[Hoot Gibson]

That's all well and good but a lot of wishful thinking. Even if you play it by the book Dems are going to be crying foul if they don't get the result they want...and be calling names, protesting, shouting down conservatives and harrassing them in restaurants etc...so by all means put someone in there who will be your "wingman" like Eric Holder proudly proclaimed...and let the Dems eat it.

No more wishful thinking than Supreme Court justice that he believes will be more of an Antonin Scalia than an Anthony Kennedy. If Trump appoints a political hack, then it will make the Democrats' claim of a cover up an easy sale for the biased liberal media and Trump will very likely be impeached.

Trump should appoint somebody who he will almost certainly fire Rosenstein and bring the Mueller investigation to close with minimal political damage. Appointing a Trump equivalent of an Eric Holder would be a disaster for the president. The media only tolerates criminals like Holder and Lynch because they are left wingers. The GOP equivalent would soon be indicted.

[Hoot Gibson]

I thought Trump should have appointed Giuliani or Chris Christie to AG. And I thought it was absurd that he waited so long to give John Bolton a job in the Defense Dept. And heavens knows, there has just got to be a job someplace for Mike Huckabee.

I despise Mike Huckabee. I guess I just don't like dishonest politicians in general. But I did like his TV show and he is a pretty good musician.

[jetpilot]

No more wishful thinking than Supreme Court justice that he believes will be more of an Antonin Scalia than an Anthony Kennedy. If Trump appoints a political hack, then it will make the Democrats' claim of a cover up an easy sale for the biased liberal media and Trump will very likely be impeached.

Trump should appoint somebody who he will almost certainly fire Rosenstein and bring the Mueller investigation to close with minimal political damage. Appointing a Trump equivalent of an Eric Holder would be a disaster for the president. The media only tolerates criminals like Holder and Lynch because they are left wingers. The GOP equivalent would soon be indicted.

1. Liberal media is going to attack Trump no matter what!
2. Who cares who the media tolerates and why? Anyone with a brain already knows their agenda!
3. GOP equivalent would be indicted for what?:eyeroll:

You think he should play it straight down the middle when the other side does the opposite! Like fighting blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back. Sorry Hoot but your advice for Trump is always horrible. And seeing how you are a Never Trumper no offense but you are the last person I would listen to on what Trump should do.

[Hoot Gibson]

1. Liberal media is going to attack Trump no matter what!
2. Who cares who the media tolerates and why? Anyone with a brain already knows their agenda!
3. GOP equivalent would be indicted for what?:eyeroll:

You think he should play it straight down the middle when the other side does the opposite! Like fighting blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back. Sorry Hoot but your advice for Trump is always horrible. And seeing how you are a Never Trumper no offense but you are the last person I would listen to on what Trump should do.

Yes, Trump is doing so well politically just Tweeting and shooting from the hip. :biglmao:

When Republicans start trying to steal elections and behaving exactly like crooked Democrats, it will be time to resign ourselves to the coming end of our republic. John Mitchell managed Nixon's re-election campaign. Sorry, but if Trump appoints a "wing man" to be his next AG, as Nixon and Obama did (twice), he will be impeached and the Republicans' chance of hanging on to the White House will be almost nil, no matter who their candidate is in 2020.

There is no evidence that Trump has done anything wrong. Appointing his own version of crooked Eric Holder is the worst possible advice to an innocent man.

As for your question of what would an Eric Holder Republican equivalent be indicted for, Holder should have many years left on a prison term for obstructing justice, perjury, and who knows what other crimes that he committed but for which he was never subjected to a criminal investigation. Being liberal Democrats is all that keeps Holder, Lynch, and Hillary Clinton free. It is not fair, but there are two different sets of rules for Democrats and Republicans. Republicans have enjoyed the moral high ground since the end of the Nixon administration and they should not surrender that ground.

[jetpilot]

Yes, Trump is doing so well politically just Tweeting and shooting from the hip. :biglmao:

When Republicans start trying to steal elections and behaving exactly like crooked Democrats, it will be time to resign ourselves to the coming end of our republic. John Mitchell managed Nixon's re-election campaign. Sorry, but if Trump appoints a "wing man" to be his next AG, as Nixon and Obama did (twice), he will be impeached and the Republicans' chance of hanging on to the White House will be almost nil, no matter who their candidate is in 2020.

There is no evidence that Trump has done anything wrong. Appointing his own version of crooked Eric Holder is the worst possible advice to an innocent man.

As for your question of what would an Eric Holder Republican equivalent be indicted for, Holder should have many years left on a prison term for obstructing justice, perjury, and who knows what other crimes that he committed but for which he was never subjected to a criminal investigation. Being liberal Democrats is all that keeps Holder, Lynch, and Hillary Clinton free. It is not fair, but there are two different sets of rules for Democrats and Republicans. Republicans have enjoyed the moral high ground since the end of the Nixon administration and they should not surrender that ground.

Who in the he!! said anything about breaking laws, much less stealing elections. Are you high? Stopped reading after the bolded.

[jetpilot]

And to be clear, Dems impeaching Trump will only hurt themselves, like the Kavanaugh debacle. No chance of Trump being removed from office, as everyone with a pulse knows.
And knowing all the dirty tricks Dems and the media will play, you think Trump should pick someone neutral? Sheesh! But I'm sure Kristol and Scarborough would agree with you 100%.

[jetpilot]

You also don't seem to realize you need to be thanking Trump for playing a huge role getting Republicans elected to the Senate in MO IN and FL.

[TheRealThing]

I despise Mike Huckabee. I guess I just don't like dishonest politicians in general. But I did like his TV show and he is a pretty good musician.

I know, you made that abundantly clear in 2015. I on the other hand love the guy, and I don't get how you can say he's dishonest.

[jetpilot]

I know, you made that abundantly clear in 2015. I on the other hand love the guy, and I don't get how you can say he's dishonest.

Agreed. Would love to know where Hoot got that Huckabee is dishonest. Could be because he's a Trump supporter lol...

[Hoot Gibson]

And to be clear, Dems impeaching Trump will only hurt themselves, like the Kavanaugh debacle. No chance of Trump being removed from office, as everyone with a pulse knows.
And knowing all the dirty tricks Dems and the media will play, you think Trump should pick someone neutral? Sheesh! But I'm sure Kristol and Scarborough would agree with you 100%.

I never said or implied that Trump should pick somebody neutral to be the new AG. He never picked neutral SC nominees, but he also did not nominate obvious political hacks.

Holder was a hack. Lynch was a hack. Reno was a hack. The last thing Trump should do is to nominate somebody who even Republicans will see as a Trump "wing man." All he needs is an honest, competent, articulate AG who will be dedicated to restoring it to an agency that will work to bring justice to all Americans. For Trump, that would result in an end to political witch hunts by his own DoJ. For Hillary Clinton, that would hopefully mean a real criminal investigation into her real crimes and a prison cell before her poor health allows her to escape accountability for her crimes.

What part of that proposal does not make sense to you? Do you think he should appoint somebody like Chris Christie or Rudy Giuliani to the position? Somebody who cannot be confirmed without suspending or eliminating the current rules of the Senate?

[Hoot Gibson]

I know, you made that abundantly clear in 2015. I on the other hand love the guy, and I don't get how you can say he's dishonest.

The guy is a hypocritical liar. You can love him all you want, but that has nothing to do with my opinion of the man.

[jetpilot]

I never said or implied that Trump should pick somebody neutral to be the new AG. He never picked neutral SC nominees, but he also did not nominate obvious political hacks.

Holder was a hack. Lynch was a hack. Reno was a hack. The last thing Trump should do is to nominate somebody who even Republicans will see as a Trump "wing man." All he needs is an honest, competent, articulate AG who will be dedicated to restoring it to an agency that will work to bring justice to all Americans. For Trump, that would result in an end to political witch hunts by his own DoJ. For Hillary Clinton, that would hopefully mean a real criminal investigation into her real crimes and a prison cell before her poor health allows her to escape accountability for her crimes.

What part of that proposal does not make sense to you? Do you think he should appoint somebody like Chris Christie or Rudy Giuliani to the position? Somebody who cannot be confirmed without suspending or eliminating the current rules of the Senate?

Rep John Ratcliffe is my pick. But to be clear the last thing I am worried about is what Dems and media think. They are going to have the same narrative no matter what, so be sure to get the guy you want in there.

[jetpilot]

The guy is a hypocritical liar. You can love him all you want, but that has nothing to do with my opinion of the man.

This is news to me. Provide some examples?

[Hoot Gibson]

Agreed. Would love to know where Hoot got that Huckabee is dishonest. Could be because he's a Trump supporter lol...

Huckabee has a long history of dishonesty. He was a tax and spend, big government Republican governor of Arkansas who has always claimed to be a conservative. Huckabee was no more a conservative than Bill Clinton on most issues. He was also McCain's hatchet man and helped him win the nomination by staying in the race after he was mathematically eliminated to siphon votes away from Romney. I don't fault him so much for that as I do for joining McCain in blatantly lying about Romney's record.

In other words, Huckabee has a lot in common with Marco Rubio and his role in the 2016 campaign. Both of them are lying RINOs who have campaigned repeatedly as conservatives and governed like Democrats after winning election.

I do think that Huckabee's daughter has been one of the best White House Press Secretaries of my lifetime. He deserves some credit for that.

[jetpilot]

http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/sho...stcount=13

I will respond to this later. Just saw it lol.
Dang it Hoot, Reagan ain't walking through that door.

[Hoot Gibson]

This is news to me. Provide some examples?

Do your own research. The McCain presidential campaign is when my opinion of Huckabee took a turn for the worst. I was initially impressed with Huckabee when he did so well in the early primaries and caucuses with very little money. I must give the man credit, he is a very smooth liar. Maybe there is something in the water of Hope, Arkansas, that gives politicians that skill.

[jetpilot]

Do your own research. The McCain presidential campaign is when my opinion of Huckabee took a turn for the worst. I was initially impressed with Huckabee when he did so well in the early primaries and caucuses with very little money. I must give the man credit, he is a very smooth liar. Maybe there is something in the water of Hope, Arkansas, that gives politicians that skill.

I don't research people's opinions. I agree the McCain thing was not a good look.

[Hoot Gibson]

Rep John Ratcliffe is my pick. But to be clear the last thing I am worried about is what Dems and media think. They are going to have the same narrative no matter what, so be sure to get the guy you want in there.

An AG nominee has to be confirmed by the Senate and Republicans don't have 60 votes to win a cloture vote. If they have to resort to the nuclear option, then it should be for a candidate that can at least win every Republican vote.

Ratcliffe sounds like he would be a good nominee.

You should be worried about what some Democrats think. Every Democrat in the House will be under intense pressure by liberal extremists to vote to impeach Trump. I am pretty sure that there are probably enough Democrats with a conscience who will be inclined to vote "No" if there is no evidence that Trump committed a "high crime or misdemeanor." Most Democrats will not care about evidence or the constitutional requirement of a high crime or misdemeanor, and will vote to impeach Trump if it comes to a vote.

I am also pretty sure that Donald Trump does not want to help push the few Democrats who would be votes against impeachment into casting "Yes" votes. There are also bound to be millions of rank and file Democrats who are not convinced that Trump deserves to be impeached. Their opinions matter and should not be disregarded.

Republican votes will not prevent Trump's impeachment. Joining the short list of impeached presidents would not be a good thing politically for Trump or the GOP.

[Hoot Gibson]

I don't research people's opinions. I agree the McCain thing was not a good look.

And I don't waste my time teaching history to people who lived through it or can do their own research. Huckabee lied to help McCain's campaign and he did it deliberately. McCain probably would have won the primary anyway, but what Huckabee did was dishonest and dishonorable, IMO.

I don't like liars and very few politicians are honest.

[jetpilot]

And I don't waste my time teaching history to people who lived through it or can do their own research. Huckabee lied to help McCain's campaign and he did it deliberately. McCain probably would have won the primary anyway, but what Huckabee did was dishonest and dishonorable, IMO.

I don't like liars and very few politicians are honest.

I'll just leave it there.

[jetpilot]

An AG nominee has to be confirmed by the Senate and Republicans don't have 60 votes to win a cloture vote. If they have to resort to the nuclear option, then it should be for a candidate that can at least win every Republican vote.

Ratcliffe sounds like he would be a good nominee.

You should be worried about what some Democrats think. Every Democrat in the House will be under intense pressure by liberal extremists to vote to impeach Trump. I am pretty sure that there are probably enough Democrats with a conscience who will be inclined to vote "No" if there is no evidence that Trump committed a "high crime or misdemeanor." Most Democrats will not care about evidence or the constitutional requirement of a high crime or misdemeanor, and will vote to impeach Trump if it comes to a vote.

I am also pretty sure that Donald Trump does not want to help push the few Democrats who would be votes against impeachment into casting "Yes" votes. There are also bound to be millions of rank and file Democrats who are not convinced that Trump deserves to be impeached. Their opinions matter and should not be disregarded.

Republican votes will not prevent Trump's impeachment. Joining the short list of impeached presidents would not be a good thing politically for Trump or the GOP.

