Discussion about this post

User's avatar
K Tucker Andersen's avatar

An addendum to my previous comment. Regardless of your feelings about the controversial persona;tires Oliver Stine and Edward Snowden, if you have not seen Stone’s documentary Snowden I suggest provides a lot of nuanced insights into the story, I am not a fanboy of Snowden, and as a result almost did not attend a screening to which I was invited. But since I make it a practice to attempt to keep an open mind with regard toco plex subjects of which I have limited knowledge, I decided to attend and was very glad that I did.

Expand full comment
K Tucker Andersen's avatar

From what I heard and have read, I agree with your conclusions regarding the odds of the confirmation of each of these three nominees. Also agree with your comments regarding the pros and cons of Patel’s likely confirmation, but on balance believe the pros of him heading the FBI far outweigh the cons . Comey and Wray both were disasters in my opinion, and exemplified the worst if the deep state.

With regard to Kennedy, just as his approval is probably a coin flip ( but perhaps with the coin weighted in Trump’s favor, not Bobby’s as a reason why he might be confirmed) , I also think that the pros and cons of him heading the agency are a close call but it is so in need of major reform that I think only an insider can succeed and that he has devoted his whole life to improving the health of our citizens , even if I disagree with some of his conclusions I support his zeal in reexamine the science of our medicine ( the approval of the mRNA not really vaccines for the general public and particularly our healthy youth almost certainly took more lives than they saved) and to highlight the problems with our food supply and thus in the end I would also cheer his confirmation.

I am prepared for Tulsi to not be confirmed but nevertheless will be devastated if she is not. Unfortunately, there is no chance any Democrat will vote for her, both our of their enforced party unity and because most of them genuinely despise her for “deserting the party “ and while doing so calling out its wokeness. I agree with her stand on Snowden, but would have phrased my reply as “ I do not regard Snowden’s intent was traitorous , but whether he is legally a traitor would have to be decide by a jury, and I understand why he does not want to subject himself to that risk”. And from hearing her discuss the situation in other contexts, I think that is actually her nuanced position. I have no opinion on her Assad visit, but I do not think that a vote to approve her should be decided on whether you agree or disagree with her in two discrete instances. Rather , in the role of DNI you want an obvious patriot, thoughtful , well informed, intelligent person who has strong convictions and will forcefully and articulately argue for those convictions while understanding the chain of command and that she serves at the please of the Commander in Chief. You do not want a Swamp Creature who sticks their finger in the wind to decide their position and how strongly to advocate for it. She has served our country in the military and in Congress, and put country above party by her decision to leave the Democrativ Party ( or in reality recognizing that they left her) and opening herself to incredible abuse by the MSM. As you cal tell, I am a real fan, and have been for years. In fact.early in the 2020 primary proves a very good friend of mine who is centrist life long Democrat if there were any iffy candidates I would vote for as the Democratic nominee and much to his surprise I replied. “ from what I know and have seen about her Tulsi Gabbard” . and the country would have been I firmly better off for the last four years with her as President rather than Biden.

Expand full comment

No posts