen’s Nazi Intel service.
          It serves the President. It is dedicated to covert clandestine operations, off the books, outside the law. It’s analysis arm has been skewed to that service and those objectives, not some general national security agenda.

          So, what do we expect. Like hiring a thug and expecting diplomacy? Or providing exception from legal consequences and expecting good behavior?

          Directors sit on this outlaw power and get to use it. Bad things occur. Naturally.

          Liked by 1 person

        • R-C says:

          The DCI never stopped us from doing anything we had to do. We worked across agencies and did just fine.

          Like

    • We might bear in mind that the Trump Team has a YUGE range of experience, deep expertise and a universal strategically innovative mindset.

      We can bet the farm that they ALL will be tapped to develop and execute robust game plans for Draining the Swamp throughout the government – and particularly for the Deep State.

      Liked by 1 person

    • daughnworks247 says:

      I don’t want to shut down CIA.
      I would love to see more analysts who are critical thinkers. Our intel agencies have access to massive quantity of data but they miss the signs, which, of course, are so clear after the attack.
      Since average citizens appear to be the best resource, maybe we need a better/faster tip-line. Biggest problem with CIA is Obama burning assets. We must have reliability for human intelligence.
      We desperately need more human intel.

      Liked by 2 people

  24. happy2h says:

    Trust, but verify. Got it!

    Liked by 1 person

  25. woohoowee says:

    Along with scaling back/eliminating all/many/some CIA ops, can’t the procedure(s) be changed to have more congressional oversight? More than just the gang of 8?

    Liked by 1 person

    • R-C says:

      The more political hacks you bring into the ‘circle of trust’, the less of a ‘circle of trust’ you have. The information WILL leak.

      Liked by 5 people

      • seventhndr says:

        If we started enforcing our treason and sedition laws we’d probably have a lot less leaks.

        Curious, with your experience, if you have any thoughts on that.

        If only we had someone that has a clear record of abusing their clearance intentionally to make an example of and observe the reaction… coughclintoncough

        Liked by 1 person

        • R-C says:

          I made it through my entire career without a single ‘security violation’ on my record. Not ONE. But that’s because I was a conscientious, thoughtful, careful, precise, and well intentioned public servant. (Not to mention ‘good looking’!)

          I am a BIG believer in punishing the guilty. That said, I am also a big believer in giving the miscreant ONE chance to reform–‘straighten up and fly right’. (In cases of national security, however, that second belief of mine is not meant to imply that I’d say that we let Snowden go because his massive breach was ‘a first offense’.)

          Each case must be weighed on its merits, according to ALL the evidence. If warranted, I support the death penalty for egregious acts of espionage–because surely, the breaches of this nature are exposing certain ‘at-risk’ individuals to death. Sometimes gruesome death.

          When we raise our hand to swear an oath of service for our nation, we step into an arena where mistakes can be very, very costly indeed. Tune into yesterday’s video of VP Pence swearing in the White House senior staff. Listen to that oath. It carries with it a weight that only those who have taken it can understand.

          And when entrusted with America’s secrets, the weight doesn’t ever go away–even in retirement. (That’s why I am so vehemently against Hillary Clinton: she had the same briefings every TS-cleared employee receives, blew them all off, and did as she did knowingly and with malicious aforethought.

          I am mindful that ‘treason’ is a slippery slope–our Founding Fathers were guilty of treason in opposing King George III. Food for thought.

          Hope this helps…

          Liked by 4 people

    • sundance says:

      I think you are hitting on the part that irks Rand Paul the most.

      He would be more assured if the intelligence Gang of Eight was the entire Senate with door closed; and I can’t say his argument isn’t solid.

      Liked by 8 people

      • woohoowee says:

        How to change the policies to accomplish broader oversight? Anyone know?

        Like

        • lbmomblog says:

          in my humble, outside looking in opinion, policies are not all that different from projects.

          Nothing is Built in a Day.

          You can’t begin to tear something down (policy or project) and re-build it better without well drawn out plans, and people in place – people in place that knowingly understand that they will have to make adjustments/tweaks along the way.

          The first draft in change, may not be the “end all that is all”.