Then Dems surely will just do it since it's bad for the GOP, right? And just :hilarious: on the first part. Also IF there is no evidence Trump committed a high crime or misdemeanor? Are you freaking for real??? Of course there is no evidence!!! Everyone knows that except Kristol, Scarborough and now.......oh he!! never mind...

[jetpilot]

An AG nominee has to be confirmed by the Senate and Republicans don't have 60 votes to win a cloture vote. If they have to resort to the nuclear option, then it should be for a candidate that can at least win every Republican vote.

Ratcliffe sounds like he would be a good nominee.

You should be worried about what some Democrats think. Every Democrat in the House will be under intense pressure by liberal extremists to vote to impeach Trump. I am pretty sure that there are probably enough Democrats with a conscience who will be inclined to vote "No" if there is no evidence that Trump committed a "high crime or misdemeanor." Most Democrats will not care about evidence or the constitutional requirement of a high crime or misdemeanor, and will vote to impeach Trump if it comes to a vote.

I am also pretty sure that Donald Trump does not want to help push the few Democrats who would be votes against impeachment into casting "Yes" votes. There are also bound to be millions of rank and file Democrats who are not convinced that Trump deserves to be impeached. Their opinions matter and should not be disregarded.

Republican votes will not prevent Trump's impeachment. Joining the short list of impeached presidents would not be a good thing politically for Trump or the GOP.

I don't care what Dems think!!! If Trump is impeached with zero evidence it is Dem politicians who will pay the price. It will dwarf the Kavanaugh circus that exposed idiot Dems!!!

[Hoot Gibson]

Then Dems surely will just do it since it's bad for the GOP, right? And just :hilarious: on the first part. Also IF there is no evidence Trump committed a high crime or misdemeanor? Are you freaking for real??? Of course there is no evidence!!! Everyone knows that except Kristol, Scarborough and now.......oh he!! never mind...

I've said repeatedly that there is no evidence of Trump wrongdoing. That "IF" is a real find there, Mr. Proofreader. nicker:

You should know by now that evidence does not matter to the crazy liberals who have won House seats.

If I am supposed to give credit to Trump for winning three Senate seats (Democrats may yet steal the Florida seat), are you going to give him any blame for a net loss of as many as 40 House seats - the most seats gained by Democrats since Watergate?

The GOP and the losing candidates deserve some blame for the heavy losses in the House, but Trump boasted about driving the turnout for the election. If voters turned out because of Trump, as he rightfully claimed, then surely he deserves some responsibility for the losses.

[jetpilot]

House went along historical norms. Senate did not. Trump stumping in 3 states I mentioned was huge for the Senate IMO. I am thankful every day that Trump got elected. He was the only person that could have beaten Hillary and it still took a million miracles. He is not perfect but is doing much better than any of the Republicans could have done and 100x better than Hillary. And I absolutely LOVE the way he takes it to the Dems and media (and establishment Rupublicans too). I look for the next 2 years to be even better now that Sessions is out of the way and Trump can go to work on the crooked DOJ. I am off my soapbox now. Tired and going to bed. I like it that we can be on the same side and disagree sometimes Hoot. Unlike that other party lol. Have a good night Hoot.

[Hoot Gibson]

I don't care what Dems think!!! If Trump is impeached with zero evidence it is Dem politicians who will pay the price. It will dwarf the Kavanaugh circus that exposed idiot Dems!!!

Democrats won't pay the price if they wrongfully impeach President Trump. What price did Democrats pay for the Kavanaugh circus? NONE. What price did Democrats pay for the economy booming after Trump was elected? NONE. Democrats just flipped control of the House a few weeks after the Kavanaugh hearings by gaining at least 32 seats.

As long as we keep nominating Republican candidates who cannot effectively use the bully pulpit to influence public opinion, the liberal media will continue to provide political cover for crooked Democratic politicians. So, the media's reporting matters, whether you care about it or not. It's the old question of a tree falling in the forest with nobody there to hear it.

An honest, free media would have widely reported the unjust treatment of Justice Kavanaugh, but we no longer have that kind of media in this country.

I do give Trump credit for personally answering far more media questions than his past few predecessors. I like watching politicians answer media questions truthfully and in easy to understand language. I loved watching Donald Rumfsfeld interacting with the press. I strongly approved Trump revoking Jim Acosta's WH press credentials.

