Trump's Critics Keep Undermining Their Case by Lying About Stuff He Supposedly Said
Trump criticized Liz Cheney's interventionism. He did not say she should "go before a firing squad."

It is no secret that Donald Trump hates former Rep. Liz Cheney (R–Wyo.), a leading critic of the former president who joined nine other Republicans in supporting his second impeachment, served as vice chair of the House select committee that investigated the 2021 Capitol riot, and is now campaigning for Vice President Kamala Harris. But contrary to what you may have heard, Trump did not say Cheney "should be fired upon" (as CNN reported), recommend "executing her" (as CNN anchor Sara Sidner claimed), suggest that she "go before a firing squad" (as The Atlantic's David Graham averred), or make "a dark and ominous threat" of "death" against her (as The New Republic's Hafiz Rashid asserted).
Here is what Trump actually said about Cheney during an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson at a campaign event in Glendale, Arizona, on Thursday night: "She's a radical war hawk. Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let's see how she feels about it—you know, when the guns are trained on her face." Referring to politicians who are inclined to favor U.S. military interventions, Trump added: "You know, they're all war hawks when they're sitting in Washington in a nice building, saying, 'Oh, gee, well, let's send, let's send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.'"
Trump's remarks about Cheney reflected a standard complaint about armchair interventionists: that they are insulated from the consequences of the wars they support and do not give adequate consideration to the human costs. Although he may have expressed that point in especially vivid terms, he did not argue that Cheney deserved to be shot or killed.
Cheney nevertheless joined other Trump critics in portraying his comments as a death threat. "This is how dictators destroy free nations," she wrote on X. "They threaten those who speak against them with death. We cannot entrust our country and our freedom to a petty, vindictive, cruel, unstable man who wants to be a tyrant."
The blatant distortion of Trump's comments is part of a pattern, and it reflects a broader problem. With four days to go before the presidential election, people who rightly worry about what a second term for Trump could mean might have a chance to persuade on-the-fence voters that his authoritarian instincts, reflected in his frequently expressed desire to punish his political opponents after he regains power, make him unfit for office. But when Trump's critics try to do that by misrepresenting easily checked facts, they encourage potentially persuadable voters to dismiss the case against him as mendacious fearmongering.
This episode is similar to what happened after Trump, during a Fox News interview with Maria Bartiromo a couple of weeks ago, was asked whether he was "expecting chaos on Election Day" if "you win." Trump said the "National Guard or, if really necessary, the military" could "handle" rioting by "radical left lunatics," because "they can't let that happen." The New York Times inaccurately reported that Trump had "openly suggested turning the military on American citizens simply because they oppose his candidacy," and other news outlets offered a similar spin.
Although Trump did not say what the Times claimed, he said other things during that interview that were more than a little troubling. "We have two enemies," he said. "We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within. And the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia, and all these countries, because if you have a smart president, he can handle them pretty easily."
As an example of "the enemy within," Trump cited Rep. Adam Schiff (D–Calif.), who managed Trump's first impeachment and is now running for the Senate. "The thing that's tougher to handle are these lunatics that we have inside, like Adam Schiff," he said. "Think of it. This guy is going to be a senator." Trump described Schiff as "a total sleazebag" who has "put our country" in "danger."
Those comments illustrated Trump's tendency to portray his political opponents as traitors, conflating his enemies with the nation's. He has similarly called journalists who offend him "enemies of the people" and described Americans who disagree with him as "communists," "Marxists," "fascists," "radical left lunatics," "sick people," and "vermin." All this is bad enough without falsely claiming that Trump told Bartiromo he favors deploying the military against anyone who dares to oppose him.
Trump's actual threats against Liz Cheney likewise are genuinely alarming, especially because they reflect his general tendency to endorse the arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment of people who cross him. In March 2023, Trump said the January 6 committee's members "should be prosecuted for their lies and, quite frankly, TREASON!" A year later, Trump declared that Cheney "should go to jail along with the rest of the Unselect Committee!"
In June, Trump shared a Truth Social post that said Cheney "is guilty of treason." The post added, "Retruth if you want televised military tribunals." Since Trump did "retruth" that message, we can reasonably infer that he thinks Cheney, whom he had already accused of treason, should face a military tribunal. Again, this is bad enough without inaccurately claiming that Trump told Carlson that Cheney should "go before a firing squad."
