Robert Jeffress says it’s unfair to describe Donald Trump as “a xenophobe” and “a racist.”
Sandy Rios laments that Hillary Clinton has “a tremendous advantage” in the upcoming election “because of this influx of immigrants from Third World countries who were accustomed to socialism—who came to our shores and got lots of benefits, and the Democratic Party made sure they knew where those benefits came from.”
Linda Harvey wants parents to withdraw their children from “these gross” sex-ed classes or “or remove kids from public schools altogether.”
Donald Trump confused his supporters and detractors alike this week when, after months of promising to build a “deportation force” to go after every undocumented immigrant in the country, his new campaign manager said that Trump’s stance on mass deportations is “to be determined” and the candidate himself said “there certainly could be a softening” of his immigration position. (Trump, however, continued to insist that he is “not flip-flopping” on the issue.)
This left Trump’s supporters in the anti-immigrant movement, many who have hailed his candidacy as something just short of the Second Coming, confused about how to respond. The reactions have ranged from denial that Trump will actually change his position—a fair assumption given Trump’s track record of saying whatever he thinks his current audience wants to hear—to dire warnings that he got behind “amnesty” to resigned acceptance that whatever Trump does, at least he’ll take a harder line on immigration than Hillary Clinton.
Some activists, like Trump himself, are claiming that he has not changed his position at all. Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson made this argument on CNN today, explaining that the candidate “hasn’t changed his position. He has changed the words he is saying.”
Dan Stein, the head of the anti-immigrant Federation for American Immigration Reform, took a similar tack, telling Newsmax that while Trump probably wouldn’t lose much support from his base if he weakened his hardline immigration stance, given the alternative candidates, he was “very confidant that [Trump’s] positions, in the end, are going to remain substantially intact.”
The Center for Immigration Studies’ Mark Krikorian, meanwhile, claimed that Trump never actually meant what he originally said about creating a deportation force, claiming that the “deportation force” he promised was just “symbolic talk” for stricter immigration enforcement.
"The idea we were ever going to deport all 12 million in two years with deportation squads—or whatever [Trump] popped off about—was never a policy,” Krikorian told The Washington Times. “It was an Uncle George spouting off about the latest thing. I think a lot of people took that as symbolic talk, a way of showing he's serious on immigration and, ‘I'm not Jeb Bush.’’
Anti-immigrant flamethrower Ann Coulter similarly tried to downplay Trump’s attempted repositioning on the issue, telling the Washington Examiner in an interview that took place after Trump’s campaign manager’s comments but before the candidate’s own, that the campaign’s change in rhetoric isn’t “a change in policy.” But she also, stunningly, conceded that it may be “in our interest to let some [undocumented immigrants] stay.”
"It mostly worries me rhetorically ... I mean, what to do with the illegals already here was never really a big part of it," she said. "We're getting a wall. We're definitely getting a wall. That's the one thing we know about a Trump presidency."
She said Trump still offers more than any of the other Republicans had.
"I don't think it is a change in policy," she said of Trump. "The policy is anyone who's here illegally is here illegally, does not have the right to be here. We'll decide whether it's in our interest to let them stay or not. Perhaps it is in our interest to let some of them stay."
Coulter hit a similar note in an interview with The Hill after Trump made his “softening” comment and vaguely outlined a policy in which some undocumented immigrants would have a way forward to legal status. “It's just rhetoric but it's still annoying,” she said. "I think he panicked and he had to say [it] ... I don't think he is softening. I mean the big thing is the wall.”
Coulter, however, who just happened to be launching her new book “In Trump We Trust” last night with a party hosted by Breitbart News, quickly changed her tune, taking to Twitter to accuse Trump of promoting “amnesty”:
William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC similarly cautioned Trump against supporting “amnesty,” saying, “If Donald Trump significantly diverges from his promise to deport all illegals, he will end his own campaign or his own presidency. His campaign or his presidency will be wounded to the point of self-destruction.”
Krikorian had a similar warning in The National Review today, saying that if Trump loses to Hillary Clinton now, it will be because of his “softening” immigration views.
