Rand Paul casts doubt on support of a Petraeus pick

[kaz]

And it's working

Sure if you consider an echo chamber where you and the media that everyone hates are the only ones listening working...

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

Got it, no one is shit in DC who didn't win a State. A ridiculous standard, but then you're a ridiculous person being a Nazi and all

 

[bendog]

Trump needs to steer clear of Bush/Obama retreads. Especially Petraeus. He'll always be associated with Bush's awful Iraq War blunder. So Rand's right, Trump should definitely pass on Petraeus.

Then out of who he has before him who do you suggest? NONE of them I particularly love. I DESPISE Romney and Bolton,Don't care for Corker,Meh on Giuiliani and Petraeus.

That's sort of what happens when a candidate shits all over war heros. He limits his pool of candidates. Corker's highly qualified, but the McCain comments cannot have sat well. And Corker has a history of standing up to Trump. Tom Cotton is probably available. LOL

PS, goper on Senate For Relations Comm.

Chairman, Bob Corker

• James E. Risch

• Marco Rubio

• Ron Johnson

• Jeff Flake

• Cory Gardner

• David Perdue

• Johnny Isakson

• Rand Paul

• John Barrasso

 

[paulitician]

And it's working

Sure if you consider an echo chamber where you and the media that everyone hates are the only ones listening working...

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

You should research Rand Paul a bit more. He's a strong advocate for preserving Civil Liberties. He doesn't get a whole lotta support from his Party because some of his stances on issues don't sit well with the current Globalist Establishment leadership.

He advocates a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, abolishing the Patriot Act & NDAA, decriminalizing some drugs, and reducing our massive prison population. I like the dude. I wish more Republicans were like him.

 

[kaz]

Sure if you consider an echo chamber where you and the media that everyone hates are the only ones listening working...

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

You should research Rand Paul a bit more. He's a strong advocate for preserving Civil Liberties. He doesn't get a whole lotta support from his Party because some of his stances on issues don't sit well with the current Globalist Establishment leadership.

He's advocates a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, abolishing the Patriot Act & NDAA, decriminalizing some drugs, and reducing our massive prison population. I like the dude. I wish more Republicans were like him.

Keep in mind he's a constipated socialist and Paul isn't either one, so of course he's not going to like him. But yeah, Paul is one of the best Republicans

 

[toomuchtime_]

Petraeus is unqualified to be SOS. He is a convict. He leaked classified information, much less mis-storing it. No.

I thought it was going to be ironic when they extended a job to Patraeus on Fox News. But THIS? Convicted of mishandling information and considering him for it really shows that mishandling information is not really a disqualifier.

Now Republicans will have to figure out a way to say its not a big deal after Trump made them believe it was all this time.

Not a problem. Petraeus is a very impressive man and will be easily confirmed by the Senate.

He is impressive but he also was convicted for mishandling classified info.

More specifically, he confided some classified information to some one he had reason to trust just as thousands of military officers and politicians do to their wives and lovers. When accused, he confessed, apologized to his family and to the country and accepted his punishment with dignity. The question now is, can he be trusted not to repeat that mistake? Trump will have to make that judgement.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Only an idiot or a prig would claim Petraeus is not qualified.

Petraeus demonstrated a lack of qualifications to be at the rank he was besides hoping to be the SoS. He is not the man for the job.

How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time

David Petraeus shared classified info. Now can he be secretary of state?

Can David Petraeus be secretary of state?

Silly stuff. Both Bush and Obama recognized his brilliance and leadership ability, and his one error in confiding in a woman he had reason to trust is an error made by thousands of military officers and politicians everywhere.

With this post you are confirming what I said, that you would rather America fail than Trump succeed in improving our security and economy.

Army officers commanding troops abroad do NOT commonly have mistresses, while their wives work with stateside army wives to keep families afloat while the men defend our country. And army officers do NOT commonly give secret info to their mistresses to write news stories with.

And you know all the secrets of army officers.

Code of Military justice, snowflake.

In other words, you don't know what military officers do.

 

[paulitician]

Trump needs to steer clear of Bush/Obama retreads. Especially Petraeus. He'll always be associated with Bush's awful Iraq War blunder. So Rand's right, Trump should definitely pass on Petraeus.

Then out of who he has before him who do you suggest? NONE of them I particularly love. I DESPISE Romney and Bolton,Don't care for Corker,Meh on Giuiliani and Petraeus.

I'm sure there's better folks to choose. Petraeus represents old failed Establishment policies. He was part of the awful Bush and Obama regimes. Trump should steer way clear of any Bush/Obama retreads. That would be my advice.

 

[oreo]

Republican Sen. Rand Paul said there's a "potential problem" with retired Gen. David Petraeus as secretary of state because of his "similarities" with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on classified information.

"You know, I think the problem they're going to have if they put him forward is there's a lot of similarities to Hillary Clinton as far as revealing classified information," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "I think that's a potential problem."

Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay a $100,000 fine for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.

But during the campaign, Trump castigated Clinton for her handling of classified information, despite the fact that an FBI investigation resulted in no charges being brought against her.