The Trump campaign quickly made hay of such false characterizations. "Even Leftists Are Debunking Latest Fake News Hoax," says the headline above a press release the campaign issued today. It quotes "Never Trumper Joe Walsh," who noted that "Trump did NOT call for Liz Cheney to be executed"; Vox writer Zack Beauchamp, who likewise observed that "Trump didn't threaten to execute Liz Cheney" but was instead "calling her a chickenhawk, something liberals said about her for ages"; and Reason contributor Kat Rosenfield, who said journalists are "lying to their audiences" when they equate his criticism of Cheney with recommending her execution.
Even while debunking that misrepresentation, the press release illustrated Trump's reflexive mislabeling of his critics. Walsh, now a radio talk show host, is a former Republican congressman who was endorsed by the Club for Growth and holds generally conservative views. He is a former Trump supporter who turned against him in 2018. While no one would mistake Beauchamp or Rosenfield for a conservative, that does not make them "leftists." But as Trump tells it, anyone who opposes him is a "radical left lunatic," part of "the enemy from within."
That attitude illustrates Trump's vindictive demagoguery, which combines narcissism with authoritarianism. It is an important consideration in deciding whether he should again be entrusted with the powers of the presidency. Instead, we are talking about the dishonesty of journalists who distort reality in their desperation to avoid that outcome.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Joe Walsh is a leftist. It's not even a controversial take.
But life's been good to him so far.
his Maserati does 185
He lost his licence, so now he don't drive.
He has a mansion, but apparently he's never been there.
(but) They tell him it's nice.
Walsh, Kinzinger... "Illinois Republican" is like a euphemism or archetype for "eGOP".
Again, back when Barack Obama was running for Senate, the IL-GOP replaced Jack Ryan with Alan Keyes. Jack Ryan was a broker turned teacher who worked in the inner city and he was embarrassed when it was leaked in a custody hearing that he wanted to sleep with his wife Jeri Ryan in a quasi-public setting (I'm not joking). The IL-GOP asked him to step down and replaced him with a black, carpetbagger, Alan Keyes who was notorious for saying "Jesus Christ himself would not vote for Barack Obama."
It was like watching a football game where one team takes out their struggling star quarterback and they put in, not one of the backups, but the nearest free agent they can find. And, after some discussion on the sidelines, he proceeds to snap the ball, backpedal to his own endzone, and then take a knee.
Huh. I wouldn't think wanting to "sleep with" Jeri Ryan under just about any circumstances would be something to be ashamed of.
Especially if you’re married to her!
Like I said, you watch it happen and your reaction is just mind-boggling until a thought along the lines of “It’s like they’re trying to lose!” pops into your head. And then…
and he was embarrassed when it was leaked in a custody hearing that he wanted to sleep with his wife Jeri Ryan in a quasi-public setting
Remember, this happened specifically because Obama used his connections to get those records leaked in the first place.
Walsh, Kinzinger… “Illinois Republican” is like a euphemism or archetype for “eGOP”.
Unfortunately, it very much is. Remember that Ray LaHood (R-Peoria) was Obama's Secretary of Transportation. It's been a big problem for a very long time in the state. John Kass refers to it as The Combine, the Democrats and their GOP sycophants who aid and abet them. It's the ultimate Uniparty.
From 2013: https://illinoispaytoplay.com/after-a-decade-of-patrick-fitzgerald-the-combine-alive-and-well/
Illinois is one of those states that no one around the country seems to pay any attention to, yet it is the most important state to look at it you want to understand the modern Democratic Party and how the Uniparty operates. California is off in lala land, New York is a world unto itself, but Illinois is how the current Democratic Party was formed. It's where Obama learned his political craft and how to play in a political arena. Look at the number of Illinoisans in Obama's cabinet. Remember, this is where Hillary Rodham, now Hillary Clinton, grew up, up in very Democrat Park Ridge, in Democrat Cook County, adjoining Democrat Chicago.
Park Ridge, when Ms Rodham lived there, was a Republican stronghold. 60 years makes a difference.
https://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/September-2019/When-Hillary-Clinton-Was-a-Teenage-Republican/
Yeah, Hilary was a Goldwater Girl.
Even the collar counties surrounding Cook are mostly Democratic. McHenry still votes GOP. I have a brother-in-law who lives there.