Krikorian, however, told The Washington Times yesterday that he trusted Trump’s advisers (who include Krikorian) to steer the candidate back to a hardline position. “I don’t trust Trump, but I trust the people working for him. And I trust Hillary to do the wrong thing without exception,” he said. “He could sell us out on everything and he’d still be better than Hillary.”
UPDATE: Coulter, who recently said that her “worship” for Trump is “like the people of North Korea worship their Dear Leader,” told WorldNetDaily on August 25 that unlike “crazed, cult-like Hillary supporters,” she’s happy to provide “helpful criticism to Trump.”
“THAT DOESN’T MEAN I’M ABANDONING HIM,” she told the far-right outlet in all-caps.
“Trump needs to stick like glue to whomever writes his speeches and fire whomever told him Americans are up at night worried about the comfort and well-being of people who broke into our country illegally,” she added.
Coulter kept the attacks coming in a column yesterday, once again smearing Khizr for his “thick Pakistani accent” and Ghazala as “a mute, hijab-wearing wife,” while stating that the DNC attendees were clamoring to “Make America Muslim.”
She said the Khans are nothing but “human shields liberals send out to defend their heinous policies” and alluded to her past attacks on a group of 9/11 widows, whom she had called “people enjoying their husbands’ death.”
The conservative provocateur somehow linked Khan’s speech about his son’s death to the debate over the Confederate flag.
Khizr Khan, the Muslim “Gold Star Father” who harangued Americans at the Democratic National Convention, with a mute, hijab-wearing wife at his side, is just another in a long string of human shields liberals send out to defend their heinous policies. The “Jersey Girls” were the classic example, first described in that magnificent book “Godless: The Church of Liberalism.”
In order to shut down a debate they’re losing, Democrats find victims to make their arguments for them, pre-empting counter-argument by droning on about the suffering of their victim-spokesperson. Alternative opinions must be preceded by proof that the speaker has “sacrificed” more than someone who lost a child, a husband, or whatever.
Khan’s argument, delivered angrily and in a thick Pakistani accent at the DNC, is that “our” Constitution requires us to continue the nonstop importation of Muslims.
If the U.S. Constitution required us to admit more than 100,000 Muslims a year – as we do – we’d already be living in Pakistan, and Khan wouldn’t have had to move to get that nice feeling of home. So the “argument” part of Khan’s point is gibberish.
Luckily, Khan had Part Two: His son died in Iraq, whereas Donald Trump does not have a son who died in Iraq, so he can’t say anything.
In addition to the sudden appearance of honor killings, clitorectomies, hijabs and massive government frauds, Muslim immigrants have given us: The most devastating terrorist attack in world history, followed by terrorist attacks at Fort Hood, the Boston Marathon, a military recruiting center in Chattanooga, Times Square, Vaughan Foods in Oklahoma, San Bernardino and an Orlando nightclub, among other places.
We’ve admitted 2 million Muslims just since 9/11 – that’s more than had been admitted before 9/11. If we don’t make it 3 million, we’re monsters? May we ask how many Muslims Khan’s mystery Constitution requires – or is that out of bounds unless we had a child who died in Iraq?
Apparently, sending out a victim to make their argument was the only option left for the “Make America Muslim!” crowd.
Muslim troops accounted for 0.2 percent of all U.S. troop deaths in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Southerners accounted for 38 percent of those killed in Iraq and 47 percent in Afghanistan.
What has South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley “sacrificed” compared to the families of these men? How about Nikki put their flag back up?
The Confederate flag won’t lead to thousands of dead and maimed Americans, as Muslim immigration does. The only danger posed by the Confederate flag is that media elites will hold the South in even greater contempt than they already do, assuming that’s possible.
But as long as they brought it up, if only people who lost children in our wars may discuss public policy, then only they should vote, not only on how many more Muslim immigrants this country needs, but on all government policies. What has Chuck Todd sacrificed? Have any current members of the New York Times editorial board ever lost a son in war? (Fighting on the American side.)
The inevitable conclusion to the hysteria over Khan is that only those who have worn the uniform and heard shots fired in anger can vote in our elections. Hello, media? Hey – where’d everybody go?
In her syndicated column today, Ann Coulter lashed out at Hillary Clinton for featuring the Mothers of the Movement, a group of African-American mothers who have lost children to gun violence and police abuses, at the Democratic National Convention.
Titling her column “When Do The Mothers Of ISIS Speak?,” Coulter criticized the DNC for “celebrating the anti-police group Black Lives Matter” and including Lezley McSpadden, the mother of Michael Brown, whose only “claim to fame,” according to Coulter, is “raising a hoodlum” and “giving birth to, and then carefully nurturing, a violent, cop-assaulting criminal.”
Whatever questionable choices were made at the Republican National Convention last week, I didn’t hear of a single speaker whose sole accomplishment was raising a delinquent who attacked a cop.
But as the country reels from the cold-blooded murder of five policemen in Dallas and three in Baton Rouge, Lezley McSpadden, mother of Mike Brown, America’s most famous cop-assaulting criminal, appeared on stage at the Democratic National Convention.
Welcome to Hillary’s convention, celebrating the anti-police group Black Lives Matter!
If Brown’s mother had done something noteworthy, apart from raising a hoodlum – perhaps pioneering a cardiac stent that will save people’s lives – then one could understand her being a “headliner” at the Democrat’s convention. But, as I understand it, her sole claim to fame is giving birth to, and then carefully nurturing, a violent, cop-assaulting criminal.
Donald Trump, along with every other Republican ever to run for president, is required to repeatedly “disavow” David Duke – someone he’s never met, never mentioned, never thought of – and certainly didn’t invite to speak at his convention.
But Hillary invites to her convention the mother of a man whose criminality destroyed a police officer’s life, tore the country apart and gave birth to a murderous cop-hating movement. Will a single reporter ask Hillary to disavow that?
In a radio interview at the Republican National Convention today, right-wing author Ann Coulter took credit for Donald Trump's campaign kickoff speech in which he blasted immigrants as “criminals” and “rapists,” while insisting that she doesn't promote racism.
While speaking with Wisconsin talk radio host Charlie Sykes, who is broadcasting from the convention, Coulter claimed that after Trump got a copy of her anti-immigrant book “Adios America!,” he incorporated her material into his infamous speech, or as Sykes put it, started “channeling his inner Ann Coulter.”
Coulter, however, took issue with Sykes when he said that her book promoted a “racist meme” about immigrants.
“My answer is F.U., Charlie Sykes, how dare you?” Coulter responded.
“There’s nothing racist about anything I say,” she said. “To be pro-American is racist?”
Coulter went on to allege that while Americans “should be arrogant about our culture,” students today endure “Chinese-style brainwashing from kindergarten through college” that teaches that “American culture is the worst culture in the world” and claimed that it is now a “hate crime to try to assimilate people.” She also cited Ben Franklin’s criticism of German immigrants to show that restricting immigration is necessary to protect America’s British-inspired culture.
On “The Eric Metaxas Show” yesterday, Ann Coulter criticized public schools for supposedly “teaching classes to white children on how bad white people are,” while insisting that segregated schools during Jim Crow “were not teaching classes in the white schools on how bad black people are.”
“[America] is the last Christian country on earth, it is one of the least sinning countries and far more sinned against, and all we do is wallow in every tiny little thing, not we, but you know, it’s forced on us from every media outlet,” Coulter said. “‘Oh, let’s talk about the bad things.’ I mean, you see the analogy with what’s done to policemen in America, keeping us safe, risking their lives, risking their lives to keep people who hate their guts safe, and 99 percent of them are fabulous and unbelievable. I would say it’s less than one percent, and all we have to hear about is, ‘Oh that one percent, and yes, there are some bad apples.’ Why don’t we say that about any other profession? How about hedge fund managers? How about campaign consultants? Any bad apples in there? How about newspaper editors?”
Coulter continued, “With them, it would be shocking to even begin a sentence with, ‘Well, there are some bad apples.’ It’s the same thing with America. We have, you know, the most magnificent country, should be fighting to protect it and instead, I mean, look at these course curriculums.”
“Even, you know, in the worst days of Jim Crow, when – true, black people could not go to school with white people because of the Democrats, but in the worst days, they were not teaching classes in the white schools on how bad black people are,” Coulter said. “Today, right here, within a half mile of where this studio is, they are teaching classes to white children on how bad white people are.”