Rand Paul casts doubt on support of a Petraeus pick - CNNPolitics.com

One of the best parts of the election being over has been Rand Paul smacking down nearly all of Trump's rumored Secretary of State nominees. Maybe his terrible campaign taught him that becoming a hack to be palatable to a mainstream who will always hate him regardless doesn't make any sense. I would enjoy watching him be a thorn in Trump's side for four years.

General Petraeus, as CIA director was actually FOUND GUILTY, of taking CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS and handing them over to his mistress to write a book about himself. Then he lied about it, they found the documents stuffed up inside his attic, he was charged and found guilty.
James Comey: David Petraeus case worse than Hillary Clinton's emails - CNNPolitics.com

Why Petraeus was even considered for Secretary of State, or any position within the Trump administration is beyond any rational comprehension.

 

[Preacher]

Sure if you consider an echo chamber where you and the media that everyone hates are the only ones listening working...

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

Got it, no one is shit in DC who didn't win a State. A ridiculous standard, but then you're a ridiculous person being a Nazi and all

Stop throwing a fit snowflake. Its pathetic. You let me know when you grow up and move out of mommy's basement mmk?

 

[paulitician]

Trump needs to steer clear of Bush/Obama retreads. Especially Petraeus. He'll always be associated with Bush's awful Iraq War blunder. So Rand's right, Trump should definitely pass on Petraeus.

Then out of who he has before him who do you suggest? NONE of them I particularly love. I DESPISE Romney and Bolton,Don't care for Corker,Meh on Giuiliani and Petraeus.

That's sort of what happens when a candidate shits all over war heros. He limits his pool of candidates. Corker's highly qualified, but the McCain comments cannot have sat well. And Corker has a history of standing up to Trump. Tom Cotton is probably available. LOL

PS, goper on Senate For Relations Comm.

Chairman, Bob Corker

• James E. Risch

• Marco Rubio

• Ron Johnson

• Jeff Flake

• Cory Gardner

• David Perdue

• Johnny Isakson

• Rand Paul

• John Barrasso

I will remind you, our military and veterans overwhelmingly supported Trump over Clinton. They will never forgive her and Obama for how they ran the VA. Many Veterans have died begging for care. Trump will address their awful VA mess soon.

 

[bendog]

Petraeus demonstrated a lack of qualifications to be at the rank he was besides hoping to be the SoS. He is not the man for the job.

How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time

David Petraeus shared classified info. Now can he be secretary of state?

Can David Petraeus be secretary of state?

Silly stuff. Both Bush and Obama recognized his brilliance and leadership ability, and his one error in confiding in a woman he had reason to trust is an error made by thousands of military officers and politicians everywhere.

With this post you are confirming what I said, that you would rather America fail than Trump succeed in improving our security and economy.

Army officers commanding troops abroad do NOT commonly have mistresses, while their wives work with stateside army wives to keep families afloat while the men defend our country. And army officers do NOT commonly give secret info to their mistresses to write news stories with.

And you know all the secrets of army officers.

Code of Military justice, snowflake.

In other words, you don't know what military officers do.

fuck off, punk.

Personally, I think Petreaus could do the job, despite being disgraced militarily. But, I don't see how he gets 50 votes.

 

[Preacher]

Sure if you consider an echo chamber where you and the media that everyone hates are the only ones listening working...

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

You should research Rand Paul a bit more. He's a strong advocate for preserving Civil Liberties. He doesn't get a whole lotta support from his Party because some of his stances on issues don't sit well with the current Globalist Establishment leadership.

He's advocates a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, abolishing the Patriot Act & NDAA, decriminalizing some drugs, and reducing our massive prison population. I like the dude. I wish more Republicans were like him.

I know all about him. I was a libertarian at the time he decided to run for Senate and supported him. I agree with his Foreign Policy and the PA and NDAA. I don't agree on the rest though.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Petraeus is unqualified to be SOS. He is a convict. He leaked classified information, much less mis-storing it. No.

I thought it was going to be ironic when they extended a job to Patraeus on Fox News. But THIS? Convicted of mishandling information and considering him for it really shows that mishandling information is not really a disqualifier.

Now Republicans will have to figure out a way to say its not a big deal after Trump made them believe it was all this time.

Not a problem. Petraeus is a very impressive man and will be easily confirmed by the Senate.

He is impressive but he also was convicted for mishandling classified info.

More specifically, he confided some classified information to some one he had reason to trust just as thousands of military officers and politicians do to their wives and lovers. When accused, he confessed, apologized to his family and to the country and accepted his punishment with dignity. The question now is, can he be trusted not to repeat that mistake? Trump will have to make that judgement.

You can put a positive spin along with a "everybody does it" head fake all you like but after whining and complaining for more than a year about mishandling information you're going to look stupid trying to take it all back now

 

[kaz]

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

Got it, no one is shit in DC who didn't win a State. A ridiculous standard, but then you're a ridiculous person being a Nazi and all

Stop throwing a fit snowflake. Its pathetic. You let me know when you grow up and move out of mommy's basement mmk?