I know the Never Trumpers are bastards, but why do they have to be such stupid bastards?
TDS is a strange disease. It turns even the mild-mannered into total assholes like political cocaine.
""Kat Rosenfield, who said journalists are "lying to their audiences""
Those believing the lies don't care. To them it's just more fuel for hate. True or not.
Fake, but accurate.
which combines narcissism with authoritarianism. It is an important consideration in deciding whether he should again be entrusted with the powers of the presidency.
California's top cop who put single moms in jail for their kids' truancy, and then bragged and cackled about it, would like a word.
Even in an article about Democrats twisting Trump’s words, Sullum has to get in his shots at Trump.
Are you saying that JS is shooting at Trump, or planning to shoot at Trump?
We need a Top-Secret Decoder Ring to decode what Trump says! What did Trump REALLY mean by comment XYZ? Now I need a Top-Secret Decoder Ring to decode the comments here ass well!!!
In the second to last paragraph he engages in the same sort of projection and blame shifting that he’s highlighting and highlighting his peers criticism of in the previous paragraphs.
It’s insane. If you aren’t out burning effigies, if you aren’t out calling him Hitler cheering for assassins, if you’re willing to acknowledge that he could win a free and fair election and rightfully be The President again, even if you hate his guts and disagree with every policy proposal he has, you aren’t the ‘enemy from within’ or ‘radical lunatic left’ he’s talking about. But if you’re going to sit here and try and feed everyone the “mostly peaceful”, “Antifa doesn’t carry membership cards”, “Don’t believe your lying eyes about crime, trust the FBI.” gaslighting that’s been failing for the last several years, you actually kinda are objectively a lunatic sewing seeds of unrest domestically.
Moral of the story: Trump is bad enough that there's no need to be dishonest about him.
Then why the dishonesty?
Btw, their dishonesty shows something about their character.
Why? Because of the lack of a Top-Secret Decoder Ring to decode what Trump REALLY means by strange or over-the-top comments! A Top-Secret Decoder Ring, or maybe a brain scanner!!! Let's get cracking on that! Or maybe crack-smoking...
It is always their initial inclination.
Exactly. Report on every verifiable fucked-up thing Trump does. If he's so vile, this should be enough. No need to fabricate stories if he's so goddamn bad.
That’s what leftists do.
Probably the same reason why certain Trump defenders (they know who they are) are incapable of telling the truth.
So, why the dishonesty, Sarc?
We all tell the truth. You’re a serial liar. Along with that far fuck pedophile you gimp for.
Speak of the devil.
Looked in a mirror?
You replied to your own comment with, "speak of the devil." Lol
Some of us a smart enough to conserve indents while still preserving the thread. Else you quickly run out of indents. That's all...
That too.
It’s like when you hand a cashier $12 for a $6.52 total and they keep trying to give the two ones back. Finally you tell them to punch the damn numbers into the damn machine and you can see the lightbulb go off when they realize you wanted a fiver back instead of a bunch of ones.
Jesse and ML won’t even put $12 into the machine. They put in $10 and hand back three ones plus the two you gave them originally, along with a lecture about how stupid you are.
Lol. Seriously? 3 ones is such a fucking hassle for you? And it makes you feel superior when a clerk wonders why you’re handing over too many bills? Really? Dude, that’s weak.
You catch a lot of shit around here, but you can’t say that you don’t go looking for it. Clearly you enjoy it.
Weird.
What sort of a masochist would continue show up here for the abuse?
Because “the devil” is muted and you can’t reply to muted comments, dumbass.
But as Trump tells it, anyone who opposes him is a "radical left lunatic," part of "the enemy from within."
HOLY FUCKING HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE INSANELY PSYCHOPATHIC? IN YOUR OWN GODDAMNED ARTICLE ABOUT MISQUOTES AND QUOTING HIM OUT OF CONTEXT AND GETTING CALLED OUT BY YOUR PEERS FOR DOING IT, YOU LOOK EVERYONE STRAIGHT IN THE EYE AND DO IT YOURSELF.
This isn't that fucking hard. If Kat Rosenfield and Joe Walsh are out on the Memorial Mall burning effigies of the President as the result of the election, yes, they are as much a lunatic as someone wearing a buffalo hat in public, if they're in the capital trying to shout down the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice that would make them radical and if they oppose Trump because of his less-than-fully progressive take on abortion access or IVF or tariffs or whatever that would make them, definitively, leftist. If they just write think pieces in their paper about how Trump should have a different view on some policy they aren't necessarily "radical leftist lunatics" or explicitly "enemies from within" that he's going to "deploy the miliary on". You fucking halfwit.
They can’t help themselves.
they should all stop doing this for money even if it means I lose the forum.
Trump is the most pro-abortion republican ever elected, ever to be nominated for president.
At it's still not enough for these lunatics.
I was watching Tucker Carlson interview Jimmy Dore-- and while I didn't listen to the whole thing I did listen to their conversation on abortion. What I found interesting is Jimmy Dore's position on abortion was pretty much exactly mine.
Jimmy Dore's position was that he was pro-choice-- that abortion-- the act wasn't a 'great thing' but women should be given the option to choose that path for themselves. Abortion should be safe, legal and rare... aborting a baby wasn't something you cheered on. He then went on to say he was talking to one of his liberal Democrat friends at a convention and he mentioned he was pro choice and she said, "that's not good enough". He asked her what she meant and she said, "You have to be pro-abortion". She indicated that you had to believe that aborting babies was a good thing, and there should be more of it in the world. When he asked her what was the justification of being pro-abortion, she said, "That's a long conversation."
These people have become a fucking death cult.
It's really perverse. I come down about the same on abortion as you do. I used to be a lot more cavalier about it, but I've never thought it was a good unto itself.
I liked what Vance said about it on Rogan (because it's pretty close to how I think about it). He is pretty firmly pro-life, but he did acknowledge that the issue comes down to the tension between two important values: valuing life and valuing autonomy and that where to draw the line is not necessarily obvious.
This is why abortion is the worst fucking issue.
Everyone's got a valid point.
^ This
Yeah, I’ve pretty much given up arguing about abortion for a while now. There are two competing and valid principles there and I don’t think there is any logic or reason that can show which should win out. It really does just come down to a personal assessment and judgement of values.
"This is why abortion is the worst fucking issue.
Everyone’s got a valid point."
Butt... Butt... Butt the LITERALLY SACRED RIGHTS OF HUMAN-DNA-BEARING CLUMPS OF CANCER are MORE valid than the life of the mother of said non-viable clumps of cancer, damn-shit-all!!! We must WORSHIT the human DNA of clumps of cancer!!!
Oklahoma now vying with Idaho for most fanatical!
https://news.yahoo.com/woman-cancerous-pregnancy-told-wait-215500885.html
Woman with Cancerous Pregnancy Was Told to Wait in Parking Lot Until She Was 'Crashing'
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/molar-pregnancy/symptoms-causes/syc-20375175
From there, we see that MOLAR PREGNANCIES ARE NEVER VIABLE!!! Yet fascist assholes like sore-in-the-cunt cuntsorevaturds want to endanger women in the Sacred Name of Unique Human DNA, which is present in a womb-slave!
From the listed source…
There are two types of molar pregnancy — complete molar pregnancy and partial molar pregnancy. In a complete molar pregnancy, the placental tissue swells and appears to form fluid-filled cysts. There is no fetus.
In a partial molar pregnancy, the placenta might have both regular and irregular tissue. There may be a fetus, but the fetus can’t survive. The fetus usually is miscarried early in the pregnancy.
Thanks for proving my point.
So then PLEASE tell me (and other readers), WHO has the valid point here? The “mother-to-NOT-be” of the non-viable clump of LITERAL cancer cells, who WANTS HER FUCKING CANCER REMOVED FROM HER, to protect her life… Or the BUSY-BODY FANATICS who want to “manage” her womb for her?
Are you Solomon-like splitting this non-baby for some strong need of yours, to be “wise”? WHO is giving you ANY “Brownie Points” for this? Playing “Both sides” gets you WHAT, in this case?
“The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in a moment of crisis, REFUSE to pick a side!”
A lump of cancer, or a woman’s control of her womb and her life … WHICH do YOU favor, Oh Solomon The Wise?
Hitler said that in the interests of a "clean" German Race, Jews and other inferiors needed to DIE... Jews and others believed that they deserved to live! What do you say... "Both sides"? "Everyone’s got a valid point. Hitler and the Jews both had valid points.”
