Replies

There was more to my comment than his being a Bain shareholder. I pointed out that he was a major public figure, who thinks he should be President. As such, he should be expected to take a position on Chinese trade deals vs. national security, no? Of course, if he does respond, we will be treated to more typical Romney spin and weasel-words.

It's unlikely Romney will respond. Same with Bain staff. I doubt the media will even bother to ask them about it.

Hunter needs to collect the dots a lot better to get any traction with this (currently) weak instrument.

I think Hunter was using this deal to draw attention to the fact that Romney is part of the same problem as Hillary, although perhaps less overtly treasonous.

Actually, Hillary doesn't have a fraction of the problems that Bill had with it. Hillary is cashing in big on Wall Street and even with defense contractors which really is quite shocking to me. Apparently, they decided she was going to win no matter what so they're appeasing her with donations. Later, maybe they'll give some money to the GOP nominee. Maybe.

It says something when the defense contractors won't even support Hunter who has been pretty good on procurement and weapon modernization programs over the years and is as gung-ho over Iraq as a person could be. Same applies to McCain really but McCain has had a lot more fundraising success earlier but let his staff fritter it away.

I agree that Romney will not bother responding. However, I hope Hunter gets some Republicans thinking about this. That was probably his main goal. Also, he may bring it up at a debate, where Romney will do his usual Clintonesque obfuscation and spin.

As for Hillary having less of a problem with Chinese influence that Bill, I think that's ludicrous. She's awash in laundered Chinese campaign money. Yes, it's true that the corporate interests are funnelling her money also, but that's because they are (as another poster here put it) whores, without a shred of patriotism. They are only concerned about the short-term profit picture. It could be argued that a looming Chinese military threat is "good for business" (in the short term), from the standpoint of defense contractors.

It says something when the defense contractors won't even support Hunter who has been pretty good on procurement and weapon modernization programs over the years and is as gung-ho over Iraq as a person could be.

Indeed it does. It proves Hunter wouldn't go along with their bribes, like many did. Maybe that's the kind of guy they're looking for....one they can more easily influence.