Metaxas said, “This started in the ‘60s, and basically, we have been teaching young people – we’ve not been teaching them about the greatness of America and the heroes of America, the people who have died for liberty. And we have not been teaching that.” He accused universities of “teaching against the greatness of America.”
On Saturday’s edition of “The Eric Metaxas Show,” Ann Coulter attacked the immigration reform plan championed by Hillary Clinton and agreed with Metaxas that Clinton’s appointment of “activist” Supreme Court justices would result in “the end of America.”
“Hillary Clinton is going to elect people like Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court,” Metaxas said. “That’s the end of America. You’re gonna have an activist judiciary.”
“I think it will be the end because she will work directly with Paul Ryan, unless the great primary opponent Paul Nehlen takes him out on August 9, which I hope he does,” Coulter said. “But we know that Paul Ryan is 100 percent for amnesty, 100 percent for transforming America into a different country more like France has been experiencing. You can see the new country they’re foisting on us. Well, that’s 100 percent Paul Ryan, and Hillary already said the first thing she wants to do is reach out to the Republicans and pass amnesty.”
“The country will be overwhelmed, more than it already is, with the third world,” Coulter said. “We’ll never win anything again. Look to France, look to California to your future.”
“Have they already overwhelmed the country with so many ringers coming in, collecting welfare and bloc voting for the Democrats?” Coulter asked. “Maybe we already are California.”
Syndicated columnist Ann Coulter published a warning for Donald Trump today, urging him not to pick a vice presidential running mate whose record on immigration would undermine the draconian stance he has taken throughout his campaign, likening the choice Trump faces to Abraham Lincoln’s search for a running mate who was “ferociously opposed to slavery.”
By selecting an “establishment” figure like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie or former House speaker Newt Gingrich, Coulter wrote, Trump could give Congress an opening to impeach him and remove him from office in order to install his vice president in the White House.
Instead, she said, Trump should choose a fellow anti-immigrant hardliner like Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama or Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.
She likened Trump’s push to build a border wall and deport millions of undocumented immigrants to the fight to abolish slavery and compared Trump’s search for a vice presidential candidate to Abraham Lincoln’s.
Lincoln’s “new Republican Party stood for the soul of the nation against the self-interest of the rich and powerful, just as Trump’s does today,” she wrote, and Lincoln picked Hannibal Hamlin to serve as his running mate in 1860 not because they were personally close, but due to the fact “Hamlin was ferociously opposed to slavery.”
“The official GOP’s opposition to Trump is the modern slavery party’s version of the Civil War, fought by plutocrats with money and media,” Coutler said. “For his vice president, Trump needs anyone — from business, academia, the military or the political world — who is Hannibal Hamlin on immigration, a warrior to defend our country from the rich’s predatory demands for cheap foreign labor.”
Lincoln’s new Republican Party stood for the soul of the nation against the self-interest of the rich and powerful, just as Trump’s does today.
Lincoln didn’t choose some eminent Whig politician to give his ticket gravitas. He chose Hannibal Hamlin. No one other than a “Jeopardy!” contestant even remembers Hamlin’s name today. He didn’t exactly set the world on fire.
Hamlin was a former Democrat, didn’t meet Lincoln until after the election, served only one term as Lincoln’s vice president, was not liked by first lady Mary Todd and didn’t work closely with the president.
He made no sense as Lincoln’s vice president on any level, except the only one that mattered: Hamlin was ferociously opposed to slavery – the new party’s signature issue. He strongly supported Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, arguing that slaves should be armed. As soon as slavery was ended, Lincoln dropped Hamlin as his vice president.
The official GOP’s opposition to Trump is the modern slavery party’s version of the Civil War, fought by plutocrats with money and media.
For his vice president, Trump needs anyone – from business, academia, the military or the political world – who is Hannibal Hamlin on immigration, a warrior to defend our country from the rich’s predatory demands for cheap foreign labor. His running mate also needs to be smart and courageous and not in love with his own press notices.
Among the possibilities Trump ought to be considering are people like Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo (the latter two are up for re-election this year, but perhaps they can run for both offices simultaneously).
Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama is one of approximately one elected officials I completely trust to protect Americans from the cheap labor-demanding rich – which is why Trump needs to keep him in the Senate.
