Posted on 05/09/2018 11:51:32 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
President Trump's pick to lead the CIA, Gina Haspel, was adamant throughout her confirmation hearing on Wednesday that she would not restart previous "enhanced interrogation" techniques used by the Agency in the aftermath of the attacks on 9/11. But in questioning from various senators, Haspel would not explicitly say if those past techniques were immoral or wrong.
"My parents gave me a moral compass, I would never ever take CIA back to an interrogation program," she told the committee.
Under questioning by California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris, Haspel again would not explicitly say if past techniques at the CIA were immoral.
"I believe that the CIA did extraordinary work to prevent another attack," she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I am also a member of the branch of Conservatives that feels that it’s our borders and invaders in our country that we should be worrying about. I’m all for mutual respect among nations and religions as well.
But not only do I NOT feel that our actions in the Middle East and securing our own borders are mutually exclusive, I feel that they are strongly intertwined, as the 19 terrorists who killed our fellow Americans were here in our country legally, when they shouldn’t have been. And that also bears on respect for religions as well.
Not only do we NOT have to choose to do one or the other, I think it is vital that we do both, but as our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has taught us, what we do, and how we do it is important as well.
I personally don’t have any issue with regime change. It is, after all, what we pursued with the Soviet Union, successfully, and for good reason. My views on nation building, however have changed. I thought we were right to try, but Islam makes it, I believe, impossible, and going forward, conduct our foreign policy with that in mind.
We're still there.
We're still not doing a good enough job keeping potential terrorists out of the US.
I am not talking about them specifically, I am speaking about them generally. And I DON’T think we are doing a good job keeping them out of the US.
Why would she reveal that waterboarding is now off the table?
“Trump has nominated this women to head the CIA and we should back him in that decision. “
So I take from that statement, that you don't support him now.
The nitpicking and criticism at every turn that Trump gets from everyone around him, the RINOs and liberals and Deep Staters and Swamp creatures and many here on FR, it is a wonder he gets anything done.
It's him against the entire world of globalist creatures and various other enemies that are literally trying to forcibly remove him from office. All the while, he's trying to undo Obama's legacy and get some things accomplished that will help the country reverse the slide into a liberal, progressive state.
This is his decision, not yours. It's his cabinet, not yours. And as such, he should be able to pick who he wants, not who you want.
If his supporters don't have his back when he he's trying to maneuver around these coup-critters, then who does?
I am not a fair-weather supporter. He's my guy. He deserves my support in the face of everyone else complaining about something this gal said at a hearing.
Maybe Hillary would have picked someone more to your liking, huh?
“....if Trump has a change of heart about Gina Haspel after hearing what she said, I’ll back him for sure....”
So I take from that statement, that you don’t support him now.
Trump is not a conservative. He is not a liberal. He is not an ideologue at all. He's a successful business man who's been around the block more than a few times.
He makes decisions, not based on some conservative purity test for his nominees, but on who he feels comfortable with.
This gal is his choice. You seem to have some hang-up on something she said in her confirmation hearings.
I can guarantee you, Trump will not be bothered by it. And neither am I.
“So now you go straight to the name-calling phase? “Dishonest”? Pleeease. I am not dishonest just because I disagree with you. “
My argument is dishonest but I am not dishonest.
Is that different from Hillary Clinton spewing her dishonest spittle onto the American public but she herself is not dishonest?
Twisted yourself into a pretzel to come up with that logic.
“Oh, I get it now.
My argument is dishonest but I am not dishonest.
Is that different from Hillary Clinton spewing her dishonest spittle onto the American public but she herself is not dishonest? “
How is THAT dishonest?
Your argument is full of crap.
But, of course, I would never imply that YOU'RE FULL OF CRAP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.