Trump to huddle with influential Republicans in D.C.

WND ^ | 3/19/2016

[BlackFemaleArmyColonel]

Confab ahead of AIPAC speech meant to improve relationship with congressional GOP.

Donald Trump will host a group of nearly two dozen influential Republicans on Monday afternoon for an off-the-record gathering that his allies hope will improve his relationship with the congressional GOP and the party’s Washington establishment, according to two attendees.

The meeting is Trump’s first major meeting with lawmakers and key Republican figures since last fall, when he met with a smaller group at the Capitol after his speech at a protest against the Iranian nuclear agreement.

Several members of the House and Senate are expected to participate, plus a bevy of consultants and veteran power brokers, the attendees said, requesting anonymity to discuss the session.

[goodwithagun]

So you know exactly what will happen at the meeting? Tell me next week’s lottery numbers. The cult like speculation is creepy.

[GLDNGUN]

So you know exactly what will happen at the meeting? Tell me next week’s lottery numbers. The cult like speculation is creepy.

Which meeting are you referring to specifically? Or was that just a rhetorical question and you aren't really interested in engaging?

[goodwithagun]

The meeting that is the topic of the article. The meeting you claim is about Trump uniting. THE MEETING THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF YOUR POST. Go away. Just go away. SMH.

[GLDNGUN]

The meeting that is the topic of the article. The meeting you claim is about Trump uniting. THE MEETING THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF YOUR POST. Go away. Just go away. SMH.

The entire point of my post was responding to those Cruz supporters comparing Trump and Cruz meetings. I simply asked you which meeting you were referring specifically to.

Evidently that was too much to ask. As I thought was perhaps the case, you aren't interested in an reasonable exchange of ideas. You want to set yourself up as some sort of mistreated victim here on FR, so you can go cry to JimRob about it. Well, Boo Friggin' Hoo.

And then you tell me to "go away"? I aint going anywhere.

When you get a minute, look up the phrase "passive aggressive".

Yeah, that's you.

[FreeReign]

So he is fine working with Graham, Bush, Romney, or whoever. He will sell his soul to ANYONE, even the most evil, vile, radical leftists IF it will help him "win".

You offer no evidence whatsoever that Cruz is selling his soul. What positions has Cruz changed?

And you offer no criticism of Trump "working with" Christie, Julie Annie, Scott Brown and Ben TPP Carson, and whoever he's meeting with this week.

But the people he thinks he is using, are really using him.

And you assume that the GOPe is using Cruz instead of the other way around, where Cruz is using the GOPe.

[LMAO]

Regarding your point ...with the exception of BO and the current completely complicit Repub Congress , most Presidents have to make deals at times ... Trump would be a far more effective operator of the bully pulpit and would utilize it with great success ..
Do you truly think that there is another candidate out there that wouldn’t have to make deals at times ? We might not even hold Congress this cycle if this GOPe nonsense continues, so this might be mute point ... I’m not fully convinced that Trump will even win now, as it’s quite obvious that the GOPe is running scorched earth interference for the DIMs

---

Lol

I’m beginning to have sympathy for the likes of McCain, Romney, Jeb, and Lindsey Graham. They all bragged about their ability to work with Democrats and make deals with them and they’ve been vilified here for doing such and rightly so. Trump picks the most left of the left that he will make deals with and his supporters praise him for his ability to make deals.

It is acceptable to question what kind of deals does he think he will get fromPelosi and Schumer. Gun bans? Amnesty? You’ve avoided so far answering the questions I raised
I gotta hand it to Trump. He’s cast quite the magic spell on his supporters. But, like he said, he could shoot someone and his supporters wouldn’t abandon him.

[GLDNGUN]

And you assume that the GOPe is using Cruz instead of the other way around, where Cruz is using the GOPe.

No, I said they are using each other. But, ultimately, who has more power? Ted Cruz? Or the GOP-e? Ted Cruz is NOT going to get the magic number of delegates before the convention. Even he knows that. Just like Kasich knows he won't. The GOP-e has played several of the candidates already to further THEIR agenda, and the power-hungry politicians have played the willing victim THINKING (or trying to convince themselves) that it is in their best interest.

Marco Rubio. Classic case. He was told to go all "Don Rickles" on Trump. He obviously was told this would take down Trump and boost him up. That he would be known as the man who took Trump down, get the credit and the nomination. THAT was what they sold him. He bought it hook, line and stinker. But anyone who taken Politics 101 KNOWS that if you viciously attack another candidate, it MAY bring that opponent's numbers down but it will ABSOLUTELY bring YOUR numbers down.