America is now facing terrorist attacks, according to Coulter, because Democrats decided to bring in “hordes of the Third World” in order to defeat Republicans at the polls.
“We’re not a nation of immigrants,” she said. “We have never been a nation of immigrants. This is a myth invented by the Democrats for electoral purposes and Republicans for who knows what reasons, because their donors need the cheap labor.”
She added that Trump’s campaign is “the only hope” for America and “the only frontal assault” against liberal immigration policies. Otherwise, “we can build the bunkers and hire the cheap labor.”
Metaxas, for his part, said that Trump is our last hope “to pull back from the cliff so we don’t all die.”
Coulter told Metaxas that she will soon release a new book titled “In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome,” which Metaxas was not exactly excited about because of her decision to “replace ‘God’ with ‘Trump.’”
Diamond & Silk, the YouTube duo who have become outspoken Donald Trump supporters and have spoken at a number of his campaign events, defended Trump’s criticism of the judge hearing a fraud case against Trump University yesterday, saying that Trump appearing before a Mexican-American judge is just like a black defendant facing an all-white jury.
“Well, first of all, you know the judge is biased,” Lynette “Diamond” Hardaway told Newsmax’s J.D. Hayworth. “You know, he’s Mexican, he’s of Mexican descent, or his heritage is Mexican. And here’s the deal. It’s just like when you walk into a courtroom [as a] defendant and the jury is all white or vice versa, or when a defense team is defending a black client with an all-white jury.”
Avid Donald Trump fan Ann Coulter made a similar argument on Twitter last week:
Re: Trump University judge - hey, has the left ever criticized a jury for having a racial composition that was all white?
Indeed, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has touted the endorsements of several politicians and activists who have done everything from denounce women’s suffrage to deny the existence of marital rape.
Schlafly is the founder of the anti-feminist group Eagle Forum and is best known for helping defeat the Equal Rights Amendment.
Among her anti-feminist beliefs is the claim that marital rape does not exist.
“By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape,” she said in 2007, later explaining that marital rape is simply a fabrication invented by feminists who want to levy the accusation when “they get tired of a husband” or “want to fight over child custody.” (Trump’s own lawyer has similarly claimed that marital rape is not rape).
Besides denying the existence of marital rape, she has blamed reports of sexual assaults on college campuses on the rising number of female college students, criticizing policies to combat assaults for turning college campuses into “a dangerous place for men.”
“There isn’t any rape culture,” she said in 2014. “There is a war on men.”
Colleges, according to Schlafly, should stop enforcing Title IX and install gender quotas to protect male admissions.
As Ian Millhiser noted in Think Progress, the Justice Department’s complaint cataloged instances where Arpaio’s deputies were “forcing women to sleep in their own menstrual blood,” “assaulting pregnant women,” “stalking Latina women” and “ignoring rape.”
Last year, The Guardian reports, Arpaio’s office “agreed to pay $3.5m to settle a lawsuit that alleged metro Phoenix’s sheriff botched the investigation into the rape of a 13-year-old girl and failed to arrest the suspect who then went on to sexually attack her again,” a case that “was among more than 400 sex-crime cases that were inadequately investigated or not looked into at all by Maricopa County sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office during a three-year period ending in 2007.”
3) Ann Coulter
While Trump has been campaigning with conservative columnist Ann Coulter to promote her attacks on immigrants, we wonder if she will ever lead one of his campaign rallies in a chant against women’s suffrage.
Indeed, Coulter hasrepeatedlyvoiced her opposition to women having the right to vote, saying that revoking women’s suffrage is necessary to help elect Republicans.
This is far from Coulter’s only controversial views on women’s issues.
Among the first members of Congress to endorse Trump was Tennessee Republican Scott DesJarlais, who along with some of his fellow GOP lawmakers met with Trump in March to work on ways to unify the party.
As we’ve noted, the GOP congressman has quite the record on women’s issues:
Before running for Congress as a “pro-life” and “pro-family” Republican, “DesJarlais, a physician, pressured a patient who was his mistress to get an abortion. It was later revealed that the pro-life congressman had approved of his first wife having two abortions, and that he’d had sex with at least two patients.” He also had affairs with “three coworkers and a drug representative,” and was later fined for violating medical ethics.