Hey, Solomon! Split the difference! Kill 3 million Jews, not 6 million, and call shit a day! Take HALF of the cancer cells out of her womb, and call shit a day!
valuing life and valuing autonomy and that where to draw the line is not necessarily obvious.
Even this is fairly generous as you have to be pretty messed up to relegate all the other decisions and the steps up to pregnancy just shy of abortion as “lacking autonomy” and we day-in-and-day-out at all levels of government and society routinely deny men and people their autonomy for much, *MUCH* less egregious violations of values far less critical than human life.
Again, my State hands out fewer than 10,000 deer tags every year to protect the lives *of deer* on public land. Shoot a deer without a tag? Pay a fine and/or go to jail. Shoot a deer *with* a tag *with an unapproved method* and/or *out of season*? Pay a fine and/or go to jail. Use thermal vision or night vision to hunt a deer or bait them and then kill it with an approved method, with a tag, in season? See above.
Even at that, I can recognize places that think they’re overrun by deer (or other animals) having no bag limits or declaring a temporary moratorium on their conservation regulations and places with a dearth of deer (or other animals) having ‘even one is too many’ restrictions.
Well, ask me about all those other things and I'll tell you what I think about that too.
But as far as the issue at hand goes, I think that most people do see it as a balance and aren't choosing either full autonomy or protecting absolutely every distinct human organism at all costs, as a simple binary choice. And give the wide range of conclusions people who aren't insanely pro-abortion reach, I'd stick with saying that the correct answer is non-obvious.
She indicated that you had to believe that aborting babies was a good thing, and there should be more of it in the world. When he asked her what was the justification of being pro-abortion, she said, “That’s a long conversation.”
This is why I tell Democrats that I’m not anti-abortion. In fact, my belief is that anyone who votes Democrat should be incentivized to abort as many pregnancies as possible. Give them a $100 voucher or Amazon gift card for every clump of cells they get removed.
Even at that, a couple of injections and you get, or can conceptually get, all the eggs for one low price rather than handing out multiple $100 gift cards, nominally every other month or so for 20-30 yrs.
Dore's experience is why I've turned against abortion. I was a lukewarm pro-choice up to 15 weeks, maybe 22 weeks, before this perverse death cult came about. Now, as far as I'm concerned, just ban it other than rape, incest, life of the mother. I'm sick of this damned death cult when the original idea was for it to be safe, legal, and most importantly, rare.
"as much a lunatic as someone wearing a buffalo hat in public"
What do you have against the Bills?
It's Sullum, who is a steaming pile of TDS-addled shit, and who should fuck off and die.
"Donald Trump hates former Rep. Liz Cheney (R–Wyo.)"
Well, the Bad Orange Man can get in line.
"his general tendency to endorse the arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment of people who cross him."
As opposed to the other side, who go far beyond rhetorically endorsing these activities, and actually follow through.
Like the Steele Dossier, Christmas[time] visits to the troops, real estate deals, tax returns, overturning the election, insurrection, asking to go into E. Jean Carroll's changing room in a Sears and Roebuck clothing department... there are so many lies... so so many.
But calling the people who push that bs enemies is going too far.
>>But as Trump tells it, anyone who opposes him is a "radical left lunatic," part of "the enemy from within."
man you almost peeked at the respectable horizon but I guess in the end your derision is the cocaine you cannot quit.
And, yes, she'll tell you she's an orphan
After you meet her family...
funny. and on-topic I'll be seeing the Crowes for the 35th time in a couple weeks
How many "never Trumpers" do not openly endorse Democrats?
You can not like Trump but endorsing Democrats...not the same thing at all.
exactly
if we had an even handed media, Trump wouldn't exist as a candidate.
However, in the world of make believe that the media was fair to Trump the candidate and not trying to constantly make a Kamala victory happen, Trump would be ahead by 7-9 points and it wouldn't even be a race.
Surprise! Trump is ahead by 7-9 points.
"if we had an even handed media, Trump wouldn’t exist as a candidate."
If you had a brain, you wouldn't post such bullshit. FOAD, asshole.
I think he's arguing that if the media had not been shitting on Republicans for decades, Trump might not have been needed.
The Tea Party might have been shat on less.
