26 votes

RT Abby Martin GRILLS Jack Hunter on Rand "happily endorsing" Romney; Jack spins into a Whirlpool!

Rand Paul 'happy' to back Romney

Published on Jun 9, 2012 by RTAmerica

In a shocking turn of events, the GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul was let down by his own son. Rand Paul was on Fox News Thursday evening to announce he was formally backing Mitt Romney on his quest to the White House. This comes as blow to many Ron Paul supporters, but is the Kentucky senator's move a smart one? Jack Hunter, official blogger for Ron Paul 2012, joins us with more.

Like us and/or follow us:

http://twitter.com/RT_America
http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Jack...

You need to take a hint from what happen to Rand...

And just shut up.

I used to like this guy.

Now I am not so sure.

And I am about one more spin article/video/appearance away from writing him off.

RT is the most anti-America

news network that exists.

One way traffic.

Good interview by Abby Martin.
But sorry Jack..not convincing.

"Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" (Shakespeare)
RP 2012~ Intellectual Revolution.

Ouch. The more Jack talks,

Ouch. The more Jack talks, the worse it gets. Spin baby spin!

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

SteveMT's picture

We will get our questions answered today ....

at the Daily Paul interview w/Rand Paul. Kurt Wallace has all of our questions ready to ask.

http://www.dailypaul.com/239483/exclusive-daily-paul-intervi...

Watch this Abbey interview with Immortal Technique

This was before the recent Bilderberg Conference and a lot of discussion of Ron Paul beginning about 11 minutes in. Great interview with brilliant points, especially related to why OWS and Ron Paul people should be working together.

http://www.sohood.com/crib/2012/05/31/immortal-technique-ign...

Somebody should make this a forum topic

beephree

Arm-Twisting?

I haven't watched this, and only watched Rand's endorsement once, but by all accounts, neither appeared enthusiastic, or truthful.

It just makes me wonder who is being held hostage.

That's one reason why I won't be calling them names: it could turn out to be like calling Ron Paul "crazy" because he wants world peace: very unjust.

Besides, name-calling is bullying, and does not help.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

Here's the irony Jack.

Whatever "strategy" you thought you had backfired BIG TIME.

Not only did it backfire with us, but worse, it backfired with the very neocons you were trying to impress and it backfired with the mainstream. -> http://www.dailypaul.com/239353/way-to-go-doug-trygve-and-ja...

So, you sold us out and you didn't even get your 20 pieces of silver for it. That was smart (not).

First of all...

First of all, it didn't back fire with all of "us." Second, it seems a bit early to me to know whether or not this strategy is back firing at all. My prediction is that most of the people who are upset right now will be enthusiastically campaigning for Rand in four years if he runs, or will be enthusiastically cheering him on in the senate as he continues to fight government there.

Finally, it's unfortunate to me that people resort to accusing Rand (or Jack Hunter for that matter) of some sort of treachery (btw it's 30 pieces of silver). Save your anger and scorn for people who are actually ruining the country.

Keep deluding yourself.

Also read: English 101. Did you READ my reply before replying yourself?

No you did not. So, your response is nonsense.

You will see in my reply a link. This link goes to a post with two links to neocon blogs which have articles that saw through Hunter, Wead's and Trygve's "strategy" and deconstructed it before the day was over on the day Rand's endorsement occurred.

So, dream away, spin away, it changes nothing. Their "strategy" was poorly thought out and backfired beyond their wildest dreams most of all with the very people they were trying to impress.

We'll see...

We'll see... Cheers! :)

If Rand Didn't Endorse Romney, These Arguments May Never

Have come into the media spotlight. I continue to maintain that the Rand endorsement, being controversial triggers with many, these types of questions and may motivate more people to look into alternative media sources for explanations and for everyone to start doing more research outside of the MSM since although Rand's explanation on Hannity may have been regarded by some as acceptable, still many people have allot of questions that are evidently not being addressed - at least not in the MSM...

The fact that Rand is still maintaining that his father is still and always will be his "first choice" continues to beg the question from everybody as to, then why is he making this endorsement? Which no matter which way people look at it, appears to be out of character. This goes with the old theory, sometimes you just gotta throw a wrench in it and throw people off in that manner in order to get questions raised that may not have been expected from the opposition...

Jack maintains in his response that part of the strategy is to "insert these arguments into the mainstream" with the effect of motivating more people to do more research possibly outside the MSM in order to answer more questions that the mainstream channels are obviously not addressing. Other arguments are also starting about bringing the propaganda to light when Abby says, "I can't imagine how much more context it could've been but to be fair I didn't hear the entire segment of that (clip)"

Jack Hunter continues to maintain that Rand's voting record (when it matters) is still very much in line with his father's and that we need to concentrate more on that than anything else when it comes to making any type of judgement. Again, because many are still so confused, Abby Martin (just like Alex Jones) concludes when she says finally "I think time will tell and we'll definitely see how this thing will play out..."

Next Chapter Coming Up - Stay Tuned... And in the mean time, Do More Research is the key lesson here for allot of folks which is precisely what I believe the goal is to help trigger more of an awakening...

-LibertyG ... 2 Corinthians 2:16-17 "To some we are a scent of death leading to death, but to others, a scent of life leading to life. And who is competent for this? For we are not like the many who make a trade(for profit) but as those with sincerity...