[Hoot Gibson]

House went along historical norms. Senate did not. Trump stumping in 3 states I mentioned was huge for the Senate IMO. I am thankful every day that Trump got elected. He was the only person that could have beaten Hillary and it still took a million miracles. He is not perfect but is doing much better than any of the Republicans could have done and 100x better than Hillary. And I absolutely LOVE the way he takes it to the Dems and media (and establishment Rupublicans too). I look for the next 2 years to be even better now that Sessions is out of the way and Trump can go to work on the crooked DOJ. I am off my soapbox now. Tired and going to bed. I like it that we can be on the same side and disagree sometimes Hoot. Unlike that other party lol. Have a good night Hoot.

Hillary Clinton was the worst presidential candidate in history. If Donald Trump was the only Republican who could beat the worst possible opponent, then the GOP is in deep, deep trouble.

Good night, JP.

[jetpilot]

Democrats won't pay the price if they wrongfully impeach President Trump. What price did Democrats pay for the Kavanaugh circus? NONE. What price did Democrats pay for the economy booming after Trump was elected? NONE. Democrats just flipped control of the House a few weeks after the Kavanaugh hearings by gaining at least 32 seats.

As long as we keep nominating Republican candidates who cannot effectively use the bully pulpit to influence public opinion, the liberal media will continue to provide political cover for crooked Democratic politicians. So, the media's reporting matters, whether you care about it or not. It's the old question of a tree falling in the forest with nobody there to hear it.

An honest, free media would have widely reported the unjust treatment of Justice Kavanaugh, but we no longer have that kind of media in this country.

I do give Trump credit for personally answering far more media questions than his past few predecessors. I like watching politicians answer media questions truthfully and in easy to understand language. I loved watching Donald Rumfsfeld interacting with the press. I strongly approved Trump revoking Jim Acosta's WH press credentials.

All Dem Senators who voted against Kavanaugh lost their seats except one who won at the last minute by a whisker. Manchin would have lost too if he hadn't have voted for Kavanaugh and he knew he had to do it to keep his seat.

[jetpilot]

Hillary Clinton was the worst presidential candidate in history. If Donald Trump was the only Republican who could beat the worst possible opponent, then the GOP is in deep, deep trouble.

Good night, JP.

Maybe but there are a lot of horrible ones. Regardless, only Trump could have beaten her and against all odds he did. So it doesn't matter where she stands on the very long list of horrible Dems. One last question! Who will be a better candidate than Hillary in 2020 for Dems? Don't say there has to be, I want a name! They are all just flat out mind-boggingly horrible. And before you say anyone who is not a criminal I say these radical fools are much more dangerous to this county than just a measly serial felon like Hillary.

And yes, the GOP doesn't have many decent candidates either but I will gladly take my chances with 6 more years of Trump over the probable alternatives.

Good night for sure now Hoot.

[Hoot Gibson]

All Dem Senators who voted against Kavanaugh lost their seats except one who won at the last minute by a whisker. Manchin would have lost too if he hadn't have voted for Kavanaugh and he knew he had to do it to keep his seat.

That is not true. Jon Tester won in Montana, Tina Smith won in Minnesota, Robert Menendez won in New Jersey, Time Kaine won in Virginia (I voted against him), Debbie Stabenow won in Michigan, Dianne Feinstein won in California - there are more.

Democrats paid little if any price for the Kavenaugh scams. It may be true that a couple of Democrats running in states won by Trump in 2016 who voted against Kavenaugh's nomination lost (McCaskill and HeitKamp), but they were expected to face stiff challenges anyway. Maybe the Kavenaugh votes were the deciding factor in those two races, I'm not sure that was the case, but Democrats did not pay a steep price for the hoaxes either way.

[Hoot Gibson]

Maybe but there are a lot of horrible ones. Regardless, only Trump could have beaten her and against all odds he did. So it doesn't matter where she stands on the very long list of horrible Dems. One last question! Who will be a better candidate than Hillary in 2020 for Dems? Don't say there has to be, I want a name! They are all just flat out mind-boggingly horrible. And before you say anyone who is not a criminal I say these radical fools are much more dangerous to this county than just a measly serial felon like Hillary.

And yes, the GOP doesn't have many decent candidates either but I will gladly take my chances with 6 more years of Trump over the probable alternatives.

Good night for sure now Hoot.

There is no Democrat at any level of government who I would consider voting for, so I am not the best judge but, yes, anybody who does not have a record of continuous scandals and criminal behavior will be a stronger candidate than Hillary Clinton. Who among us would have said that Obama would have been a good candidate in 2006? He was a horrible president, but he won two terms. You are being naive if you really believe that Democrats have no chance of winning in 2020.