The establishment knew that Marco's numbers would fall big time, NOT go up as he was told. They didn't care if his numbers cratered. They just wanted to use him as a sledgehammer against Trump. They tried but it didn't really hurt Teflon Don too much. But it ended Rubio's political career. The establishment could care less. They used Rubio and then tossed him out like last week's trash after he used up his usefulness.

Now, it's comical watching the GOP-e court Cruz and Kasich simultaneously. They are just 2 more tools that will thrown out the second they are no longer needed.

Kasich thinks he is helping to cause a contested convention and that he will be the anointed one because he says he's the most Presidential and that the "polls" give him the best chance to beat Hillary.

Yes, Cruz thinks that he is using the GOP-e for his purposes, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT HIM TO THINK. Just as they want Kasich to think the same thing.

Cruz thinks that if he can keep Trump from clinching the nomination before the convention that he will win a contested convention simply because he will be in 2nd place. He figures, well if we deny Trump, I'm next in line!

What a joke, if they can deny the #1 vote getter, they will have NO PROBLEM denying it to #2. What is Ted's argument going to be? Hey, I'm #2!? LOL They will say, Yeah, and Trump was #1 - what is your point? You helped us deny him the number of delegates he needed to clinch. Thanks for playing. Now run along.

I can hear all of contested convention B.S. already - "Well, it's not about who had the most or 2nd most delegates going in...it's a whole new ballgame! It's a chance to "re-set!" To start over! Forget all that's happened so far, let's start fresh and pick someone who represents all of us, can reach out to everyone, can be Presidential, is not extreme...blah, blah, blah.

It's really fairly obvious what is going on here.

[moehoward]

"Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the populist-right favorite who endorsed Trump last month, and Trump campaign counsel Donald F. McGahn organized the meeting along with Trump's advisers."

Sounds ok so far.

[moehoward]

“I find this interesting, ..”

I don’t. Sounds like he’s meeting with some folks that Sessions is bringing in.

Cruz is taking ‘their’ money, and has them running his campaign.

[GLDNGUN]

You offer no evidence whatsoever that Cruz is selling his soul. What positions has Cruz changed?

I could talk about several that he has changed, and some that he doesn't need to change since he is already on the side of the establishment such as with trade and visas. But when I said that he will sell his soul to the most evil people, I was referring specifically to the Chicago thugs that he gave quarter to. Those wackos are the most vile people in this country. Can we agree on that? Ted Cruz tried to excuse their behavior in a typical political double-speak fashion where he said responsibility starts at the top - meaning Donald Trump. That gave the liberal media all they needed and ran with it. Cruz was just fine with their characterization that he was criticizing Trump more than the protestors. In other words, he was absolutely willing to align himself with the most vile people in this country to further his ambition for power.

[FreeReign]

No, I said they are using each other. But, ultimately, who has more power? Ted Cruz? Or the GOP-e? Ted Cruz is NOT going to get the magic number of delegates before the convention.

...What a joke, if they can deny the #1 vote getter, they will have NO PROBLEM denying it to #2. What is Ted's argument going to be? Hey, I'm #2!?

....Cruz thinks that if he can keep Trump from clinching the nomination before the convention that he will win a contested convention simply because he will be in 2nd place. He figures, well if we deny Trump, I'm next in line!

No not at all.

Your entire arguement is based on the premise of leaving out a third possibility. That Cruz would get a plurality of delegates.

In an contested convention, Cruz has already said that he is only for the candidate with the most delegates, winning the convention.

And as far as who has more power, Cruz or the GOPe, it's Cruz who has his the larger slate of chosen delegates, and not the GOPe!

[GLDNGUN]

Your entire arguement is based on the premise of leaving out a third possibility. That Cruz would get a plurality of delegates.

Not going to happen. But I'll play the game. First, how is it possible that you haven't thought this through? Nobody but Cruz is suggesting he could go into the convention with a plurality of delegates. The GOP-e is working with Cruz and Kasich and everyone else for one purpose - to keep Trump from having the nomination already clinched. They are assuming he will at least have the plurality of delegates. They just don't want him to have the majority at that point. Let that sink in - it's already assumed that Trump will have a plurality of delegates by the convention. The plan is to keep him from having a majority and steal it from him at the convention and give it to someone else.

Are you seriously suggesting that if Cruz has a plurality of delegates, then it's all over? You are kidding right? The same GOP-e that will take it away from Trump would certainly take it away from Cruz. Don't they hate Cruz and everything he stands for? Well? Do they or not? This is entire point I've been making about THEM using Cruz and him playing along. Ultimately, THEY have the power and will toss him aside the moment they need to. Just as they did with Rubio. Just as they will with Kasich. Oh, but Cruz is "special" and they won't do it to him, right? LOL That's what Rubio thought. That's what Kasich thinks. I can't believe the Cruz supporters are falling for this. They sound like a female being courted by a serial womanizer, "Oh, he won't cheat on ME".