DesJarlais’ ex-wife also accused him of “dry firing a gun outside the Plaintiff's locked bedroom door, [admitting] suicidal ideation, holding a gun in his mouth for three hours, an incident of physical intimidation at the hospital; and previous threatening behavior ... i.e. shoving, tripping, pushing down, etc.”
5) Robert Jeffress
Texas-based pastor Robert Jeffress is one of Trump’s most outspoken Religious Right supporters and campaign surrogates. For instance, Jeffress rushed to Trump’s defense when he said that women who have abortions should face “some form of punishment.”
Conservatives' outrage over @realDonaldTrump abortion comments hypocritical. Maybe they don't really believe abortion is murder.
Before the GOP presidential frontrunner started winning the backing of Republican leaders, he assembled a team of ardent right-wing conspiracy theorists whose bigoted and bizarre beliefs once put them decidedly on the fringe of American politics.
Trump himself has spread a wide range of bizarre and bogus claims, winning state after state by questioning the facts about President Obama’s birthplace and religion, bashing immigrants as “killers and rapists,” parading discredited stories to demonize Muslim-Americans and, at one point, linking an opponent’s father to the Kennedy assassination.
As more “establishment” and “mainstream” Republicans declare their support for Trump, it is critical to remember the people whom Trump initially invited into his campaign: a range of pundits and preachers who have pushed racist, xenophobic and truly insane beliefs throughout their careers.
No endorser was out of bounds for Trump, whether it was a pastor who believes Starbucks injects semen from gay men into its lattes in order to spread Ebola or a radio host who thinks that alien creatures secretly run the government.
These activists have now also become some of Trump’s most outspoken defenders. And, in return, Trump has elevated their profiles by appearing on their radio programs, inviting them to share the stage with him and even praising them to national audiences.
Trump’s apparent victory in the Republican presidential primary gives these figures an unprecedented platform from which to spew their paranoia and bigotry. And it presents a strange turning point at which conspiracy theories that previously only lurked around the edges of political discourse are suddenly thrust to center stage.
The fact that the Republican Party is about to nominate a candidate who has embraced conspiracy theorist broadcaster Alex Jones is downright terrifying.
Trump’s top confidant, Roger Stone, a conservative operative who has called for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders to be killed, has been on Jones’ show nearly every week during the campaign. The two are even working together on an effort to track down Republican delegates who don’t support Trump and hound them at their hotel rooms at the party convention in Cleveland.
Jones’ “news” program is a natural outlet for Trump, as pollafterpoll shows that Trump supporters disproportionately subscribe to shocking conspiracy theories, including ones championed by Jones and by the candidate himself.
It’s hard to describe how utterly bizarre Jones’ worldview is and how unbelievable it is that a major presidential candidate is promoting it.
Trump has become a regular guest on “The Savage Nation,” a right-wing radio program hosted by Michael Savage that has the fifth-largest radio audience in the country, often appearing on the show immediately before primary election days in order to drum up support from Savage’s listeners.
Oh, you're one of the sodomites. You should only get AIDS and die, you pig. How's that? Why don't you see if you can sue me, you pig. You got nothing better than to put me down, you piece of garbage. You have got nothing to do today — go eat a sausage and choke on it. Get trichinosis.
“Ann’s been amazing,” Trump said earlier this year. “I’m a big fan and you know that.”
Indeed, Trump’s extremist plan of mass deportation, constructing a massive border wall, impounding remittances, expelling refugees and curtailing legal immigration seems to resemble the proposals laid out in Coulter’s book, “Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole,” in which she called on the government to adopt draconian policies to curb both lawful and unlawful immigration and refugee resettlement programs because, in her view, America has too many Latinos.
Coulter has urged GOP candidates to win elections by stoking anti-immigrant sentiment and “unapologetically opposing the transformation of America into a Third World country.”
Coulter claims that unless immigration is drastically curbed, parents will have to “get used to your little girls being raped” because “gang rape, child rape, elder rape, and murder rape are highly correlated with specific ethnic groups — ethnic groups we are bringing to America by the busload.”