Jack, when your explaining,

your losing your argument. The more Hunter talks the worse it gets. Looks like we were hoodwinked, unbelievably sad. But, financially we are winning. Don't borrow money and continue to bankrupt the money changers that produce nothing and live off us borrowing money, support your local small businesses. Time is on our side, not theirs.

That was painful to

That was painful to watch.

Jack Hunter you have been an inspiration for me.

But that inspiration is turning into a bad breath.

Stop ruining everything.

Stop lying.

Stop corrupting yourself.

"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--

Infiltration

that is what happened. And Jack Hunter, the Southern Avenger, is an infiltrator who is blinded by the spotlight.

That was very painful to watch.

Let us disappoint the Men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this Country. John Adams

can't help but notice....

I am not a name caller, but I can't help but notice the similarity. Forgive me, Mr. Hunter, but your double speak begs artistic representation--even if Zorg's part is on the other side.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krcNIWPkNzA&feature=youtube_g...

Man, I LOVE RT

I really enjoyed RT grilling Jack Hunter and watching Jack try to defend Rand Paul's endorsement of Mitt Romney.
Jack's famous lines.... "you judge a politician by how they vote".
Well now Jack, isn't an endorsement kinda like a vote?
Jack, you really put your foot in your mouth here.
Thank you RT, this kind of "grilling" interview wouldn't happen with the mainstream media here in Amerika...it was too pro-Liberty.

no...

No, an endorsement is not like a vote. An endorsement (which most people agree has almost zero effect on elections) is more a gesture of good will than anything else. A "vote" in the relevant sense is something that has a direct effect on policy.

Man, I hate RT.

When I lived in Europe, at one point the only television station in English my family could pick up was Russia Today and even then it was obvious they had an agenda. RT is more biased than Fox News and MSNBC combined. Talk about a subjective interview. If I were the one being interviewed, I probably would have gotten up and walked out on that woman half-way through. RT is a radically Leftist network and the only reason they don't promote Obama is because Obama isn't Left enough for them. I'm glad they've given Ron Paul a lot of publicity, but it didn't help much because there are very few Republican voters that watch RT.

all media are 'propaganda.'

pro·pa·gan·da
noun \ˌprä-pə-ˈgan-də, ˌprō-\
Definition of PROPAGANDA

1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions

2: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

3: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

"propaganda" by itself merely means to propagate, as in to spread and perpetuate. the definition, like a gun, has no inherent evil.

it can be both good, and bad.

thus, all media are in fact, "propagancda."

that goes for RT and well as CNN/MSDNC/FakeNews et al, and all 'alternative news,' as well Infowars, et al, and to anyone with a particular point of view they'd like to spread, inform, educate, or influence, like Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange, or our fellow r3VOL vloggers like Adam Kokesh, MatLarson10, TMOTofGa, or aBillyRcok, etc.

particularly when it comes to both MSM and 'alt.MSM,' between their blatant to more subtle omissions, and comparisons with what other, multiple media outlets 'report' or not report, in lies the Truth.

Just info brother. Just info.

In fact ANY time I post a link to whomever or whatever, I EXPECT all my beloved R3VOL to know to take it with a grain of salt and come to their on conclusions, not by just watching/reading/viewing the links provided, but hopefully are curious enough to seek out more counterpoints or corroborating points on issues raised from other sources, on your own, as well.

after all, is that not how most of you come to verifying that Dr. Paul and the principles and philosophies he's championed are real and legit, all on your own, with your due diligence?

sure, I'm human and I too allow myself to sometimes get swept up in emotional response to various events, but in the end, it's all just info to me: I accept and reject as I see fit.

just as reading a book by any particular author does not automatically mean one endorses all, or part, or ANY of the info cited or propagated in the book nor the author, I expect everyone here to know the same would apply to citing media outlets, as well.

PS. however I always found it bemusing that the capitalized version of "propaganda" always referred to the Vatican's propaganda entity, without a shred of irony.)

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

RT = Propaganda

I'd say, pure 'n simple. Trying to look as if they're good guys, its just fishy.

There is another type of propaganda\evil\etc. coming from Russia, looks that way.. internet pornography.

It is ALL propaganda

Wake the eff up. ABCCBSNBCFOXCNNMSNBC = Corrupt government Propaganda aka public relations.

THINK FOR yourself homie.

Let us disappoint the Men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this Country. John Adams

But

But you insult me as if I don't know what I'm talking about.

%$#@

I don't have a twitter account nor a facebook account and I reeeeeeeeeeealllly wanna see Jack squirm

u said this was on June 9th?

can anyone who has viewed this please take a look and see if they see it on russiatoday's youtube profile as perhaps it was 1 interview in a whole episode?

http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday/videos?view=0

aha! got

Thank You For That

I was hoping someone would put up the link.
Thanks for sharing.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

It is obvious that Jack has

It is obvious that Jack has gotten too close to Rand to give objective analysis if the situation. That said, I think he did a fair job of defending Rand's actions though I don't agree with Rand's endorsement or timing. Bottom line, according to Jack, is that Rand is trying to sell the message to the mainstream Republicans. I just don't agree that will be effective in both swaying those neocons nor holding onto the existing base. Not good strategy because I do not perceive it as even a necessary evil. Rand could easily have not endorsed and got a free pass because, after all, his dad is a contender. He should have waited out the nomination.

I think Rand and jack are

I think Rand and jack are "butt buddies".