In an contested convention, Cruz has already said that he is only for the candidate with the most delegates, winning the convention.

I'm afraid you are wrong here as well. I know why you think that though. It's because you believed what Ted Cruz said. When he said that, he was still under the delusion that he would win outright, so he wasn't worried about having to actually back up this principle if put to the test. Now, after his prospects aren't looking as good, he's had a new revelation! From a Townhall article (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/03/16/ted-cruz-why-yes-denying-trump-the-nomination-at-a-contested-convention-would-be-legitimate-n2134448) with a headline "Cruz: Why Yes, Denying Trump the Nomination at a Contested Convention Would be Legitimate" it says:

Now, having dismissed and critiqued the concept of a contested convention for weeks, Cruz's campaign and allies should take note of the argument their candidate advanced with Hugh Hewitt last evening prior to returns coming in. There's a difference between an establishment-"brokered" convention and a contested convention, he said, contending that a scenario under which the delegate frontrunner doesn't end up claiming the final crown wouldn't necessarily be illegitimate:

BOOM.

Classic example of why some view Cruz as a typical lying, sleazy politician. The moment he needs to jettison a position of principle that he had just articulated a few days earlier, BOOM, it's gone.

You previously asked for something he's changed a position on since working with the GOP-e. Well, there you go. Ted Cruz served it up on a silver platter.

And as far as who has more power, Cruz or the GOPe, it's Cruz who has his the larger slate of chosen delegates, and not the GOPe!

I hope by now you see what a silly, naïve argument that is.

[FreeReign]

Your entire arguement is based on the premise of leaving out a third possibility. That Cruz would get a plurality of delegates.

Not going to happen. But I'll play the game.

You don't know if it's going to happen or not. That's pure speculation.

And if it isn't going to happen then what pray tell is your concern??

Are you seriously suggesting that if Cruz has a plurality of delegates, then it's all over? You are kidding right? The same GOP-e that will take it away from Trump would certainly take it away from Cruz.

Are you seriously suggesting that if Trump and Cruz hold 80 or 90% of the delegates to the convention, that the GOPe can take the nomination away??

Now, having dismissed and critiqued the concept of a contested convention for weeks, Cruz's campaign and allies should take note of the argument their candidate advanced with Hugh Hewitt last evening prior to returns coming in.

Instead of describing in your own words what Cruz said and then criticizing him for it, you should instead supply the direct quote.

I hope by now you see what a silly, naïve argument that is.

LOL. I would have hoped by now that you would have seen that you still haven't made any argument.

[jospehm20]

You are the one that implied Trump was buying politicians with his donations, not me. I do not think Trump was dirtying his hands in politics as much as he was just trying to keep people off his back. He donated $25K to both sides in the VA governor’s race in 2009 because he was building a golf course there. Do I think he agreed with both sides equally? No. I think he just wanted them both not to screw up his golf course. All of these businessmen have seen how government at all levels destroys industries and businesses it takes an interest in. I think that many businessmen feel they have to pay the equivalent of protection money to keep government from getting too interested in them.

[jospehm20]

No, I heard Cruz accuse Trump of buying corrupt politicians at one of the debates and Trump said “I donated to you”.

[goodwithagun]

Lol! Your post contains passive aggressive content and you tell me to look it up!

[berdie]

Well, I took some time this afternoon to look this up.

Trump donated $2500 to Cruz in 2014...and praised him mightily. It appears to me that Trump only became anti Cruz when Cruz started coming up in the polls. Just as he has everyone else. Trump admitted as much in one of the debates when Cruz asked him about how the NBC issue wasn’t an issue a few months before. Trump’s answer was...you weren’t a threat.

Truthfully, I’m not for Cruz, Trump or Kasich. This is all politics and there really are no “saviors”.

I am a vote against The Criminal and The Admitted Socialist
I think it is great that people on this site think there is a savior. .Rock on. Much like past elections..I’m voting against someone...not for someone.

[CA Conservative]

So Trump is now going to be part of the GOPe.... At least, that is what everyone would say about Cruz if he did the same.

[jospehm20]

“Trump’s answer was...you weren’t a threat.”

How many other candidates would admit that? Trump cracks me up and I think he is comparatively honest as far as the candidates for President go. I do not think he is a savior but I do think he is the best candidate to make changes in the way DC does business.

[berdie]

Different people have different perceptions and likes/dislikes. His admission that he only turned on Cruz (and others) when they became a threat wasn't particularly funny to me.

I don't think you or I know what kind of difference he, or anybody, can make in DC. In my mind...it is a swamp.

This being said..in case I have not said it on this thread..I am voting against Hillary/Sanders or whoever the Dems put up. I'm not enamored with any of the Pub candidates. But that is not new.