I encourage you to listen to the John Kiriakou interview on the Useful Idiots podcast for an alternate perspective on all this. He goes into some detail about what it means to be a literal "asset" of a foreign government and how Clinton knew what she was doing by saying that about Gabbard. Speaking with you rather than rj on this because I think you're capable of critical thought. It's not my favorite podcast, I find the hosts pretty annoying in their own ways, but they have guests like this that aren't given much exposure in other media and it's worth hearing them out.
Kiriakou was charged with breaking the Espionage Act for exposing the torture program in 2012, so he has a unique experience and point of view about the intelligence community and the way the media describes whistleblowers, etc.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...dcast-john-kiriakou-cia-espionage-act-906981/
Yep, you use "critical thought" so well in your rep response.
But Kiriakou isn't a Federal, elected official who gives credibility to people just by meeting them. To cover for anyone's crimes against humanity is being used by that person/country as an asset for them whether you are paid or not.
My bad, that would take "critical thought".