          You put the folks on the job that have been there and done that, that have experienced the “dang that didn’t turn out just right” or “dang, I should have expected this to happen” or “yep, we did it this way …and that principle will work here” …. You put those folks on the job, you give them the tools, you give them a budget, you give them the people/resources/hard hats, …. but you maintain signing of all paychecks.

          For example, Re-building the U.S. Postal building …and turning into something completely different…given that it had a long established connection within its community…and yet you turn it into a Hotel….

          In my view, Re-vamping policies isn’t too far from that Postal building turned hotel. Just a much larger scale – and much larger established community.

          Know the goals, scope, scale, hazards, and understand you will have to adjust here and there.

          Liked by 3 people

      • SteveInCO says:

        Note that both the house and senate do the oversight.

        Would you trust Keith Ellison to do oversight, when it comes to going after ISIS/Muslim Brotherhood?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Fe says:

          No friggin way.

          Like

          • MVW says:

            Exactly. No way can we trust that adopted son of Mohammed.

            All security is a two edged sword. Moreover swords cut anyone even the one holding it, but bad guys have them too, so no getting around having them.

            CIA cheering must have demoralized the pathological enemy media. And the outgoing muslims botherhood in charge of the CIA were not happy either as they know what the CIA can do blackmail wise. The problem is that if Brennan knows the goods on the generals, NATO generals, politicians, then the Brownsoned compromised whose-its are no good to us either (at this point).

            No sense keeping the swamp that you know when evil knows it also.

            DRAIN IT, and DRAIN IT NOW!!

            Like

      • Timmy-the-Ute says:

        There are 15 members to the Senate Intelligence Committee. But looking at some of the members I would not trust them with a secret.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Bull Durham says:

          Exactly. They are mostly the enemy of the People.

          Like

        • sundance says:

          I think Rand Paul is specifically identifying the intelligence “gang of eight” in his critique. Read his full outline.

          Like

          • Timmy-the-Ute says:

            I understand Paul’s desire to have greater oversight, but if you can’t trust the Senate Intelligence Committee I would definitely not trust the entire Senate. Can you imagine telling national secrets to Al Franken. Senators are not the noble men of the 1800. But it is always nice to be noticed by the teacher. 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

    • Bull Durham says:

      The greatest oversight is a President who is not trying to overthrow governments, change regimes, assassinate leaders, create color revolutions and promote chaos, or worst of all, finance, train, arm, direct and fight alongside radical Islamic terrorists and Ukrainian nazis.

      Pres.Trump has said several times quite clearly he has no interest in such covert ops.

      We’ll see shortly.

      Liked by 4 people

  26. james23 says:

    I’m for Pompeo if he Drains the Swamp.
    I don’t want to hear from or read about–ever again–the “Intel Community.”
    John al-Brennan taught me that these folks are very very dangerous and tend to be anti-democratic.

    Liked by 2 people

    • R-C says:

      I belonged to the ‘intel community’ for quite a while. The circles in which I worked in my ‘compartment’, and with my colleagues from other agencies, were comprised nearly totally of great Americans, doing serious work for the American people, in a very sober manner.

      But, my observation in life is that there is always at least one turd in the punch-bowl. Virtually every team I’ve ever been a part of has at least one ‘That Guy’ who either can’t or won’t get along, and who you can’t seem to get rid of.

      Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

      The problems you speak of ALWAYS come from the political hack appointees, who breeze into town with almost no prior experience, and run roughshod over the worker bees without fear of reprisal since the president put them there. Brennan is a case-in-point.

      Liked by 6 people

  27. 10mozart11 says:

    I appreciate the debate Sundance. But for the life of me, I cannot see why Rand can’t express his “misgivings” with words (see Pappa Ron in InfoWars today), while at the same time voting YEA. Might be a “meaningless” vote to bolster Rand’s non-interventionist bona fides, but his VOTE still rubs this flyover rube the wrong way.

    Liked by 1 person

    • rsanchez1990 says:

      I am certain Pappa Ron would’ve voted the same way for the same reasons. Libertarians in general are much more principled and inflexible with their ideology than more traditional Republicans. I also think that Rand knew his nay vote would be meaningless in terms of affecting the outcome, but still meaningful in terms of expressing his misgivings on the intelligence community and sharing them with the American people.