Gallups and Trump share a passion for promotingbirther conspiracy theories and denouncing the Common Core academic standards, which Gallups warns will ensure that “our smallest children in pre-school” will learn about “the mechanics of homosexual sex.”
“[T]his dude is a Hollywood actor, his so-called wife is a Hollywood actor,” he said of two parents who lost children in the shooting.
A Trump spokeswoman said that the campaign “was not aware” of Gallups’ views, but the campaign still boasts of his endorsement on its website.
Unsurprisingly, Gallups has also speculated about whether Obama is the Antichrist, ultimately concluding that while the president is “an anti-Christ,” it is more likely that “he is a depiction of some of the characteristics of the anti-Christ who is to come.”
Trump was very proud to land the endorsement of Robert Jeffress, a prominent Southern Baptist preacher and Fox News contributor who has hitthetrail with the candidate at a number of events.
At one rally, Trump invited Jeffress to join him on stage as he decried the supposed persecution of Christians in America through the “War on Christmas” and lamented that he wouldn’t have been criticized if he had proposed a ban on Christians from entering the U.S., as he did with Muslims.
Jeffress made waves in the last presidential election when, after endorsing Rick Perry, he told Christians that they shouldn’t vote for Mitt Romney because of his Mormon faith, which wasn’t too surprising since he once blasted Mormonism as “a cult” from “the pit of hell.”
Update: Following the massacre at a gay nightclub in Orlando, James David Manning said he was outraged by Trump’s remarks expressing support for the LGBT community and has withdrawn his support. “Sodomy is more dangerous to America than radical Islam,” he said.
Accused Obama of murdering his “love child” outside the U.S. Capitol.
And that list barely scratches the surface of the many absurd and offensive things that Manning has actually said.
While Trump of course cannot be held responsible for all of the statements these individuals have made, he can and should be held responsible for embracing them and, at times, promoting their baseless conspiracy theories.
As the story goes, a school librarian was wearing a black armband in protest of the Vietnam War. Then, a young Coulter started debating with the librarian about the conflict in Vietnam, “raised my little paw” and told her that “we made promises to our allies and we need to stand by our allies, or something to that effect.”
The librarian, Coulter reveals, finally removed the armband so she could get through the class without an argument.
“It’s all starting to make sense,” Metaxas joked. “By the end of the hour I will have you psychoanalyzed.”
When Coulter tried to point to Trump’s teetotalism as proof of his personal virtues, Metaxas interjected: “His vice of choice was adultery.”
“Allegedly,” Coulter said with a laugh.
“You know where he met Marla Maples?” Coulter said of Trump’s second wife, who was rumoredto behis mistress while he was married to his first wife, Ivana. “You know where he met her? I haven’t really followed his personal story very closely but he met her in church.”
People Magazine reported at the time that Trump and Maples met at a celebrity tennis tournament in Atlantic City in 1985 and by “1987, during services at the Marble Collegiate Church in Manhattan, Trump was secretly romancing Maples as he found ways to temporarily ditch Ivana and their kids.”
“He kept going to some, like, Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church, kept meeting Marla Maples there, got to know her as a friend and at some point he apparently went to the pastor and said, ‘I think I’m in trouble, I’m falling in love with this woman,’ and then he did marry her,” Coulter said.
She explained that just as “we have degrees of murder, we can have degrees of adultery.”
Trump, she said, is unlike other politicians who have had “sleazy” affairs.
“There are degrees of murder, there are degrees of adultery,” she said. “It’s not his strongest point, oh well. He’s the only one who’s going to build the wall.”
Coulter dismissed Sykes’ criticisms of Trump, saying that the candidate’s interview with Chris Matthews in which he called for punishing women who have abortions was “fabulous”; brushing off Trump’s frequent interactions with racists on Twitter as “one dumb retweet”; and saying that the $1.9 billion in free media that Trump has gotten isn’t actually helping him because “this alleged free media has been free attack ads on him.”
When Sykes implored her to convince Trump to talk more about policy, Coulter insisted that “they” — presumably the media — don’t want to talk about Trump’s policies because his central policy is “not changing the entire demographics of the country so that no Republican or conservative can ever be elected again.”
