By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - The Kremlin stopped Trump from appointing Mitt Romney as Secretary of State

SpokenTruth said:
Seventizz said:

Utter bull and more liberal fake news.  Romney was paid to bash Trump before the RNC. Why would Trump appoint him to anything?

Do you have the receipts?

Do I need any?  Romney called a Hinckley Institute press conference and did a press tour after that - some interviews conducted prior.  Whether or not the republicans paid him (they did) is irrelevant.  It still proves that the Trump team wouldn’t offer him any position within their cabinet.



Around the Network
Seventizz said:
SpokenTruth said:

Do you have the receipts?

Do I need any?  Romney called a Hinckley Institute press conference and did a press tour after that - some interviews conducted prior.  Whether or not the republicans paid him (they did) is irrelevant.  It still proves that the Trump team wouldn’t offer him any position within their cabinet.

So you made a claim you can't back up.  Twice now.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:
Seventizz said:

Do I need any?  Romney called a Hinckley Institute press conference and did a press tour after that - some interviews conducted prior.  Whether or not the republicans paid him (they did) is irrelevant.  It still proves that the Trump team wouldn’t offer him any position within their cabinet.

So you made a claim you can't back up.  Twice now.

And twice you miss my point that discredits these ridiculous allegations with something trivial.



deskpro2k3 said:
Puppyroach said:

Are you serious in arguing Trump supporters aren't big on social media? =)

And who claims that Trump won the election thanks to Russia? Give sources please. Arguing that Russia meddle in the election is not the same as arguing that Trump won because of it. If you can't tell the difference, well then I can't help you.

The rest of your post is just incoherent, you claim for example that people can't complain about problems with racism within the police force while wanting to have a police force at the same time? You don't understand that people want to get rid of racism within the police force for the very reason that they want a police force in society that people can trust? 

That guy don't seem to realize that Trump uses social media to campaign and to talk to his supporters, the same people that he is bashing. When I read that, I'm like, "da f@ck did I just read?" lol

I think projection if one of the main themes of the far-right. 



Seventizz said:
SpokenTruth said:

So you made a claim you can't back up.  Twice now.

And twice you miss my point that discredits these ridiculous allegations with something trivial.

Then stop making a claim if you can't back it up.  Stick to your point.  You muddy your own message.

A former presidential candidate being paid to negatively discuss Trump would be a big deal.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
Seventizz said:

And twice you miss my point that discredits these ridiculous allegations with something trivial.

Then stop making a claim if you can't back it up.  Stick to your point.  You muddy your own message.

A former presidential candidate being paid to negatively discuss Trump would be a big deal.

It was.  You realize a national press conference, press tour, pr team, and entourage cost money, right?  He wasn’t even running or tossing his name into the foray.  What other motive is there?



Seventizz said:
SpokenTruth said:

Then stop making a claim if you can't back it up.  Stick to your point.  You muddy your own message.

A former presidential candidate being paid to negatively discuss Trump would be a big deal.

It was.  You realize a national press conference, press tour, pr team, and entourage cost money, right?  He wasn’t even running or tossing his name into the foray.  What other motive is there?

Uh, no.  He gave a speech at the Hinckley Institute which he has lots of ties to.  A former campaign advisor and close personal friend is the former director.

And what PR tour?  Do you mean the one from 2012? 



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:
Seventizz said:

It was.  You realize a national press conference, press tour, pr team, and entourage cost money, right?  He wasn’t even running or tossing his name into the foray.  What other motive is there?

Uh, no.  He gave a speech at the Hinckley Institute which he has lots of ties to.  A former campaign advisor and close personal friend is the former director.

And what PR tour?  Do you mean the one from 2012? 

A simple YouTube search will show you the press he did after his speech.  But I think it’d be better to keep on topic with the thread and figure out if the Trump administration would bother giving Romney a position within their cabinet for the Russians to interfere with.



Puppyroach said:
AsGryffynn said:

This is exactly the same response I use to refer to the anti Russian hawks BEFORE the horrific accusations against anyone were leveled... You're daffy if you think Trump was going to appoint Romn even when Mr Tangerine hadn't liked him... 

You hate Russia for doing you a favor. Some of the people, meanwhile, over at my hometown wish Russia had rolled tanks down La Rambla after the CG reached Barcelona... 

If there's no proof, I refuse to believe it. Testimony from people with interests involving Russia are automatically rejected. Also, I refuse to believe loons like Christopher Steele, who cited something as ridiculous as a "piss-dossier" as proof... 

Then there's your sanctions, which translate to "The European Union must sanction Russia, because we say so..." and the fact we have already made it clear we are not going to do that. 

1. I never claimed Trump would have appointed Romney. I only say that the timeline of Steeles memos are important and relevant. And you are the one making the assumptions here once more.

2. I don't hate Russia. Being critical of the leadership of a country doesn't mean you hate the country. I oppose the way Russia basically invaded Crimea just as I oppose any cases where the US invades other countries or conduct made up wars just to fuel their own industries. I try to be consistent in that criticism.

3. So you mean the police for example should never use testimony from, say, other criminals in their investigations since those criminals have a vested interest and are not trustworthy? Then you would not solve basically any high profile criminal cases. I do agree that you shouldn't believe anything without proof. But you should then atleast  be consistent and open to accept evidence from anyone, even those who have their own agenda. Evidence is evidence, regardless of the source.

4. Nope, the sanctions has nothing to do with the EU. They were agreed upon by a super majority in both the house and the senate and still not enforced by the president. Let us speculate and imagine how Trump and the GOP would have reacted if Clinton or Obama would have refused to enact sanctions after a decision from a super majority? Well, we do have some indication on how they would have reacted considering the response to Obamas executive actions through the years and how Trump thought Obama was "weak" in his approach to other countries. 

Well, if he wouldn't have picked Romney, then it makes no sense whatsoever to dissuade him from naming him instead. Thus the argument logically dissolves. Also, I think we made it clear the Steele dossier is not to be believed. Among all incriminating materials, it's right there with Fire and Fury

Also, that puts us on the same channel, as I too believe invasions are unwarranted, but at this point I've realized neither country intends to back down and be the moral example here, so I no longer expect either to pony up in this regard... 

Testimony can be used only when it's exhaustive enough. It needs evidence that hints it might be true. So far we have evidence Russians basically ran their own lobbying group, but I don't see torches and pitchforks outside AIPAC. When we have evidence the Russians violated laws and committed criminal offenses or administrative ones, then I will voice my disapproval. 

The sanctions the House approved sanction companies abroad with Russian investment. The latest Nordstream and European power companies conveniently left out would then be sanctioned for doing business as usual solely because the US said so. This didn't sit well with the talking heads in Brussels at all. They voiced this much themselves. 



Epic was right all along... 

Cubedramirez said:
I am starting to believe that people who believe Russia and Trump worked together are in the same group of 9/11 truthers.

Now that's not fair to associate us with them...

 

There is actually some REAL, rational evidence that the official story of 9/11 is not correct. :P



 

"We hold these truths t-be self-ful evident. All men and women created by the.. Go-you know the.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden