Rudy regrets turning down AG position

[Calminian]

...God knows my heart and motivations. He also knows what it took to rouse me from being a life-long Republican, to having to oppose the Party’s candidate. I was convinced, and remain convinced, that President Trump is a clear and present danger to American constitutional values and the rule of law. I am also convinced he does not have the character or emotional constitution to lead our nation.

It has been common knowledge for a very long time that Trump values loyalty above almost anything else.

That opinion was not based on the Comey memos, and I don’t recall anything that was reported on the Comey memos that contradicts that opinion.

And there you go again. Pulling up things from his past to stander him. This gossip. It's like James said,

James 3:10 Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so.​

 

[HankD]

I’m glad you also pray for him.

Yes, among many other things.

God knows my heart and motivations. He also knows what it took to rouse me from being a life-long Republican, to having to oppose the Party’s candidate. I was convinced, and remain convinced, that President Trump is a clear and present danger to American constitutional values and the rule of law. I am also convinced he does not have the character or emotional constitution to lead our nation.

It has been common knowledge for a very long time that Trump values loyalty above almost anything else.
That opinion was not based on the Comey memos, and I don’t recall anything that was reported on the Comey memos that contradicts that opinion.

President Trump has a spine to stand up to international bullies and the deep seated post administrative left progressives (and marxist).

I am glad President Trump requires loyalty from his staff just as I was glad for the loyalty of those in my squadron.

 

[Baptist Believer]

And there you go again. Pulling up things from his past to stander him.

You claimed that I am slandering Trump by repeating falsehoods about his obsession with loyalty — acting as if my opinion in that was created by the Comey testimony. I remember Trump from back in the early 1990s, where most of my first impressions of him were developed. So I provide a video that includes a clip from an interview with Charlie Rose where Trump himself makes his viewpoint explicit and you cry foul because it came “from his last.” I don’t have the ability to show you things from the future, but everything he has said and done from 1992 onward merely confirms the premium he places on loyalty, including his recent tweets. I suppose that would be dredging up the past too.

Unless you have evidence that Trump has changed his viewpoint, the evidence stands and you are simply denying reality to claim otherwise.

This gossip.

Gossip (noun) - casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.

Presenting a video of the subject of conversation defining his viewpoint is not gossip, it is evidence. If you want to see gossip, look at your allegations about Mueller and Comey.

It's like James said,

James 3:10 Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so.​

That’s right. You need to stop cursing.

 

[Calminian]

You claimed that I am slandering Trump....

Yes, 100% daily.

 

[HankD]

Yes, 100% daily.

There is no more doubt (at least in my mind) at best you are a NEVERTRUMPer.

BTW I was myself at first but the i used the ancient rationale - If you must choose the lesser of two evils.

 

[Calminian]

Asserting the Guilani is an honorable man? Asserting that Giuliani is doing his job as an advocate for the President?

How in the world is that a smear?

You also smeared Rudy. You said you assumed he would have been honorable and recused himself, implying he is dishonorable for saying he wouldn't.

These are smears.

 

[HankD]

Innuendo, oblique slander/libel with ad hominem attacks are a Saul Alinsky Trademark.

 

[Calminian]

There is no more doubt (at least in my mind) at best you are a NEVERTRUMPer.

BTW I was myself at first but the i used the ancient rationale - If you must choose the lesser of two evils.

There were guys like Dennis Prager who opposed Trump during the primaries. He's been a blessing ever since as he knows Trump is good for the country, even not being his first choice. Even Mark Levin is respectable in this regard, and he was really anti-Trump during the primaries and even a bit after. But he knows Trump is good for the country. That's sincere and respectable conservatism. They are real conservatives who want the Country to do well and don't care if their first choice is the one doing it. Larry Elder is another. Has his disagreements, but keeps them in perspective. There are people here I these boards in can include also in this category, but probably don't need to mention.

Then there's the Ben Shapiros and the like, who sit back and wait for opportunities to slander. These are the guys conservative in name only. Their focus is Trump, not the Country.

 

[HankD]

There were guys like Denise Prager who opposed Trump during the primaries. He's been a blessing ever since as he knows Trump is good for the country, even not being his first choice. Even Mark Levin is respectable in this regard, and he was really anti-Trump during the primaries and even a bit after. But he knows Trump is good for the country. That's sincere and respectable conservatism. They are real conservatives who want the Country to do well and don't care if their first choice is the one doing it. Larry Elder is another. Has his disagreements, but keeps them in perspective. There are people here I these boards in can include also in this category, but probably don't need to mention.

Then there's the Ben Shapiros and the like, who sit back and wait for opportunities to slander. These are the guys conservative in name only.

