Others in ooposition had their moment where they ran against or disagreed with Trump.

Romney made it a spectacle which of course the media went nuts over and gave wide distribution. He personally attcked Trump:

Mitt Romney: Donald Trump is a 'phony, a fraud' - CNNPolitics.com

Romney should be brought to the fore and then dumped for Petraeus, who is better suited for the job in the first place.

Originally Posted by Guest

Others in ooposition had their moment where they ran against or disagreed with Trump.

Romney made it a spectacle which of course the media went nuts over and gave wide distribution. He personally attcked Trump:

Mitt Romney: Donald Trump is a 'phony, a fraud' - CNNPolitics.com

Romney should be brought to the fore and then dumped for Petraeus, who is better suited for the job in the first place.

This is so amusing coming from the side that criticized Hillary Clinton for leaking classified material. What General Petraeus did with classified material was far worse and cost him his job.

Originally Posted by Guest

This is so amusing coming from the side that criticized Hillary Clinton for leaking classified material. What General Petraeus did with classified material was far worse and cost him his job.

No actually what is amusing is how one can ignore what Clinton has done and be so specific about another's violations.

The only difference is Obama wanted Petraus gone and he continues to cover for Clinton.....at least up to her losing that is.

The facts remain Petraeus passed around books full of classified material to his girlfriend/biographer. This cost him his job and almost cost him his marriage.

This doesn't look good on the old resume. Even Trump is smart enough to know not touch this one with a ten foot pole.

Originally Posted by Guest

The facts remain Petraeus passed around books full of classified material to his girlfriend/biographer. This cost him his job and almost cost him his marriage.

This doesn't look good on the old resume. Even Trump is smart enough to know not touch this one with a ten foot pole.

So what does this view of wrong doing have to say with Clinton's mis handling and the loss of American lives and jeopardizing the security of the USA due to "MISHANDLING' of classified material.

He is no more disqualified than Clinton and his were lessor allegations.

What he did not have was Obama backing him and covering for him like he did/does for Clinton.

He is the better choice for the job of secretary of state....setting aside the BS guilty of what ever claims.

Originally Posted by Guest

The facts remain Petraeus passed around books full of classified material to his girlfriend/biographer. This cost him his job and almost cost him his marriage.

This doesn't look good on the old resume. Even Trump is smart enough to know not touch this one with a ten foot pole.

I agree it sets bad precedent to go forward with Petraeus as Secretary of State. and as much as I like Rudy Giuliani he also would be a bad pick.

Romney would be the best pick because compared to most in Washington he is squeaky clean and he is intellectually up to the task.
He has different views than Trump on many issues which is a good thing because Trump needs people willing to speak up and to challenge his position. However Romney is also professional enough to do his due diligence when the final decision is made.

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

I agree it sets bad precedent to go forward with Petraeus as Secretary of State. and as much as I like Rudy Giuliani he also would be a bad pick.

Romney would be the best pick because compared to most in Washington he is squeaky clean and he is intellectually up to the task.
He has different views than Trump on many issues which is a good thing because Trump needs people willing to speak up and to challenge his position. However Romney is also professional enough to do his due diligence when the final decision is made.

Personal Best Regards:

For what it's worth I agree with your logic. Romney is the best pick as Trump has all hawks right now, they are great at war but totally ignorant to the cost of it. Everyone is salivating antisipating a giant unfunded spending spree. Romney would bring some level of reality to the party.

Originally Posted by Guest

For what it's worth I agree with your logic. Romney is the best pick as Trump has all hawks right now, they are great at war but totally ignorant to the cost of it. Everyone is salivating antisipating a giant unfunded spending spree. Romney would bring some level of reality to the party.

Oh God...you women crack me up...so naive. Trump is going to borrow/spend like a madman. Romney is Gordan Gekko from the movie Wall Street...a corrupt raider and destroyer of failing companies. He buys them cheap and sells off the pieces. A very few he's brought back...because it was profitable for him.

Meet the new boss...he's gonna spend like the old boss.

"President-elect Donald Trump intends to launch a broad legislative agenda that includes cutting taxes, rolling back the Affordable Care Act, growing the military and rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure.

The question is how congressional Republicans, after eight years of apocalyptic warnings about the growing national debt, will respond to the dire fiscal implications of proposals that would likely send the deficit soaring.

Taken together, the Trump agenda stands to drain hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the federal balance sheet. His proposed tax cut alone, according to independent analysts, could cost the Treasury as much as $7.2 trillion over a decade."

How to pay for Donald Trump’s trillion-dollar agenda? Congressional Republicans aren’t saying. - The Washington Post

Originally Posted by Guest

"President-elect Donald Trump intends to launch a broad legislative agenda that includes cutting taxes, rolling back the Affordable Care Act, growing the military and rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure.

The question is how congressional Republicans, after eight years of apocalyptic warnings about the growing national debt, will respond to the dire fiscal implications of proposals that would likely send the deficit soaring.

Taken together, the Trump agenda stands to drain hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the federal balance sheet. His proposed tax cut alone, according to independent analysts, could cost the Treasury as much as $7.2 trillion over a decade."

How to pay for Donald Trump’s trillion-dollar agenda? Congressional Republicans aren’t saying. - The Washington Post

Take the money from welfare and put the former recipients to work building the infrastructure...a la the public works projects during the depression.

THAT won't happen... So Trump will borrow...a LOT. Damn the torpedo's...full speed ahead!

It is not a choice of the two. Neither are worthy of the position. Both are disloyal and should not even be considered. There are far better choices out there than those two that are damaged goods. Trump's best choice would be to go over to the State Dept and burrow down in the present employment list until they find an experienced ambassador that has not been appointed but has risen through the ranks on merit. One that knows the workings of the job and has worked many countries. Vet him and then offer him the job.

Originally Posted by Guest

It is not a choice of the two. Neither are worthy of the position. Both are disloyal and should not even be considered. There are far better choices out there than those two that are damaged goods. Trump's best choice would be to go over to the State Dept and burrow down in the present employment list until they find an experienced ambassador that has not been appointed but has risen through the ranks on merit. One that knows the workings of the job and has worked many countries. Vet him and then offer him the job.

Ambassadorships are political appointments, reward for working hard for the candidate.

Originally Posted by Guest

Ambassadorships are political appointments, reward for working hard for the candidate.

Not all of them. Some become ambassadors by working up from the ranks. Yes, they are still appointed, but these are appointed by merit. I have known Management Officers that have worked their way up to Ambassador in several instances. But, the point is that those two, Romney and Petraeus are not good choices. There are career State Dept employees that have experience and ability to perform a great job in that position as SecState.

Petraeus is hardly better than Hillary, a criminal
Romney is a petulant loser with no loyalty.

Originally Posted by Guest

Not all of them. Some become ambassadors by working up from the ranks. Yes, they are still appointed, but these are appointed by merit. I have known Management Officers that have worked their way up to Ambassador in several instances. But, the point is that those two, Romney and Petraeus are not good choices. There are career State Dept employees that have experience and ability to perform a great job in that position as SecState.

Petraeus is hardly better than Hillary, a criminal
Romney is a petulant loser with no loyalty.

To sh!tty places...Somalia, S Africa, Haiti...not to Switzerland, Germany, France, England, Tahiti, and all the other "nice" places.