General Discussion

global1

(25,261 posts) Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:36 AM Mar 2015

OK - We're A Day Into This GOP Letter To Iran - What Are The Repug Talking Points For Doing It?.....

We're a day into the controversy surrounding this letter signed by 47 of 54 Repug senators. The swift response by the Administration and the Dems and the fallout in the MSM has had a chance to ruminate now. So what are the Repugs saying in defense? How are they justifying this letter? What are the conservative talking heads on the cable news shows and radios saying to defend this action. By now the Repug talking points have to have been distributed. What are we going to hear the next few days from them.

And will the 7 Repug senators that didn't sign be given talking points as well?

This ought to be interesting.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

OK - We're A Day Into This GOP Letter To Iran - What Are The Repug Talking Points For Doing It?..... (Original Post) global1 Mar 2015 OP

I have seen commenters trying to spin it as an "editorial". DetlefK Mar 2015 #1

aka a logan act violation Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #2

Well, GOP won't NEED talking points on this anymore - Clinton camp just announced blm Mar 2015 #3

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)

1. I have seen commenters trying to spin it as an "editorial".

Reply to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 10:04 AM

Mar 2015

You see, it wasn't a diplomatic note refering to ongoing negotiations, being sent to a foreign government with a US Senate letterhead. It was merely an editorial elaborating on the opinions of some people.

Romeo.lima333

(1,127 posts)

2. aka a logan act violation

Reply to DetlefK (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 10:33 AM

Mar 2015

blm

(113,078 posts)

3. Well, GOP won't NEED talking points on this anymore - Clinton camp just announced

Reply to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 10:40 AM

Mar 2015

a 'press availability' for this afternoon to take questions on the BS email story.

Way to step on the biggest story of the year, geniuses.

Reply to this discussion