      Liked by 3 people

      • furtive says:

        He would have voted in favor if it was a determination of the result. He will also monitor Pompeo & disclose his concerns to POTUS45

        Like

      • You are SO right, rsqanchez! As a practicing Libertarian myself, I can attest to our principled and inflexible natures! And you don’t always want an inflexible person on the job. I’ve thrown a ‘principled’ spanner in the works more than once, to my later regret.

        Liked by 1 person

        • rsanchez1990 says:

          I suppose a better word than inflexible would have been “uncompromising”.

          I was watch David Seaman today and he characterized Donald Trump as a more “personable” Ron Paul. The Donald had to develop a charismatic personality to successfully negotiate with businesspeople. He also had to develop an ability to see and understand the perspective of potential partners, so he could better understand where he could compromise so he lost minimally and both gained maximally.

          I think Donald Trump is every bit as liberty-loving as Ron Paul. Trump just knows how to get stuff done. I would’ve loved to vote for Ron Paul for president in 2012. Ron just couldn’t get it done.

          Liked by 1 person

  28. NYGuy54 says:

    Liked by 4 people

  29. furtive says:

    Pompeo is an over-achiever, a war monger & a gullible Russiaphobe. He was also a grandstander on the PHONY Benghazi Select Committee, a complete waste of money.

    He will go way overboard on surveillance. He needs an inspector general 24/7.
    Hopefully Trump will catch on ASAP.

    SOMETIMES SCHELEPPER Sanders is correct….

    Liked by 1 person

  30. lbmomblog says:

    Thanks for the info, and explanations on the topic Sundance. I listened to Rush today, what’s he saying about Dem’s will be starting impeaching. That should be a “did u know how absurd” topic.

    Like

  31. kltk1 says:

    I really like Sundance’s approach here. I’m a Rand Paul supporter but will defer to the judgment of the President on this one.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. WhyNot132 says:

    The only problem with Sundance analysis and Rand Paul stand is that the venue is inappropriate. He wants to make a point – go and make a point, do not use the nomination process to make your points. Trump – and any other President – deserves whoever advisors he wants. The views and the characters of those advisors don’t matter, the decision will be made by the President and he can ask for their opinion anyway. This is dishonest to hijack American people event for his propaganda points. This is the same argument that the Democrats do: “We need to have a discussion.” Go and have the discussion, don’t do it to delay people’s business.

    Liked by 4 people

    • rsanchez1990 says:

      I will offer a counterpoint. The Republicans in Congress successfully blocked Obama from installing a Supreme Court Justice who would have tilted the Court decidedly left, possibly for decades. I definitely agree with that particular move, and that is the role the Senate plays, “advice and consent”. Supreme Court Justices and Cabinet appointees (who are much more than just advisors to the President) go through the same confirmation process.

      Rand Paul was doing the “advice” part of his constitutional role, probably knowing that the rest of the Senate was going to do the “consent” part and approve Pompeo’s nomination. That being said, I am also very annoyed with the Senate for taking so long with Trump’s other picks. The circumstances are very different from lame duck Obama to new President Trump. We shouldn’t have to wait until January 31st to get votes on Trump’s other Cabinet picks.

      Liked by 2 people

      • WhyNot132 says:

        There is a huge difference between a Secretary, who is, in essence, an advisor, and a Supreme Court Justice, who, like the President, is a decision-maker. A Secretary has a boss, the President, who makes and who is responsible for the decisions. A SCJ doesn’t have a boss. He makes the decisions. His character and opinions matter.

        Like

        • rsanchez1990 says:

          Of course there is a huge difference, they have constitutionally distinct roles. I still maintain that a Cabinet Secretary is much more than an advisor. The President grants them authority to execute his plan. Of course at the end of the day, they answer to the President, but they still wield tremendous power in the government, which is why Congress has to approve them first.

