This was another part, I think of why people didn't trust Harris. Because at the same time she's saying, "Hey, these things I said in 2019 that were kind of like left wing crazy, I don't mean them anymore. Also, Joe Biden was totally fine and I have no idea why he dropped out. And I never saw any problem the whole time I was in the White House." Either you weren't in the room, you weren't paying attention, or you were lying to us. And the gaslighting is so frustrating.
Bill Maher: What do you think of Trump saying he'll go after entitlements if he's re-elected? Erik Erickson: Bulls**t. Bill Maher: Bulls**t that he says it? Erik Erickson: He's not going to do it. Nobody's going to do it. I mean this is what the president says... Bill Maher: But why say it then? Erik Erickson: Because he wanted more money from the Republicans in his budget for nuclear defense so they gave him more money by saying we'll deal with entitlements next time around. And next time around just like George W. Bush said he'll do it he won't actually do it. Alex Wagner: He's been pretty good about following up on all the big promises. I mean... They don't always get through, but like... Erik Erickson: There's no way. And even if the republicans... Paul Ryan wanted this forever, you had both houses of congress and a republican president, they wouldn't touch it. When we finally go bankrupt as a nation, they'll all deal with these issues and until then we're not going to.
Trump won all the swing states. All seven. I mean he ran the table. Trump won so big, today he called the secretary of state in Georgia and he asked him to lose him 11,000 votes.
Carrey: We have a president who started out when the country was together, and it had a wonderful leader and he is tearing us limb from limb. Destroying every institution. Maher: Let's talk about this Donald Trump, even though we don't want to. Let's bring it in on the panel. Carrey: He's a car salesman. He's a used car salesman. He didn't make America great again, but he did turn back the odometer.
This is a choice of two futures: the left’s vision of disunity and discord or our vision of equal opportunity and equal justice
We will never cave to the left-wing and the left-wing intolerance. We will never surrender to mob violence, and we will uphold American freedom, equality, and justice for every citizen of every background,” Trump said as the crowd cheered.
Anyone who dissents from their orthodoxy must be punished, canceled, or banished,” he said.
Democrats, he said, had embarked on a mission to tear down existing American traditions and institutions, no matter what the cost. “We’re not going to take moral lectures from the same left-wing ideologues who oppose school choice, who support deadly sanctuary cities, who want to defund our police – defund and abolish our police,” he said. “Think of it: Defund and abolish is now their theme.
The destruction of American monuments and statues, Trump argued, was a signal to how they fundamentally wanted to change everything about the country. “They’re tearing down statues, desecrating monuments, and purging dissenters,” he said. “It’s not the behavior of a peaceful political movement; it’s the behavior of totalitarians and tyrants and people that don’t love our country.”
Trump also warned about mail-in voting fraud, fueled by Democrats changing the rules in the middle of an election year, without testing the process. “This will be, in my opinion, the most corrupt election in the history of our country,” he said.
“As everyone knows, they’re using their enormous power to silence conservative voices,” he said. “You know that. It’s not even close. I don’t even think they’re hiding it anymore.”
“It’s the same spirit that compels each of you to stand strong against the dull, mindless, soul-crushing conformity mandated by far-left pundits, professors, and liberal politicians,” he said. “They’re taking our country in the wrong direction.”
“If ever he became President, this country would be a mess. They would rip down everything … He wouldn’t call the shots, he would have nothing to do with it,” Trump said, noting the left would only “lock him in the Oval Office” so they could do as they pleased.
George W. Bush attempted to put Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court and pushed comprehensive immigration reform, No Child Left Behind, the General Motors Bailout, etc. I opposed all those, but never doubted President Bush's integrity, character or faith. Frankly, Trump does not have the character or strong Christian faith I prefer in a president. But he is positively angelic compared to his political opponents and the press. Between Trump and his opposition, I would rather vote for him, despite his flaws, than for his opponents who want a flawless progressive utopia. Trump is neither an ambassador for my values nor the articulate champion of my principles I would prefer. But he is a safe harbor in a progressive storm that seeks to both destroy my values and upend our constitutional republic.
Progressives believe Trump is an authoritarian tyrant barely constrained by the rule of law. With a straight face, these same progressives argue that the accusations against Kavanaugh are proof of his guilt, that he should not be presumed innocent, that a lack of witnesses is confirmation he did what they claim, that all women must be believed except the ones who defend Kavanaugh and that any dissent is just white male privilege. Progressives may claim Trump is Caesar at the edge of the Rubicon, but they have embraced the bastard love child of Joseph Stalin and Franz Kafka and enlisted the American political press to smear, defame and attack anyone who stands in their way.
I think Merchan is desperate to stain the incoming president with the label convicted felon. And understand, under the law, Trump is not officially convicted of anything until he's formally sentenced, even though many in the media, of course, began immediately and incorrectly calling him a convicted felon when the jury verdict came in. That was the whole goal of indicting Trump and putting him on trial. Democrats assumed their politically driven lawfare campaign would destroy him. Instead, you know, it had the opposite effect. Voters saw it for what it was: a corrupt weaponization of the law, and it backfired spectacularly. Many Americans recognize this was a sham trial, a preordained outcome. It drove a lot of them to Donald Trump and he won.
What I fear is that people, kind of looking down their nose, will say the people that are supporting Donald Trump are a bunch of idiots. They're not. They're legitimately scared. They're fearful. They're not as optimistic for legitimate reasons and there should be respect for that.
