Jake Tapper

Rank 9 of 47

Score 117

Reposted by Jake Tapper 🦅

-2

Exactly. And for Dave Smith, I’ll give you a simple answer about “what we got” for my sacrifice and the ultimate sacrifice my friends paid: NO MORE 9/11’s. That’s what we got.

Thank you Dave Smith for revealing what a truly reprehensible person you actually are. I thought it

Frank McCormick

@CBHeresy

Don’t attack veterans for fighting the wars they were called to serve.

If this is the type of country we are becoming, we truly are in decline. No society lasts without honor for those sworn to its defense.

11/24/2025, 10:45:33 PM

The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the impact of military service and the outcomes of the war in Afghanistan. It defends the sacrifices made by veterans and criticizes another individual's comments as disrespectful. The tone is defensive and accusatory, aiming to highlight the perceived benefits of military actions in preventing further attacks like 9/11.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement aims to defend veterans and their sacrifices, aligning with the principle of doing no harm by advocating for respect towards them. [+1]
Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
The statement violates the principle of respecting privacy and dignity by calling someone 'reprehensible,' which is a personal attack. [-1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement does not engage in constructive criticism and instead resorts to personal attacks, violating this principle. [-2]