He was one of the few sources of truth concerning (the nonexistence of) weapons of mass destruction in the build up to the Iraq invasion. And he was willing to go public. I think he was on active duty then, so I'm not sure how he managed it.
Until now, I've always found his analysis honest and insightful. All that make me not want to dismiss anything he says too lightly.
I see people referring to this dude as a source of truth a lot and I cannot fathom why.
Why is a convicted pedophile who hasn’t held a security clearance for over a decade a reputable source of info?
Am I missing something?
I also hear him connected to Tucker and CandyO, and what the hell happened way of speaking.
He was one of the few sources of truth concerning (the nonexistence of) weapons of mass destruction in the build up to the Iraq invasion. And he was willing to go public. I think he was on active duty then, so I'm not sure how he managed it.
Until now, I've always found his analysis honest and insightful. All that make me not want to dismiss anything he says too lightly.