          Liked by 1 person

          • rsanchez1990 says:

            And one more thing, there are people in the Trump administration who are officially advisors, and these people did not need Congressional approval, because they are only advisors. They don’t have constitutional authority to execute on national policy and legislation. Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller, and Michael Flynn are all advisors to the President, and none needed Congressional approval, as a few prominent examples.

            Liked by 1 person

        • The US Constitution is clear that Supreme Court Justices may be impeached

          That The Federalist Papers – and not the U.S. supreme Court – is the highest authority and evidence “of the general opinion of those who framed, and of those who accepted the Constitution of the US. on questions as to it’s genuine meaning”. The supreme Court is merely a creature of the Constitution and is completely subject to its terms; and when judges on that and lower federal courts – who serve during “good Behaviour” only (Art. III, Sec. 1, cl. 1) – usurp powers, they must be impeached and removed from office (Federalist No. 81, 8th para).

          http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fed81.htm

          Like

      • furtive says:

        Advise…

        Like

    • Timmy-the-Ute says:

      Paul may have noble ideas, but in the end he is behaving like a small man like Rubio and the games he played about his vote for Tillerson.

      Like

    • curley727 says:

      I agree. Rand is just another POS grandstanding politician playing it sage because the vote count was already for confirmation. Where was he the last 8 years?

      Like

  33. Trumppin says:

    The CIA should be disbanded and rolled back to our military where it belongs.

    Like

    • truthseekerr says:

      yea hope Trmp goes that way

      Liked by 1 person

    • Bull Durham says:

      Military fought that an won twice. After WWII, the OSS was disbanded. It reappeared in a new package, altered, the CIA. Then the CIA was separated from MilIntel when the Military wanted its own Intel for battlefield decisions. Apparently, that hasn’t done well either.

      Human Intel is the most difficult. It takes years to get a good agent of information by a case officer. It is near impossible in the regions the US has stuck its military, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and now North Africa, Sub-Sahara and Central Africa. Language, customs, mores, racial and religious differences make most of our best officers unable to get the human intel from sources that are worth pursuing.

      So, if is like taking a bicycle to the Sahara. Tough place to ride a bike.

      American policy needs to change if we are going to be effective.
      But the warmongers want war. the MIC wants Trillions. Ideologues want the Hegemon to throw its weight around. Serving those goals with our system of Intel gathering does not work. Hasn’t for 70 years.

      But we sure can create chaos. So that’s what we do.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Trumppin says:

        Great explanation!

        Like

      • happy2h says:

        It’s always the guys pulling the strings. I’m sure there are many true patriots in the CIA. Unfortunately, their political bosses are mostly just shills for the global cabal. Foreign interests and lobbyists have influenced the government for decades. President Trump saved the day.

        The OSS was made up of Patriots fighting for America and protecting our boys overseas. Once the war was over, the politicians got rid of them and began to spin their web of lies and deceit.

        Below is just one example of what Bull is talking about. Operation Halyard; From the mouths of our veterans and OSS heroes:

        Liked by 1 person

        • Great story about Serbs helping our men. One of them said,”State Dept made a mistake…” by declaring the Serb who led the rescue effort a Nazi collaborator.

          It was not a mistake. FDR & State Dept. were Communists and supported fellow Communist Tito. There is bitterness in the former Yugoslavia to this day.

          Truman was not a Communist. It’s a miracle he survived his term in office. He kept the Commies out of the Greek government – again, gratitude among some older Greeks to this day.

          Like

          • happy2h says:

            Investing, great insight. Spot on regarding Truman and how he saved Greece. He was a good man in a pit of red vipers

            In my opinion He was able to stop the communist takeover of Greece, but not reverse the course taken Yugoslavia, for two reasons:

            1.) Greek civilization, both government and culture, are the pillars on which western society has been built. To let Greece fall to the communist would have been an absolute Embarrassment, for the whole western world.

            2.) The communist plot against Greece was post war. Tito was endored by England in 1943 and the United States followed suit. But there is overwhelming evidence that our OSS did not support Tito. England has always greatly influenced U.S foreign policy.