The massive majority of Trump's Critics aren't any deeper (substantial) than name-calling-bullies on a kindergarten playground.
Probably has a lot to do with that [WE] gang RULES absolute ('democracy') frame of mind.
That woman was raped, beaten, thrown out on the street, maligned, abused, and treated horrifically in every way you can think of. And that’s wrong and awful.
But damn it I don’t like her. And neither should you.
Sincerely,
-Jakey Jakey News Is Fakey
“Those comments illustrated Trump’s tendency to portray his political opponents as traitors, conflating his enemies with the nation’s.”
I politely disagree with this. It’s Sullum who is conflating here, although no doubt Trump has conflated things from time to time as well. For example, I have taken an oath – and several times renewed that oath – to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic.” By this criterion Adam Schiff is, in fact, a traitor! He (and, of course, a large number of other officials both Democratic and Republican) have violated the Constitution of the United States of America an uncountable number of times and, in doing so, have become internal enemies of the nation. The fact that Donald Trump is also an internal enemy of the nation by the same criterion does not automatically invalidate his declaring his opponents to be enemies, nor does declaring his personal opponents to be enemies mean that they are not also enemies of our Constitution. When an official comes right out and says that the Constitution “is a living document” to be interpreted according to the political sentiment of the moment they are violating their oaths to support and defend the Constitution without even having the decency to hide it.
Nice said, my friend.
If Trump was truly so terrible, why do people need to keep making up lies about him??
Because it works?
“Those comments illustrated Trump’s tendency to portray his political opponents as traitors, conflating his enemies with the nation’s.”
That's because THEY ARE. What a shock it would apparently be to the learned Sullum if there actually are enemies of our country and humanity in and out of the halls of Congress. Most especially, someone like Schiff.
Agreed...However
Let's be serious, critics of both sides pile on exagerrated interpretations. It's how the media works. We have gone from the old gotcha politics to the gotcha on steroids politics. Now we take everything out of context and apply the most extreme interpretation.
I won't both-sides it though. The difference is that Trump routinely says extreme and vulgar and demeaning things. He sounds like a surrogate in a baement, only he is supposed to be the leader. It's frustrating that when one instance gets exagerrated we see articles condemning said exagerrations. Really? I'm getting people joke-splaining that Hinchcliffe was referring to Puerto Ricos actual trash problem. As if he would be joking about a trash problem at a rally. And how would that be a joke from a comedian? It only works as a joke if it were about the people. But that's how it goes. The endless back and forth. This is what Trump has done to the country.
This is what Trump has done to the country.
Oh, bullshit. The Democrats and ex-GOP NeverTrumpers like to claim this, but anyone who can't see that these divisions started forming back in the 60s and have accelerated since the 2000 election are fucking ignorant.
"...The difference is that Trump routinely says extreme and vulgar and demeaning things. He sounds like a surrogate in a baement, only he is supposed to be the leader..."
The poor, whiny snow-flake has been triggered. TRIGGERED, I tell you!!!!!!
Look what Trump made us do!!
"...Let’s be serious, critics of both sides pile on exagerrated interpretations..."
Cites missing, TDS-addled steaming pile of shit.
The difference is that Trump routinely says extreme and vulgar and demeaning things. He sounds like a surrogate in a baement, only he is supposed to be the leader.
Periodic reminder. Ladies, your ballot is not a valentine. You're not voting for prom king. Hopefully this message can get through.
I spoke to a femael friend this week who told me that literally her primary reason for hating trump is he mocked the disabled somehow (which i dont even believe i assume it's a media lie).
That's her reason. WW3 and free speech and capital gains tax on unrealized gains were a foreign country to her.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA&ab_channel=CNN
FOAD, asshole.
BTW, shitbag Jeffy here is linking YT vid of a CNN claim, debunked years ago, about Trump supposedly mocking someone with disabilities.
Every bit as imbecilic as the claim that he wants to put that witch in front of a firing squad. Jeffy is a slimy piece of shit, ain't he?
Entirely too many people want a warm daddy-figure for POTUS; largely the same demo as found Walter Cronkite so WONDERFUL!
https://youtu.be/Y_zTN4BXvYI?si=t8ZRPWOYFom0f1QF
Not even close.
"...people who rightly worry about what a second term for Trump could mean might have a chance to persuade on-the-fence voters that his authoritarian instincts, reflected in his frequently expressed desire to punish his political opponents after he regains power, make him unfit for office..."
Have I mentioned that Sullum is a steaming pile of TDS-addled shit who should fuck off and die? Pretty sure I have, but it deserves repeating.
rightly worry about what a second term for Trump could mean
And what, pray tell, would a second term for Trump mean? Spell it out.
Sullum's head would explode from his TDS. We'll see pieces of it as far away as two states from Texas.
Lowest unemployment we’ve had in decades?
Lowest minority unemployment we've had...ever?
I just saw and heard Trump 5 minutes ago on national news talking about aiming a bunch of rifles at Liz Cheney's face. Your headline and story claiming this as a lie is reprehensible and makes me reconsidering why I am a paid Reason subscriber as long as you are allowed to keep writing while being paid with subscriber money.
Parody?
Never presume mental effort where abysmal stupidity will suffice.
D-
A substandard attempt.
He suggested she be sent to fight in one of the wars she likes so much. The guns pointed at her would be those of enemy soldiers. He essentially called her a chicken hawk. Hopefully you are being sarcastic
Team D need a distraction from the abysmal job numbers.
The more they lose control, the crazier and dangerous they become. The DNC controlled media is truely as Mike Malice said, the enemy of the people.
The hail Mary of using war monger Liz Cheney as a martyr for the libs/media is beyone bizarre. F them all...Cheney is a war monger an her, her Daddy, and all the neocons should enlist in the Irving Kriston Trotsky brigade and fight on the line in Ukraine..
Exactly. There's no need to stretch or lie about Trump saying ridiculous and authoritarian things. As Joe Rogan put it, he already says plenty of "crazy shit" that is easily verified.
^ This is the slimy pile of TDS-addled lefty shit who supports murder as a preventative to putting shoes on a desk:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Ya know, asswipe, your whining is going to be very satisfying. FOAD, shitbag.
And yet he’s still objectively better than Kamala.
Objectively? Please, what objective facts make Trump a superior choice for President than Kamala?
I'm guessing that you're going to go entirely with policy preferences, which depend on what you value and how your prioritize your values, if you're going to try and be objective. But even that depends on your subjective preferences.
Posting separate to keep the discussion separate, but my reasons to vote for Harris over Trump are pretty simple. Even setting aside the "crazy shit" he says, he is clearly just not smart enough or industrious enough to do the job. He's never even pretended to actually study any issue that matters. All of his ideas are things he throws out there with about as much thought as most people that tweet or comment on the internet, which is to say, not much thought at all. Tariffs to replace the income tax? That was clearly not remotely feasible, and it could only be floated by someone with a great deal of ignorance on economic policy in the U.S. For someone in the top spot of U.S. government for 4 years, that level of ignorance is inexcusable and disqualifying. We can't rely on him to pick "the best people" like he did last time (itself a joke), to talk him out of proposing and supporting nonsense like that if he wins.
For all of the effort spent on pointing at Biden as a senile old man, the level of denial that Trump is too old is also quite dangerous. After whining about 60 Minutes edits to the Harris interview, it was almost comical how much more editing of a barbershop Q&A Fox News did to avoid airing Trump's normal wandering and rambling answers. The hard part about Trump and his age, of course, is that he was always like that. So, it is hard to distinguish between the lack of focus he always displayed with anything that might be age related.
How did I do at being objective in my thinking?
Not bad for a slimy pile of lefty shit.
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?…”
Kamal Harris has proposed in this campaign taxing unrealized capital gains. This is proposal that reveals true economic ignorance and possibly utter stupidity. We do not have a choice between Donald Trump and an intellectual paragon.
Some countries do tax unrealized gains on some assets, such as real estate and foreign securities, from what I can find with a quick search. (UK, Canada, Switzerland and Germany, notably) So, I don't think it is a crazy or "ignorant" idea. Trump, on the other hand, talks about tariffs as if he doesn't even understand what a tariff is, such as when he talks about other countries being the ones to pay them. Tariffs are paid by the company that imports the goods, right? I assume that some of those companies will be owned by foreign individuals, but I also expect some to be owned by Americans. And those companies are only ever going to import something that they can sell for a profit in the U.S., so the tariff will either raise the price of the good as the importer tries to recoup at least some of the tariff, or they won't import it at all, leaving higher priced goods in the U.S. the only source for our consumers. Just like excise taxes on booze and tobacco, the tariffs will result in higher prices, even if it is a foreign company that pays the tariff directly.