When he kept his promise and appointed Neil Gorsuch to the SCOTUS i was convinced.

 

[Calminian]

When he kept his promise and appointed Neil Gorsuch to the SCOTUS i was convinced.

Exactly, many were. I think that's when Prager really rethought his opposition, and became a Trump apologist.

I believed Trump at the outset, but you might find this interesting, I opposed Trump prior to this recent campaign, because I knew he was pro-choice and would have probably won. I told my wife I hoped he didn't run. But once I heard him proclaim his switch to pro-life (I believe it was at a CPAC), I was onboard. But I totally get those who had reservation during the primaries, even after he offered his list of conservative judges. But those who still opposed him after Gorsuch? And after being called one of the most pro-life presidents in history by Operation Rescue, March for Life and Concerned Women for America? Sorry, something's wrong there.

 

[HankD]

Exactly, many were. I think that's when Prager really rethought his opposition, and became a Trump apologist. I believed Trump at the outset.

You might find this interesting, but I opposed Trump prior to this recent campaign, because I knew he was pro-choice and would have probably won. I told my wife I hoped he didn't run. But once I heard him proclaim his switch to pro-life (I believe it was at a CPAC), I was onboard. But I totally get those who had reservation during the primaries, even after he offered his list of conservative judges.

Actually I supported him from the onset.

But when he made his derogatory remark about McCain NOT being a war hero I was very disappointed and felt not to vote for him.

I did vote for him though because he was in my mind, the lesser of two evils.

Now I am really disappointed in McCain.

 

[Calminian]

Actually I supported him from the onset.

But when he made his derogatory remark about McCain NOT being a war hero I was very disappointed and felt not to vote for him.

I did vote for him though because he was in my mind, the lesser of two evils.

Now I am really disappointed in McCain.

Oy, McCain! He's another one. Never ever turned down an opportunity to be a liberal media darling.

That said, I supported him in 2008 and even made campaign calls for him. And I truly don't know what he would have done in office.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Yes, 100% daily.

That is simply a lie.

 

[Baptist Believer]

You also smeared Rudy. You said you assumed he would have been honorable and recused himself, implying he is dishonorable for saying he wouldn't.

No. I was not implying he was dishonorable. I simply pointed out that he is now under President Trump’s employ as an attorney. The job of an attorney is to be an advocate for his client. One can be an honorable attorney and advocate for things one does not personally believe. I couldn’t do it myself, but I recognize the importance of an attorney doing so if they decide to represent a client.

If Giuliani had claimed he would not have recused himself before he became Trump’s attorney, then I would have to question whether or not he is honorable. I’m starting to suspect that he has made such a statement previously and that I just don’t know about it since I don’t watch Fox News commentary shows or read Brietbart and similar sites.

If that is true, I revoke my assumption that he is an honorable man.

These are smears.

They were not intended to be. I may be in error.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Innuendo, oblique slander/libel with ad hominem attacks are a Saul Alinsky Trademark.

Yes, I wish you all would stop using them.

 

[Calminian]

...If Giuliani had claimed he would not have recused himself before he became Trump’s attorney, then I would have to question whether or not he is honorable.....

Bingo (I really hate saying bingo).

 

[HankD]

Yes, I wish you all would stop using them.

You first.

 

[church mouse guy]

Asserting the Guilani is an honorable man? Asserting that Giuliani is doing his job as an advocate for the President?

How in the world is that a smear?

Yeah, sure, up above you said that Rudy would have had to recuse himself to be honorable. You overplayed your hand. It is clear that you are talking outside the law and grinding an axe for the Dems. You want to smear the GOP all the time.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Yeah, sure, up above you said that Rudy would have had to recuse himself to be honorable.

Sure. He was involved in the Trump campaign and the campaign was part of the investigation, so there was a conflict of interest. That’s simple ethics - a standard used in business, government and church life. I don’t understand why that is so hard for some Christians to understand. We are called by Jesus to be wise and aboveboard in what we do.

You overplayed your hand. It is clear that you are talking outside the law and grinding an axe for the Dems. You want to smear the GOP all the time.

Nope. You are simply spinning stories to justify your view.

 

[church mouse guy]

Sure. He was involved in the Trump campaign and the campaign was part of the investigation, so there was a conflict of interest. That’s simple ethics - a standard used in business, government and church life. I don’t understand why that is so hard for some Christians to understand. We are called by Jesus to be wise and aboveboard in what we do.


Nope. You are simply spinning stories to justify your view.

You are 100% wrong. What do you know about the law? And knock off that stuff that your opinion is the Christian opinion.