Time to turn your back on the GOP’s Barack Obama …
Former President Jimmy Carter, the progressive socialist democrat weasel who gave us Islamo-fascism, opined he would much rather choose a “malleable” Donald Trump over Ted Cruz …
Jimmy Carter: I'd pick Trump over Cruz
“I think I would choose Trump, which may surprise some of you,” the former Democratic president said during an appearance at Britain’s House of Lords on Wednesday afternoon. He was asked who he would pick for the GOP nomination.
“The reason is, Trump has proven already he’s completely malleable,” Carter explained. “I don’t think he has any fixed [positions] he’d go the White House and fight for. On the other hand, Ted Cruz is not malleable. He has far-right wing policies he’d pursue if he became president.”<Source>
Pretty much why the progressive socialist democrats, RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), and the establishment despise Ted Cruz. He has proven that he will not wither under media attack and will actually stand up to the majority of the GOP and Congress to protect his constitutionally conservative core values.
Unlike a Donald Trump, the “deal maker” who acts more like a progressive socialist democrat than the conservative he claims to be. Of course, we might ask why any conservative would give up a speaker’s slot at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) if he did not fear embarrassing questions about his previous history of supporting Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and others who are the polar opposite of conservatism.
Here is what Donald Trump said at the GOP Debate in Detroit …
The most startling answer of the evening had to do with attacking the families of terrorists – a war crime under most scenarios. And, yet there is Trump claiming that the military will do what I tell them to do. Scary, especially considering that was the most prevalent defense at the Nuremberg War Crime Trial.
BAIER: Mr. Trump, just yesterday, almost 100 foreign policy experts signed on to an open letter refusing to support you, saying your embracing expansive use of torture is inexcusable. General Michael Hayden, former CIA director, NSA director, and other experts have said that when you asked the U.S. military to carry out some of your campaign promises, specifically targeting terrorists' families, and also the use of interrogation methods more extreme than waterboarding, the military will refuse because they've been trained to turn down and refuse illegal orders. So what would you do, as commander-in-chief, if the U.S. military refused to carry out those orders? TRUMP: They won't refuse. They're not going to refuse me. Believe me. BAIER: But they're illegal. TRUMP: Let me just tell you, you look at the Middle East. They're chopping off heads. They're chopping off the heads of Christians and anybody else that happens to be in the way. They're drowning people in steel cages. And he -- now we're talking about waterboarding. This really started with Ted, a question was asked of Ted last -- two debates ago about waterboarding. And Ted was, you know, having a hard time with that question, to be totally honest with you. They then came to me, what do you think of waterboarding? I said it's fine. And if we want to go stronger, I'd go stronger, too, because, frankly... ... that's the way I feel. Can you imagine -- can you imagine these people, these animals over in the Middle East, that chop off heads, sitting around talking and seeing that we're having a hard problem with waterboarding? We should go for waterboarding and we should go tougher than waterboarding. That's my opinion. BAIER: But targeting terrorists' families? RUMP: And -- and -- and -- I'm a leader. I'm a leader. I've always been a leader. I've never had any problem leading people. If I say do it, they're going to do it. That's what leadership is all about. BAIER: Even targeting terrorists' families? TRUMP: Well, look, you know, when a family flies into the World Trade Center, a man flies into the World Trade Center, and his family gets sent back to where they were going -- and I think most of you know where they went -- and, by the way, it wasn't Iraq -- but they went back to a certain territory, they knew what was happening. The wife knew exactly what was happening. They left two days early, with respect to the World Trade Center, and they went back to where they went, and they watched their husband on television flying into the World Trade Center, flying into the Pentagon, and probably trying to fly into the White House, except we had some very, very brave souls on that third plane. All right? |
The United States Constitution, the Geneva Convention, and the laws of war are not suggestions. The idea that Trump would knowingly issue an illegal order and demand the military honor the order is ludicrous. <Source>
So why should we be surprised when Donald Trump waffles and walks it back …
Donald Trump reverses position on torture, killing terrorists' families
Republican front-runner Donald Trump moved to staunch scathing criticism of his national security views on Friday, executing an abrupt about-face by declaring that he would not order the U.S. military to violate international laws to fight terrorism.
After advocating the killing of terrorists' families and the benefits of waterboarding, Trump reversed course after condemnation from former cabinet members, lawmakers and intelligence and military officials, some of whom denounced him as "utterly unfitted to the office" of president.