He can literally wake up - I have this vision of him in, you know, silk pajamas, with his little slippers on with a 'T' on his emblem. He wakes up and he sends out a tweet ripping, you know, someone a new one...He's the first guy that's ever been allowed to call into everything but 'Meet the Press.' I think they even relented. So he has been a master at how you get into the media, the new media, the diverse media that exists today in a way that had never been done before.
To speak of a president “obstructing” Congress is to speak of spotting a unicorn. It is a nonsensical fantasy. And leveling the very allegation, in the first instance, evinces a fundamental constitutional illiteracy.
Our tripartite separation-of-powers edifice was hardly devised for the purpose of ensuring amiability between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. On the contrary, the Framers envisioned a national government in which the three branches existed in a state of continuous, unyielding tension with one another.
In particular, the two political branches — Congress and the executive branch — were meant to be jealous guardians of their own ambits and spheres of influence. Ceaseless tussling between them was to be the norm. “Ambition,” James Madison told us in Federalist 51, “must be made to counteract ambition.”
Accordingly, inter-branch political showdowns are routine. The president can veto legislation. Congress, using its power-of-the-purse prerogative, can defund presidential priorities. And so forth. Each branch has various tools at its disposal to help “counteract [the] ambition” of the other.
That is how our separation of powers is supposed to function — in a state far closer to animosity than to geniality. Which is precisely why House Democrats alleging “obstruction of Congress” as an article of impeachment makes no sense.
If the president disagrees with what Congress is doing, then he should lawfully impede or obstruct its efforts. And the proper way for Congress to push back on a frustrative president is not to resort to the extreme and uniquely anti-democratic remedy of impeachment but to simply defund his legislative priorities or perhaps force a government shutdown.
Fact is, it is wholly improper — and counter to the spirit embodied in our constitutional framework — for Congress to attempt to impeach the president for obstructing its congressional responsibilities. To pout over purported “obstruction of Congress” is to moan that the president is reasserting the truism that he is, in fact, a separate branch of government and capable of pushing back on the other branches.
By attempting to impeach the president because he wields presidential power, House Democrats reveal that it is they themselves who are the ones abusing power.
“Trump can be and must be expunged. The hate he has triggered, the pandora’s box he has opened, they will not be so easily destroyed. So, let us brace ourselves. The task is twofold,” Olbermann said. “The terrorist Trump must be defeated, must be destroyed, must be devoured at the ballot box and then he and his enablers and his supporters and his collaborators and the Mike Lees and the William Barrs and the Sean Hannitys and the Mike Pences and the Rudy Giulianis and the Kyle Rittenhouses and the Amy Coney Barretts must be prosecuted and convicted and removed from our society while we try and rebuild it and to rebuild the world Trump has nearly destroyed by turning it over to a virus.”
Like any business person, Trump has made mistakes – some whoppers in fact. So did Romney. Our country was founded on people who were unafraid to make whoppers. Big deal. Some of Trump’s businesses were either ugly, shady or awful. I have no interest in dealing in gambling or strip joints. For him it was just another business. Voters will have to weigh the evidence and compare those legal but unsavory businesses with the way Hillary Clinton conducted the seamy quid pro quo and crony capitalism of the Clinton Foundation. I suspect that will end up a wash with neither side getting clean.
He sees green first. At least so far as the evidence is concerned. True, he’s made terrible comments about a handicapped person and about Rosie O’Donnell and some other individual women. That makes him a jerk, not a racist, bigot or other “ists.” He seems to be an equal opportunity offender at times, and a charmer at others. Don’t know how he’ll change in the Oval Office. Could be a problem if he gives Angela Merkel a weggie or tries to high five the Pope.
This election isn't about greatness, the future, or even Donald Trump. It's about defiance. To his supporters, a vote for Trump is a way to flip the middle finger to the system, the media, the elite, the liberals, the know-it-alls and the people who pretend they're better than us.
Feelings are powerful. According to research, 95% of our decisions are based on subconscious factors - like how we feel. Not logic. Not what you "know" is right. We make decisions based on what we feel in the moment.
Anger is a powerful emotion. What Trump represents is real. Concern about Hillary's ability to fix a system she's been inside of her whole career is real.
The people did not want a politician. The people wanted to be seen. Donald Trump convinced those people that he could see them. Hillary Clinton did not.
Let’s try something new. Let’s run America like a business, where no colors matter. Whoever can do the job, gets the job.
I can't imagine what this place would be - I can't imagine what the country would be - with Donald Trump as our president. For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be - I don't even want to contemplate that.
He [Trump] is a faker...He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego.
Imagine if all nine justices announced their presidential preferences in the advance of each election. Imagine further that they took sides in primary battles, too. It's folly to pretend that judges and justices have no political views, or that their legal views are entirely separate from their judicial philosophies. But there is value in at least formal neutrality in these most partisan battles. Any smart lawyer - or smart citizen - can see that. So, in short order, will Ginsburg.
This was another part, I think of why people didn't trust Harris. Because at the same time she's saying, "Hey, these things I said in 2019 that were kind of like left wing crazy, I don't mean them anymore. Also, Joe Biden was totally fine and I have no idea why he dropped out. And I never saw any problem the whole time I was in the White House." Either you weren't in the room, you weren't paying attention, or you were lying to us. And the gaslighting is so frustrating. 