Comments by "gary K" (@garyK.45ACP) on "Media goes after Trump’s CIA pick Gina Haspel" video.

  1. They hate women even more than they hate Trump. I can't wait to see Senate Democrats attack a woman. For being tough on terrorists. In an election year.
    15
  2. Thank you for our freedom! I disagree with you. As I stated, I am looking forward to Democrats attack a woman. For being tough on terrorists. In an election year. YOU have the right to disagree with ME and to vote for liberals who attack a woman for being tough on terrorists.
    1
  3. Peter S...I am disagreeing with you. Are you going to vote for liberal Senators?
    1
  4. Peter S...would you attack fellow military service members for following current rules of engagement because they are different from the rules of engagement when Obama was President? The woman was following and enforcing the rules of engagement in effect AT THE TIME. This woman was serving her country, just as you did,.You and I can differ on what those rules should be, but how can you attack someone for following what was the rule at the time? You make no sense. IF she had continued enhanced interrogation AFTER the rules changed, you would have an argument. She didn't. I am also dismayed that a person who defended our country's system would be willing to judge someone based on reports in the news. Innocent until proven guilty... by Twitter? Is that the standard YOU defended?
    1
  5. Peter S...your left wing, liberal stripes. I can no longer believe you aren't a liberal or ever served in the military. Some people will tell you that WAR is "never OK" but we have to respect people who followed the rules of engagement at the time of their service, don't we? Or is war just "never OK" and anyone who serves in the military is a murderer? Why do you think she was confirmed a year ago and now she can't be? Did she do something in the last year? Or is it because CNN told you to say that? Or is it because you hate women? Your excuses make no sense.
    1
  6. I never said it was in another country. I DID say I do not judge before knowing facts and I do not base my opinions on what CNN says. I DID say she was confirmed by the Senate a year ago for her current job and any denial of her for further advances are sexism and nothing else. Stop making lame excuses. You are a libtard who never served in the military.
    1
  7. So you are running away Peter? You ARE a libtard. Faced with any logical argument, you run. Typical. Definitely NOT a military person. Stop stealing valor from people who protected our freedom!
    1
  8. Called. They said they never heard of you. You aren't in the directory either. http://www.newriver.marines.mil/Portals/17/Documents/Phone%20Directory.pdf I am not going to give out my phone number to someone pretending to be military on the internet. And I am not going to run down any of your other bullshit either. Have a good laugh for making me chase down your last nonsense to prove you a liar. If you don't want to write any more, then just run away. "I rest my case" means "I'm leaving now" AKA running away. Thanks, Cap'n Crunch. I'll be here if you have anything else to say. If you have nothing else, I will just declare victory.
    1
  9. Stop it Cap'n Crunch. If you cannot make your point then maybe you should run away. Stop pretending and make your case...oh, you rested your case. I forgot.
    1
  10. Maybe you work at the Subway or the Wendy's? You are the crew captain at Wendy's? Should I try that number? LMFAO!!!!!!!
    1
  11. Like I said, random gamer...I am looking forward to what Senate Democrats do to a woman they confirmed a year ago. In an election year. For being tough on terrorists. Aren't you? She WILL be confirmed. If you don't like it...even better.
    1
  12. They didn't challenge it last year when she was confirmed for her current position. Dream on. This person does not "lead the country" and I made NO COMMENTS on what I am "in favor of". Please feel free to read what I wrote again. I stated some facts. She will be confirmed.
    1
  13. She is being attacked because she is a woman. Using the rules of engagement in force AT THE TIME against her is a lame excuse for blatant sexism. She was confirmed by the Senate for her current post. IF she had continued using enhanced interrogation during the period between the last time she was confirmed and now, that excuse would make sense. She didn't. It doesn't. It is pretty clear the Democrats have erected a glass ceiling for women and they don't want her to break it.
    1
  14. Herman47...So, what kind of torture did she do between the last time she was confirmed by the Senate and now? Or is it because Democrats just don't want a woman to go above the level of Deputy Director?
    1
  15. So Herman, did she do that since last year when she was confirmed by the Senate for her current job? Or do you use that as an excuse for hating women?
    1
  16. She was confirmed by the Senate in 2017 for her current position. If you oppose her now it is because you do not like women rising to the top level.
    1