Others suggested that the military would be within its rights to refuse to obey those orders.
But in a statement Friday, Trump said that he understands "that the United States is bound by laws and treaties" and that he would "not order our military or other officials to violate those laws and will seek their advice on such matters."
He added, "I will not order a military officer to disobey the law. It is clear that as president I will be bound by laws just like all Americans and I will meet those responsibilities."
The statement was first reported in The Wall Street Journal.
Katrina Pierson, a Trump spokeswoman, said the candidate had been misunderstood.
"He realized they took him literally, that's why he put out the statement," she told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "What he's saying is that he wants to go after them with the full force of everything we have."
Neither the statement nor the campaign's explanations were enough to quell the bipartisan uproar.
Source: Donald Trump reverses position on torture - CNNPolitics.com
Like Obama, this is only part of a pattern and practice of shooting from the lip; and then blaming it on a misunderstanding when you are demonstrably wrong. Not even the guts to stand up and admit making a mistake.
But, then again he did the same thing with racist KKK member David Duke …
Donald Trump stumbles on David Duke, KKK
The Sunday uproar started when Trump was asked by [Jake] Tapper whether he would disavow Duke and other white supremacist groups that are supporting his campaign.
"Just so you understand, I don't know anything about David Duke, OK?" Trump said.
Trump was pressed three times on whether he'd distance himself from the Ku Klux Klan -- but never mentioned the group in his answers.
"I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists," he said. "So I don't know. I don't know -- did he endorse me, or what's going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists."
Donald Trump is trying to clean up a racially charged controversy Monday after he refused to disavow former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke over the weekend.
When asked about his comments on CNN's "State of the Union," Trump blamed a "bad earpiece."
"I was sitting in a house in Florida, with a bad earpiece," the brash billionaire told NBC's "Today" show. "I could hardly hear what he's saying. I hear various groups. I don't mind disavowing anyone. I disavowed Duke the day before at a major conference." <Source>
Of course this was a lie, primarily because Trump repeated a large portion of the question in his answer; proving he not only heard it, but acknowledged the question in his answer.
Trump the deal maker: Is his immigration stance the opening bid in a presidential negotiation ploy? …
Did Donald Trump tell the New York Times Editorial Board, off the record, that he wouldn’t be as tough on immigration as his public stance?
Donald Trump Secretly Told The New York Times What He Really Thinks About Immigration
The New York Times is sitting on an audio recording that some of its staff believes could deal a serious blow to Donald Trump, who, in an off-the-record meeting with the newspaper, called into question whether he would stand by his own immigration views.
On Saturday, columnist Gail Collins, one of the attendees at the meeting (which also included editor-in-chief Dean Baquet), floated a bit of speculation in her column:
The most optimistic analysis of Trump as a presidential candidate is that he just doesn’t believe in positions, except the ones you adopt for strategic purposes when you’re making a deal. So you obviously can’t explain how you’re going to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants, because it’s going to be the first bid in some future monster negotiation session.
Sources familiar with the recording and transcript — which have reached near-mythical status at the Times — tell me that the second sentence is a bit more than speculation. It reflects, instead, something Trump said about the flexibility of his hardline anti-immigration stance. <Source>
Like Barack Obama, Trumps historical positions and associates are in plain sight. And, like Barack Obama, they paint Trump as a progressive socialist democrat – not a conservative. Even worse, there is the suggestion that he might be the unelectable stalking horse to allow Hillary Clinton to slip into the White House on a wave of anti-Trump sentiment. Significant rewards to follow.
Bottom line …
Trump is a chameleon, ever-changing to adapt his color to his background. Other than his narcissistic ego-maniacal promotion of the Trump brand, all we know is that he has few core values and can be bought. That is, when he is not buying others.
The man who shouts liar, liar at others is perhaps the biggest liar of all.
Ted Cruz is the only constitutional conservative with the cojones to stand up to his own party, the establishment, and anyone else that would attack the Constitution or the United States. Steadfast and “unmalleable.” The man that can reverse the tide of socialism and establishment cronyism – not simply slow it down by tinkering at the edges of waste, fraud, and abuse.
We need a Ted Cruz.
-- steve
No comments:
Post a Comment