He actually floated the idea that tariffs could replace all income taxes, which is utter stupidity. Because whatever happens with imported goods due to increased tariffs, the countries those goods came from won't just sit on their hands and take it. Making our exports less competitive in a trade war is not going to do anything positive for our economy, and especially not for the average worker.
"...So, I don’t think it is a crazy or “ignorant” idea..."
That's because you are a steaming pile of lefty shit. You support murder as a preventative for something, but he’s not sure what. You are an asshole who should FOAD.
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?…”
That attitude illustrates Trump's vindictive demagoguery,
Sullum started off well but ends on this tiresome nonsense. The left has called everyone on the right greedy, racist, fascist, traitors, and Nazis for the better part of 5 decades but we're supposed to fall apart because Trump calls them enemies in return? The right avoided this for decades and lost ground because of it while Sullum and the other Reasoners at best ignored it while others like ENB fully participated.
But now we're supposed to believe they care about decorum and respect? Reason finally calls out how the left-media openly propagandizes for the left (but still pretends this is new and Trump related instead of the ongoing decades-old practice) but they still haven't let their decorum fantasy go.
This is so funny!!!
The Trump traitors actually think they are going to be alive on November 6th!!!
Hilarious!!!!
Man someone in the church really buggered you huh?
You have a really pronounced multiple personality disorder.
Omg this is so funny!!! All you stupid assholes think you’re going to be alive in 2 weeks?
WE
ARE
GOING
CUT
YOUR
FUCKING
HEADS
OFF!!!
I see KAR has descended into tough gui threats already.
Pace yourself lil buddy, you’ll blow your load too early.
Hahaha! Good one!
Keep in mind you’re the underdog dude.
Eat shit an die, slimy pile of shit.
I tried muting him, but it fucked up the rest of the comments along with his. As much as they usually let people say what they want without moderating here, they should definitely delete actual threatening comments.
^ Like yours, slimy pile of lefty shit? You support murder as a preventative for something, but he's not sure what. He is an asshole who should FOAD.
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?…”
Trump says so much goofy s**t that he has the party believing the other side is evil incarnate so he just rattles on with streams of conscientiousness they lap it up and that is where we are today and if you don't believe in it you're a Communist or worse. What a damn joke.
I see you just woke up from a 40 year coma or else you'd know this has been SOP for you leftists for a very long time.
tazmo8448 says so much goofy s**t that he has the party believing the other side is evil incarnate so he just rattles on with streams of conscientiousness they lap it up and that is where we are today and if you don’t believe in it you’re a Communist or worse. What a damn joke.
But then tazmo8448 is a steaming pile of TDS-addled shit, ain't he?
That's rich. Nobody has lied and distorted more about Trump than sullum.
What the hell happened to Libertarians? Have you read Reason magazine lately? The Libertarians are pinko leftists now.
Libertarians thought so hard about ways to oppose Trump that they turned gay. Like little black sambo being chased around the tree by the Trump tiger until they turned into Dylan Mulvaney.
https://substack.com/profile/36497587-rightful-freedom/note/c-75222275
"But when Trump's critics try to do that by misrepresenting easily checked facts, they encourage potentially persuadable voters to dismiss the case against him as mendacious fearmongering."
But that's just normal reasoning; When somebody's critics turn out to be lying about them about things you can check, you rationally assume that the bad things they say about him that you have trouble checking are lies, too.
Yes, Sullum, you do keep undermining your points by constantly lying about and misrepresenting reality.
You are awarded zero points for criticizing the media's dishonesty when you engage in the exact same behaviour.
Let's not leave out the bogus Steele Dossier, Trump is working for Russia, dismissing the Hunter Biden laptop story, and the pretense that Democrats are all for individual liberty. Democrats project sincerity while lying about all kinds of things.
An indication if high functioning sociopathy...but not that high.
The Steele dossier did far mor damage to democracy than any riot.
As did the left's (DOJ) censorship of social media in general. Trump lost by extremely small amounts and to claim all that had no effect is to prove you are a lying pile of TDS-addled shit.
deleted. wrong thread.