            It was the Brits and Churchill that pushed the United States to abandon their Serbian allies, and support communist Tito and the Partisans. Or for better clarity they abandoned the “Home Army”, loyal to the Yugoslav King. Both were almost entirely Serbian. But it was the much larger (at the time of the switch to Tito) “Home army” (Cetniks), led by General Mihajlovic, that fought the Nazi’s and their Croatian and Bosnian Muslim collaborators. At the time of the techtonic shift in support, Tito was only fighting against the Yugoslav royal army.

            It is certainly possible that some close to FDR, were communist saboteurs, but there is overwhelming evidence that Churchill’s inner circle and foreign based intelligence officers were feeding him lies and communist propaganda. See follow up post.

            Like

          • happy2h says:

            I cannot confirm your statement that FDR was a communist, (really would be interested to learn some new facts). But there is no doubt that that Churchill’s inner circle and foreign intelligence offices routinely fed false battle reports and other communist fabrications back to Churchill.

            This is excellently and extensively documented by one of the foremost experts in WWII English intelligence, David Martin, in his book; Web of Disinformation: Churchill’s Yugoslav Blunder. I highly recommend it. The book is a culmination of Martin’s 40+ year quest to prove how Churchill was deceived and why the allies abandoned General Mihajlovic and left the fate of Yugoslavia in Communists.

            Here is one excerpt that highlights the OSS objections to the catastrophic shift to Tito:

            “It is noteworthy that the OSS (Office of Strategic Services) was less impressed with Tito. Based on a 40-page field report filed by Capt. Walter Mansfield at the end of March 1944, the U. S. offered to continue supplying Mihailovic. OSS’s founder and chief, “Wild Bill” Donovan, argued that the Western Allies needed to keep their options open in the Balkans. This proposal was flatly rejected by Churchill. Col. S.W. Bailey, of British intelligence, actually called for Mihailovic’s assassination.”

            People can try to rewrite history but the truth will always eventually come out.

            Like

  34. andi lee says:

    A look back on Rand Paul’s deeply passionate rejection on renewing, and expansion of, Obama’s version of the Patriot Act.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. MIKE says:

    My question is, what’s it going to take to get Tom Cotton on the Trump Train?
    I think he’s worth flipping. Am I wrong?

    Like

    • Bull Durham says:

      He’s locked in his ideological box. He is convinced he sees the world correctly.
      He’ll be with us for 40 years unless he dies prematurely. This is McCain redux.

      Liked by 1 person

      • andi lee says:

        In total agreement.

        As an aside, wikileaks exposes McCain as compromised in some manner. Of interest is the specific email addresses.

        Ref: Podesta email
        Subject titled, “Mission Accomplished”

        https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/22912

        Like

      • MVW says:

        McCain is crooked, on Hillary’s sack’m team, then plunder everything except the screams of the exploited children sold to muslims.

        Paul also has a profession.

        Ideology gives us a compass when the wind is blowing and no land is in sight, it is what stands behind the Declaration of Independence.

        You blow a lot of hot air sometimes.

        Like

  36. Albertus Magnus says:

    I think everyone needs to calm down.

    Sessions is going to go through. He already has the support of the liberal GOPers like Susan Collins. However,

    the ones at stake are primarily DeVos and then 1 or 2 of his financial secretary picks because of their Wall Street ties.

    He is going for the whole thing. If he believes he needs Sessions’ vote to get these through, he will delay Sessions to get them, especially DeVos.

    There will be a PUBLIC fight over Sessions that we will win that will be used by BOTH sides to get organized for the REAL challenge, getting the SCOTUS nominee through WITHOUT pulling the nuclear option, which McConnell prefers not to do.

    Watch and see.

    10 days from now, you will likely have ALL nominees confirmed, have just won a skirmish over Sessions and the troops will need to be ready for the big battle…the SCOTUS confirmation.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bull Durham says:

      They don’t have the votes to stop Mnuchin or Ross. and these two will do more for the economy than anything outside of the Trump efforts himself.

      DeVos will get through. She looked like a block of titanium taking those hits.

      This is scumbag tactics by Dems and UniParty trying to bully Trump.

      The team in the Oval Office is holding fire. When the nominees are done, they’ll hit hard.

