Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Guiliani: "Hillary Clinton could be considered a founding member of ISIS"
The Hill ^ | 3/23/16 | Rebecca Savransky

Posted on 03/23/2016 8:36:13 PM PDT by DeathBeforeDishonor1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: Publius

I can’t say anything about Electoral College issues, but it would be IMHO the closest thing to an unbeatable ticket ever. To assuage grass roots Conservatives and get them to the polls, they could name their Cabinet and Supreme Court nominees up front, loaded with fire-breathing, credentialed Libertarian types. Trump could announce Janice Rogers Brown as his first SCOTUS appointment. I’d walk over a bed of hot coals for a chance to get Brown on the High Court. So would many others.


21 posted on 03/23/2016 9:36:55 PM PDT by huckfillary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: huckfillary

Rudy can’t be Veep because both he and Trump are from NY.

Dick Cheney had to change his residency to Wyoming to run with G.W. Bush. But he could do that because at one time he was from there. Since Trump has filed as being from NY Rudy would have to affect a quick move to Florida, Connecticut or somewhere.


22 posted on 03/23/2016 9:38:38 PM PDT by Fai Mao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: huckfillary
You can't have the president and vice president from the same state. That's why Cheney moved back to Wyoming from his job at Halliburton in Texas in 2000.

But naming a Cabinet and potential Supreme Court nominees up front is a good idea.

Back in 1980, PBS did something that worked brilliantly, so much so that the two parties refused to let it happen again. Instead of having "debates" involving the candidates, which would have led to nothing but pre-digested sound bytes, they held genuine debates between the advisors of the candidates, i.e., those who would be expected to serve in the administration of the candidates should they be elected.

The first debate was on economic issues. Arthur Laffer was the captain of Reagan's team, I forget the captain of Carter's team, and Mitch Rogovin was the captain of John Anderson's team. Each captain determined who on his team would go in to make or answer a point. There was cross-questioning, rebuttal and counter-rebuttal. One of my favorite memories was Art Laffer taking the ball himself and eviscerating Rogovin on tax policy.

In the foreign policy debate, Al Haig, captain of the Reagan team, sent Paul Nitze in to sack Paul Warnke and his appeasement-based foreign policy.

These were honest debates, conducted within a strict set of rules, and I learned more from them than I learned from listening to the candidates. I suspect it was the spontaneity of the debates that frightened off the two party establishments.

We need to do this in 2016.

23 posted on 03/23/2016 9:47:14 PM PDT by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DeathBeforeDishonor1

Another home run! Giuliani tells it like it is.


24 posted on 03/23/2016 10:00:35 PM PDT by Ray76 (Judge Roy Moore for Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius; huckfillary
But naming a Cabinet and potential Supreme Court nominees up front is a good idea.

Also against the law. Seems that a candidate offering a government post prior to election is guilty of offering a bribe...

25 posted on 03/23/2016 10:01:02 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: okie01

It would be enough to say that, “This is the kind of person I’d like to have in my administration in the Cabinet or as an advisor.”


26 posted on 03/23/2016 10:02:26 PM PDT by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DeathBeforeDishonor1

I’d like to see her “in the big house”. She’s a life long liar and criminal.


27 posted on 03/23/2016 11:36:37 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or eradication Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeathBeforeDishonor1
When she makes claims she's against isis and tough on terrorism no one brings up bengahzi! WHY?
28 posted on 03/24/2016 4:12:40 AM PDT by ronnie raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeathBeforeDishonor1

Rudy is walking us down that road to the real truth.

What is the Benghazi cover up really about. Hillary could care less about the dead.

What it is really about is that Hillary, Obama and Jarrett funded and armed ISIS. They didn’t just create the vacuum, they filled it as well.

Libyan oil is now one of the contributors to the ISIS money machine.


29 posted on 03/28/2016 5:41:56 PM PDT by Revolutionary ("Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson