Trump adviser calls for 'hater' Hewitt to be banned from convention

[goatprairie]

Leaving all this aside for a moment, go back to Trump's statement about this.  Imagine if he'd instead said "well, I'm disappointed to hear that from Hugh, but I hope that over the next few months, I can persuade him and others that they should support me, and help me to defeat Hillary in November.  And I'm going to be working very hard to try to earn the votes of Hugh and others out there in the meantime."

I think he's almost incapable of saying something like that, but it's nice to imagine for a moment....

I think he's almost incapable of saying something like that, but it's nice to imagine for a moment..

That's because Trump is that rarest of birds  a SORE WINNER. You are right...it is not in him to try and reconcile or convince opponents. Opponents must be destroyed...fairly or unfairly. And in Trump's case mostly unfairly. He's personally trashed every one of his opponents. But now they must all come together and make nice with him. In which case he's delusional.

[RoosGirl]

We may be actually saying the same thing, or at least, getting to the same place.

I have read that the convention will be ordered by a modified Roberts' Rules of Order.  I once ran an organization according to Robert's,  so I have an idea of how the convention will be run.

Under Robert's,  actual disruptors would be those who obstinately talk out of turn and won't shut up when the chair rules them out of order.  If they persist, the chair orders the seargent-at-arms, or his equivalent, to eject the disruptor. 

If Hewitt attends the convention, I assume it will be as a journalist.  He is an opinion journalist.  As a journalist, he would practically never be recognized by the chair to speak.  Certainly, if he tried to gain the simultaneous attention of the entire convention in violation of Robert's,  he could be ejected.

But the convention has a lot of "downtime," when it's not actually conducting business.  People are permitted to mill about, have quiet discussions, etc.  Journalists may walk the floor where the delegates are and speak with the delegates.  Speech content is not something that is regulated.  If someone wishes to walk the floor and lobby for this or that, they are free to do so, even if "this or that" is the rejection of the assumed nominee.

If Hewitt is a delegate, he may seek a voice in the convention, according to the rules set forth by the convention, itself.  As long as he follows those rules, he has a right to address the entire convention.  And he has a right to call for the rejection of the assumed nominee.  He may also mill about convention downtime and lobby others to his position.

Either way, Hewitt may go to the convention, and work within the rules to ditch stumpy back home, in a dumpster.

If he tries to talk out of order to the entire convention, the chair would generally tell him to shut up and sit down warn him that if he persisted, then the chair might have him ejected.

But, the circumstances would have to be extraordinary to ban an attendee proactively.  Perhaps, if the particular attendee has a history of attending conventions and trying to speak out of order.  Or perhaps the attendee goes to conventions and holds actual violent riots.  But protesters would always be admitted, as long as they follows Robert's Rules.

So, I am unaware that Hewitt has a history of going to conventions and ignoring Robert's Rules of Order.

In which case, a call for his ban, whether he will go to agitate for lump lying don's overthrow or not, is fascistic.

Agreed.  I took extreme exception to the lie (again, I will retract my words if anyone can provide transcript that Hewitt said he was going to attend the convention with the purpose of disrupting) that the reason he was being "banned" was because he said he was going with the intent of being a disruptor.  We (in general) can disagree all day long about whether Hewitt should be excluded from the convention, but I will not stand for outright lying to try to prove one point or the other.

[Smokin Joe]

Its funny you do not see the irony in your post.

Cruz had little actual support outside of Texas, some yes. But much was handed to him by political king pins like in Utah (Bishop Romney), etc. So Most of his later campaign after he became the  token #neverTrump was nothing more then Establishment insiders using him since they had nobody else. So yes when Bush's lawyer put out a call for help to the Bush camp and they took over his campaign from the top down he became the establishment figurehead.

Wow. Unreal. You mean we've been misled all along? That the last few years of fighting against the GOPe in Congress were all part of an elaborate ruse to pull in disaffected voters unhappy with the lack of resistance to Obama and the broken promises made to TEA party people and suck them into the womb of the GOPe to fend against Democrats running as Republican outsiders in the future?

Hoodathunkit?

>snort!<

I like the one about the moon landing pictures being shot over by Cody, Wyoming better.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I think he's almost incapable of saying something like that, but it's nice to imagine for a moment..

That's because Trump is that rarest of birds  a SORE WINNER.

Heh -- that's absolutely true.  The guy just can't take "yes" for an answer.  He has to keep pushing....