      SC nominee will be pure gold. They know the ideology will be attacked, but every other aspect will be pre-tested by the Oval Office. He’s got 20 to choose from. He’ll pick the strongest personality who can whether the storm. They pre-test these people in sessions simulating the hearings. It’s like training for a fight. Have to learn how to take the heat, when to reply hard, when to be meek.

      I could never pass the test. I’d be ripping the place up and smashing heads.
      Senators are worse than ticks and fleas on a mangy dog. I always recall the scene in African Queen when Humphrey Bogart comes out of the water covered in blood sucking leeches. That’s a Senate committee when they attack.

      Like

  37. Pam says:

    Chad Pergram ‏@ChadPergram
    Immediate cmte votes on Rick Perry for Energy and Ryan Zinke for Interior delayed

    Like

  38. WhyNot132 says:

    Still, it would be 10 days loss because of people like Rubio and Paul. Rand Paul was publicly against many nominees because at one point or another they said something about something they he didn’t like. Grandstanding.

    Like

  39. feralcatsblog says:

    JFK was reported to have said that he wished he could splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and cast it to the winds.

    Like

  40. truthseekerr says:

    reagan almost got it too. 3 months in

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bull Durham says:

      Both were “outside” the Established power groups.
      Trump fits that more than either of them.

      Pray every day, each time you see him and are proud and glad. A little prayer for his protection.

      Like

  41. andi lee says:

    I totally missed this hearing in Nov 2016 but
    an excerpt of, Mike Pompeo “destroys Director of National Intelligence”

    Liked by 1 person

    • dayallaxeded says:

      Anyone know the ID of the meathead, with the telling eye-checks and head knods, over Crapper’s right shoulder during the video above? That guy should be the target of intense scrutiny. Every gesture/expression says he’s the guy who briefed Crapper and insured that <0bummer’s mooseslime water was carried.

      Like

  42. Dale says:

    I have had experience with Electronic Intelligence and while I know that it would be more efficient to roll 17 different agencies into one or two, I feel that this type of centralization of power would do more to threaten or freedom.

    IMHO having many agencies spreads out the power and offers some modicum of protection to the citizens.

    Like

  43. paulgilpin says:

    rand paul is a young john mccain with better hair.

    Like

  44. JAS says:

    The whole construct of the agency has been suspect to me from the get go.

    “We are a Nation of Laws”, or so the saying goes. There is a very good reason that the CIA is not allowed to operate domestically. CIA operations are by their very nature de facto illegal in our country. The question then becomes why do we have an agency the purpose of which is to do things all over the world that are illegal in our own country? Well, we need that capability. But not without accountability.

    The agency’s history is rife with scandals that have cost a lot of people their careers and freedoms, their lives; actions initiated by our own Presidents that used the agency’s secretive existence to bypass our laws. Air America, Iran-Contra, Benghazi to name just three.

    There is also a big problem in that the very way the agency is organized omits even the most basic checks and balances, another of the very principles our Nation was founded upon,

    An agency that by its very nature is commissioned to perform covert “actions” (spelled attacks) on our enemies cannot at the same time be responsible for GATHERING and INTERPRETING the intelligence that lead to those covert actions. Checks and balances immediately go out the window with that construct. “Take our word for it”? I don’t think so.

    We should have the CIA collect intelligence in the field, period. Another separate agency should then thoroughly evaluate that intelligence on its merits, both for accuracy and legality. Finally, another separate agency, one that is subject to our laws, the UCMJ for example, should be tasked with the execution of covert actions.

    i don’t see it working any other way, lest we abandon the basic principle our country was built upon, namely, “We are a Nation of Laws”.

    Like

  45. Garrison Hall says:

    ‘We need strong guardians on the wall; scary men skilled in war are necessary for our security. We also need the ability to stop the blood letting before we cross the line into blood-lust.”

    You’ve succinctly described what it means to be a warrior, Sundance. True warriors can do both, can clearly understand when it’s necessary to do one and when to stop and do the other. The American military has a long tradition of deliberately searching out and then empowering/promoting real warriors. The American intelligence apparatus not so much. The deep state, not at all. In fact, the actions of the deep state are repugnant to America’s warrior class. I think Trump understood this when he made sure he had combat generals in his cabinet.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s