The difference between a national socialist and a Nazi is like the difference between a male and female dung beetle. No one knows the difference but you

 

[g5000]

I think a Petraeus confirmation hearing would be priceless.

"Let me get this straight. You created a private unsecured email account so you could pass highly sensitive classified information to your mistress?!?!"

"I believe those are the required qualifications to be Secretary of State these days, Senator."


Donald Trump got a lot of mileage and votes out of someone passing our nation's secrets via email. And he said if he was President, that person would be in jail.

And now he nominates an adulterer who passed to his mistress classified information regarding the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings.


Don't worry. It's okay if Trump does it. Just ask his Chumps.

 

[kaz]

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

You should research Rand Paul a bit more. He's a strong advocate for preserving Civil Liberties. He doesn't get a whole lotta support from his Party because some of his stances on issues don't sit well with the current Globalist Establishment leadership.

He's advocates a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, abolishing the Patriot Act & NDAA, decriminalizing some drugs, and reducing our massive prison population. I like the dude. I wish more Republicans were like him.

I know all about him. I was a libertarian at the time he decided to run for Senate and supported him. I agree with his Foreign Policy and the PA and NDAA. I don't agree on the rest though.

So you went from small government to totalitarian government? What triggered that epiphany?

 

[paulitician]

Obviously it's not working if they don't have the support of a Nazi. I see your point

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

You should research Rand Paul a bit more. He's a strong advocate for preserving Civil Liberties. He doesn't get a whole lotta support from his Party because some of his stances on issues don't sit well with the current Globalist Establishment leadership.

He's advocates a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, abolishing the Patriot Act & NDAA, decriminalizing some drugs, and reducing our massive prison population. I like the dude. I wish more Republicans were like him.

I know all about him. I was a libertarian at the time he decided to run for Senate and supported him. I agree with his Foreign Policy and the PA and NDAA. I don't agree on the rest though.

Well, he's not your classic Libertarian. He isn't his Father. But as far as Republicans go, he's the closest thing. I really do wish more Republicans would support him.

 

[kaz]

Petraeus is unqualified to be SOS. He is a convict. He leaked classified information, much less mis-storing it. No.

I thought it was going to be ironic when they extended a job to Patraeus on Fox News. But THIS? Convicted of mishandling information and considering him for it really shows that mishandling information is not really a disqualifier.

Now Republicans will have to figure out a way to say its not a big deal after Trump made them believe it was all this time.

Not a problem. Petraeus is a very impressive man and will be easily confirmed by the Senate.

He is impressive but he also was convicted for mishandling classified info.

More specifically, he confided some classified information to some one he had reason to trust just as thousands of military officers and politicians do to their wives and lovers. When accused, he confessed, apologized to his family and to the country and accepted his punishment with dignity. The question now is, can he be trusted not to repeat that mistake? Trump will have to make that judgement.

You can put a positive spin along with a "everybody does it" head fake all you like but after whining and complaining for more than a year about mishandling information you're going to look stupid trying to take it all back now

You mean like you look right now for doing the reverse with Hillary? QFT, you do look pretty damned stupid

 

[kaz]

We saw how much support Pandering Paul got in the primaries eh? LOL...he is not even close to his father...his father had principles and much like me he refused to change them to pander to people. His son is a cuck.

So your definition of relevance is primary votes? So in your mind, no one is relevant in DC but Trump, Bernie and Hillary? That's a pretty stupid definition

If people liked him and liked what he was saying he would have won at least 1 damn state. They didn't. He does nothing but whine in DC to get attention he is barely known. He WAS known when he first ran because he used his fathers supporters to win. He has done nothing but pander HEAVILY and it got him no where.

You should research Rand Paul a bit more. He's a strong advocate for preserving Civil Liberties. He doesn't get a whole lotta support from his Party because some of his stances on issues don't sit well with the current Globalist Establishment leadership.

He's advocates a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, abolishing the Patriot Act & NDAA, decriminalizing some drugs, and reducing our massive prison population. I like the dude. I wish more Republicans were like him.

I know all about him. I was a libertarian at the time he decided to run for Senate and supported him. I agree with his Foreign Policy and the PA and NDAA. I don't agree on the rest though.

Well, he's not your classic Libertarian. He isn't his Father. But as far as Republicans go, he's the closest thing. I really do wish more Republicans would support him.

Agreed, that's why I agree with he's one of the best "Republicans." His father killed his effectiveness with his ever inflating ego. Hopefully Rand won't go down the same path. It would be nice if he discovered a more true libertarian path though. You're not actually a libertarian either though

 

[bendog]

Trump could tap either Risch or Barrasso and be assured of a goper taking the senate seat. Ghouliani would be a messy confirmation fight, and he'd be ethically impaired from day one, Petreaus wouldn't be donfirmed, imo, and I really don't see why Trump would spend capital on forcing Romeny on his public. Either of those two senators are well qualified and would sail through confirmation.

But then, we would not be treated to the daily reality tv melodrama.