“No, they will not talk about his policy,” she said, “because his policies, which is what I’d like to talk about, there’s no one else who has these policies. I think the most important issue now is not changing the entire demographics of the country so that no Republican or conservative can ever be elected again.”
In a Sunday interview with Breitbart News, Ann Coulter reflected on Justice Scalia’s legacy on the Supreme Court, which she lamented has become a vehicle for the nefarious liberal agenda despite the best efforts of Scalia and others conservative justices.
“Liberals can’t get their ideas through, they can’t get people to join them in their ideas for a total Marxist takeover of the country, abortion on demand, gay marriage was not doing very well in the democratic process,” she said.
But since liberals don’t believe in democracy, she explained, “they just go up to the Supreme Court and say, ‘Could you please hallucinate a right to gay marriage in the Constitution?’”
It’s no secret that Donald Trump likes the work of anti-immigrant extremist Ann Coulter, but he had a chance to tell her so publicly in a radio interview shortly before Coulter took the stage at a Trump campaign rally in New Hampshire last night.
Boston talk radio host Howie Carr, who was broadcasting from the Trump event in Milford, New Hampshire, put Coulter on the line with Trump as she prepared to speak and Trump prepared to head over to the event. Coutler told Trump that he is “doing a fantastic job” and that he would “love” her speech.
“Ann’s been amazing,” Trump responded, adding, “I’m a big fan and you know that.”
Trump also took the opportunity to go after his “low-energy” opponent Jeb Bush, joking that “he probably paid $5 million” for a recent crowd at a campaign event.
“I don’t know, Jeb is out there, he’s spent $100 million, it’s sad actually what’s going on with Jeb, he’s got no votes, he’s down around two [percent] and I think it’s a pretty sad situation,” he said.
Trump added that “most” of his Republican rivals will probably soon drop out of the race.
Steve Deace loved Ann Coulter when she was outraging liberals, but now that she is attacking his candidate of choice, Ted Cruz, she has become a "sad caricature" and a "useful idiot."
Glenn Beck wants to make it very clear that he will not be buying Al Jazeera America because "not one dime will ever go to pay a state that harbors and infects the rest of the world with twisted ideology that leads to terror."
Tony Perkins explains that conservatives love Ted Cruz because is willing to "challenge the darkness -- of terrorism, Christian persecution, same-sex marriage, abortion, religious hostility, radical Islam, family breakdown, even the economy."
Meet Dan Wilks, the billionaire sugar daddy for Ted Cruz and Religious Right.
Finally, the MRC's Dan Gainor is no fan of the upcoming film "Norm of the North" because in it, Gainor says, "Norm goes on his own little polar bear jihad against capitalism."
Coulter started off the interview by defending herself from charges that she’s “divisive,” noting that Jesus Christ was divisive as well. “Yeah, I’m ‘divisive’ because I say things I believe, generally, so does Jesus, and liberals yell at me, that makes me ‘divisive.’ It’s the hecklers’ veto,” she said.
She went on to liken the media’s treatment of her to how it covers Donald Trump, whom she believes will save the U.S. and, therefore, the whole world.
“We are talking about the future of not only of America but of the last genuinely Christian country on earth and thus the world,” she said. “If we lose America, it is lights out for the entire world for a thousand years.”
Coulter explained that God has a role in lifting up Trump’s candidacy: “It is like the fall of Rome but, thank God, and I am not using the Lord’s name in vain, I mean that absolutely literally, thank God for raising up Donald Trump and giving us a chance to save the country.”
“Unless Donald Trump is elected, we’re never going to have another Republican president,” Coulter added, warning that having another Democrat in the White House would mean that “it’s over” and “the country is finished” because there will be a “Supreme Court of nine Ruth Bader Ginsburgs.”
If Trump loses, Coulter said, she will probably “stop wasting my time on politics” since “a Republican can never be elected president” if the country fails to enact severe restrictions on immigration.
“What is the point of talking about abortion or anything else unless you get Donald Trump in to build the wall, deport illegals, end this ‘anchor baby’ nonsense, stop importing 100,000 Muslims a year, in addition to two million Third Worlders per year,” she said. “It’s madness what this country has been doing.”
Coulter went on to say that President Trump should “deport [Sen. Marco] Rubio” and members of the advocacy group National Council of La Raza.