[driftdiver]

Why would it matter if he said it?  This is speech.  Speech is not the action of disruption.  Only wimpy, cowardly liberals want speech codes protecting their sacred cows, or in this case, their god, lying don.

@RoosGirl

We're talking about the candidate that accused Cruzs father of being involved in the Kennedy assassination.  Which is only one of many blatant lies told by the Trump campaign.  Each of which should have caused him to end his campaign in shame.

[RoosGirl]

@RoosGirl

We're talking about the candidate that accused Cruzs father of being involved in the Kennedy assassination.  Which is only one of many blatant lies told by the Trump campaign.  Each of which should have caused him to end his campaign in shame.

Right.  I cannot control what other people say/write, but I darn sure can make it known that *I* know when they are lying.

[Smokin Joe]

She is in favor of defeating Trump and thus winning the White House...you are in favor of defeating Trump, with the same result. I'd call that a shared position.

Truth is, latest poll has Trump tied with her in Pennsyvania....TIED IN PENNSYLVANIA!!!  That is huge, likewise in the same polling he holds a lead in Florida and has led in Ohio in several other polls. Those are trends that lead to the White House...so if the race is very close, and NeverTrumps fail to support the GOP nominee...it won't simply be that he lost. He will lose BECAUSE of NeverTrumps, and that means you get 100% of the blame for the ensuing Hillary presidency. Its absurd to try and wiggle out of that responsibility...its all yours. The rest of us are going to support the GOP nominee and fight like heck to keep Hillary out of the White House...NeverTrumps, evidently, are content to be the factor that puts her IN there. Pat yourselves on the back.

Oh, bullshit.

He will lose because a vocal plurality in multiple jurisdictions fell for his BS and eliminated better candidates.

 There are those of us who have warned for a long time that we would not support Trump, not even in the General. We're just a few busy keyboards on the internet, but I like to think we represent some segment of the voting population, just as the busy keyboards singing the praises of the donald like to think they represent an overwhelming majority of the GOP. Reality check: Trump may have finally pulled in the number of committed delegates after the rest dropped out, but it was far from a landslide, it was no shoo-in, and states which haven't 'mattered' in the primary process for a long time got to weigh in.

Your boy had a plurality of support, not some overwhelming majority.

Yet the whole time, those of us who indicated we could not support a Trump Candidacy were told OUR VOTES WERE NOT NEEDED.

Eat it, own it, you folks insisted on this mess, and went to some incredible lengths to berate and belittle those who tried to warn you. and it is all yours.

100% of the responsibility lies with the people who were taken in by the Charlatan.

Do the lemmings who ran off the cliff blame the ones who didn't jump?

[Mechanicos]

I think he's almost incapable of saying something like that, but it's nice to imagine for a moment..

That's because Trump is that rarest of birds  a SORE WINNER. You are right...it is not in him to try and reconcile or convince opponents. Opponents must be destroyed...fairly or unfairly. And in Trump's case mostly unfairly. He's personally trashed every one of his opponents. But now they must all come together and make nice with him. In which case he's delusional.

Yeah I guess Trump should be happy the GOPe wants to steal his hard earned nomination. Not like he did not spend his own money and work his ass off to get here. And its the same group of thieves as before.

[INVAR]

But the convention has a lot of "downtime," when it's not actually conducting business.  People are permitted to mill about, have quiet discussions, etc.  Journalists may walk the floor where the delegates are and speak with the delegates.  Speech content is not something that is regulated.  If someone wishes to walk the floor and lobby for this or that, they are free to do so, even if "this or that" is the rejection of the assumed nominee.

The Trump Worshippers haves already assaulted that notion and declared that to be "disrupting the Convention" and "robbing them of their nominee".

Even though you are correct, it doesn't matter to the neoFascists on the Trump Train.

They demand that he and anyone who is not supporting Trump be banned as a disruptor because to them, it's not a convention to select a nominee - but a Nuremburg Rally.

[sitetest]

The Trump Worshippers haves already assaulted that notion and declared that to be "disrupting the Convention" and "robbing them of their nominee".

Even though you are correct, it doesn't matter to the neoFascists on the Trump Train.

They demand that he and anyone who is not supporting Trump be banned as a disruptor because to them, it's not a convention to select a nominee - but a Nuremburg Rally.

Yes, you're right.  All within the state.  Nothing outside the state.  Nothing against the state.  And lying don is the state.

[r9etb]

He will lose because a vocal plurality in multiple jurisdictions fell for his BS and eliminated better candidates.
.
.
.
.
Do the lemmings who ran off the cliff blame the ones who didn't jump?

Excellent.

[r9etb]

Yeah I guess Trump should be happy the GOPe wants to steal his hard earned nomination. Not like he did not spend his own money and work his ass off to get here. And its the same group of thieves as before.

Actually, a large segment of the GOP -- not to mention a whole host of non-Republicans -- would love to see a candidate who can beat Hillary Clinton in the general.  Donald Trump is not that man.  I see no reason why we should suicidally nominate a horrifically bad candidate.

But suppose Trump does manage to scrape out a win: he'll govern the same way -- a petty and thin-skinned tyrant who cannot ignore personal slights, real or imagined.  In other words, he'll govern in pretty much the same way that the current petty and thin-skinned tyrant governs.

[geronl]

Truth is, latest poll has Trump tied with her in Pennsyvania....TIED IN PENNSYLVANIA!!!  That is huge,

Meaningless polls actually. The Democrats are still beset by division of the primary, Trump is now running unopposed. When the Democrats unite behind Hillary and they will, she will blow Trump away.

so if the race is very close, and NeverTrumps fail to support the GOP nominee...it won't simply be that he lost. He will lose BECAUSE of NeverTrumps, and that means you get 100% of the blame

So voters having trouble seeing much difference between the Twins and decide to vote third party and write-in are at "fault". No, it does not work that way. It is the job of the candidate to attract as many votes as possible. It is not my duty to support the Republican nominee 'no matter what'. That is loser RINO establishment thinking. Trump is not worth voting for. As a matter of fact I could not live with myself if I voted for the freak show.

Trump is a failed human being.

[goatprairie]

Oh, bullshit.

He will lose because a vocal plurality in multiple jurisdictions fell for his BS and eliminated better candidates.

 There are those of us who have warned for a long time that we would not support Trump, not even in the General. We're just a few busy keyboards on the internet, but I like to think we represent some segment of the voting population, just as the busy keyboards singing the praises of the donald like to think they represent an overwhelming majority of the GOP. Reality check: Trump may have finally pulled in the number of committed delegates after the rest dropped out, but it was far from a landslide, it was no shoo-in, and states which haven't 'mattered' in the primary process for a long time got to weigh in. we could not support a Trump Candidacy were told OUR VOTES WERE NOT NEEDED.


Your boy had a plurality of support, not some overwhelming majority.

Yet the whole time, those of us who indicated we could not support a Trump Candidacy were told OUR VOTES WERE NOT NEEDED.

Eat it, own it, you folks insisted on this mess, and went to some incredible lengths to berate and belittle those who tried to warn you. and it is all yours.

100% of the responsibility lies with the people who were taken in by the Charlatan.

Do the lemmings who ran off the cliff blame the ones who didn't jump?

we could not support a Trump Candidacy were told OUR VOTES WERE NOT NEEDED.

We were not only told our votes weren't needed, we were told what awful people we were in various descriptions for not supporting the Orange Toad. People tend to remember things like that when the people who dumped filth on you then ask for your support.

[Smokin Joe]

we could not support a Trump Candidacy were told OUR VOTES WERE NOT NEEDED.

We were not only told our votes weren't needed, we were told what awful people we were in various descriptions for not supporting the Orange Toad. People tend to remember things like that when the people who dumped filth on you then ask for your support.

Well, I told them I couldn't support him. Then I reminded them I couldn't support him, as he is not a Conservative.
They told me that was okay, called me names, and said they didn't need me anyway.
Now, they want WHAT? 

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Do the lemmings who ran off the cliff blame the ones who didn't jump?

Love that line...I'm stealing it. ^-^

[jmyrlefuller]

Well, I told them I couldn't support him. Then I reminded them I couldn't support him, as he is not a Conservative.
They told me that was okay, called me names, and said they didn't need me anyway.
Now, they want WHAT? 

They still don't really want our vote. What they want is a scapegoat.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Yeah I guess Trump should be happy the GOPe wants to steal his hard earned nomination. Not like he did not spend his own money and work his ass off to get here. And its the same group of thieves as before.

Troll.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Do the lemmings who ran off the cliff blame the ones who didn't jump?

Brilliant.

[INVAR]

Do the lemmings who ran off the cliff blame the ones who didn't jump?

Yes.  Trump Lemmings actually blame the ones they know are not going to jump off the cliff, BEFORE they jump off the cliff.

[Henry Noel]

Heil Trump!!!

Drumpf, to you.