Unhinged Celebrities Losing It! Want Trump Assaulted, Rename Republican Party To ‘The Rape Party’


Multiple Hollywood personalities have gotten
involved with politics and it’s becoming extremely unhinged. Actress Molly Ringwald has taken it upon herself
to rename the Republican Party to ‘The Rape Party” and she’s facing quite a bit of
criticism from citizens accusing her of calling them “rapists” simply for their political
affiliation. Ringwald, 50, best known for Sixteen Candles
and The Breakfast Club, has become outspoken amid the controversial events engulfing the
confirmation of Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh and the pushback orchestrated by Senate Democrats. Ringwald was quite clear with her message
and disdain for Republican Party and Republicans in general who support Brett Kavanaugh as
he fights accusations from Christine Blasey Ford who says that he sexually assaulted her
in the early 1980’s while they were in high school. Ford has yet to produce a corroborating witness
and the people she named thus far have spoken against her story. Ringwald took her voice to Twitter, lashing
out at Republicans. “It’s no longer the Republican Party to
me. It’s the Rape Party.” Another Hollywood actress lashed out at Republicans
as well. Sarah Silverman attacked President Trump,
hoping that he would one day know what it feels like to be held down and violated. She stated this in response to Trump criticizing
the protesters confronting senators in/at the elevators as they attempt to move to a
different floor. “I hope you someday understand what it is
to be held down against your will and violated. Your compassion is startless” “The very rude elevator screamers are paid
professionals only looking to make Senators look bad. Don’t fall for it! Also, look at all of the professionally made
identical signs. Paid for by Soros and others. These are not signs made in the basement from
love! #Troublemakers” Kathy Griffin also chimed in, ranting off
a string of expletives towards Senators voting in favor of Kavanaugh. She dedicated a special message to Sen. Jeff
Flake (R-AZ) who was fine with Democrats requesting the FBI investigation into Kavanaugh’s accusations,
but then seems to believe that the FBI report to be sufficient enough and he voted YES to
push Kavanaugh to the next stage of the confirmation. Griffin seems very angry over this. Griffin was unable to hold a job with CNN
and Squatty Potty after she was seen in a picture holding a fake decapitated head of
President Donald Trump. More celebrities were involved in the anti-Kavanaugh/Trump
antics. Amy Schumer and Emily Ratajkowski were arrested
during protests held at Capitol Hill. However, a contradicting report on their arrest
came out that suggested otherwise. Their arrest seems more like a “let’s
pretend to get arrested for social media likes” act. Getting a $50 ticket is much different than
getting arrested. However, the two celebrities were able to
get their social media pictures that made it seem like they were being arrested and
resisting with protesters. This seems more like a publicity stunt than
someone who actually cares about politics. Schumer has starred in multiple movies, most
known for the movie Trainwreck. Emily Ratajkowski became stunningly famous
when she starred in the ‘Blurred Lines’ music video, which turned out to be one of
the worst songs ever created (my opinion). Ratajkowski’s popularity grew as she posted
sultry photos on Instagram. Hollywood is becoming unhinged and too involved
in politics.

President Trump takes on the Iran deal, health care, and the Republican Party


ROBERT COSTA: Disruption at home and abroad. President Trump undermines the Obama agenda on health care and the Iran nuclear deal. I’m Robert Costa. We’ll discuss the politics and consequences of unraveling commitments, tonight on Washington Week. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) I just keep hearing repeal, replace, repeal, replace. Should have been done a long time ago. ROBERT COSTA: After failed attempts in Congress, President Trump dismantles Obamacare on his own. His administration will stop paying monthly subsidies that cover low-income Americans. Democrats sound the alarm. HOUSE MINORITY LEADER NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): (From video.) This is sabotage of the Affordable Care Act and, quite frankly, a real disservice to the American people, many of whom voted for him. ROBERT COSTA: What do the new rules mean for Americans and the future of the law? Plus, the president says the Iran nuclear agreement is a bad deal and requests Congress to act. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) The Iranian regime continues to fuel conflict, terror, and turmoil throughout the Middle East and beyond. ROBERT COSTA: But some of his own advisors and leading Republicans are wary of walking away. REPRESENTATIVE ED ROYCE (R-CA): (From video.) As flawed as the deal is, I believe we must now enforce the hell out of it. ROBERT COSTA: Where does America stand on the world stage? And what is driving President Trump? We’ll explore his go-it-alone strategy with Shawna Thomas of VICE News, Julie Hirschfeld Davis of The New York Times, Nancy Cordes of CBS News, and Michael Crowley of POLITICO. ANNOUNCER: Celebrating 50 years, this is Washington Week. Once again, live from Washington, moderator Robert Costa. ROBERT COSTA: Good evening. This was the week a frustrated President Trump took a hammer to some of the biggest pieces of his predecessor’s agenda. In back-to-back decisions, he made significant changes to the Affordable Care Act and the Iran nuclear agreement. We’ll explain the effect of both moves, but let’s begin with health care. After several failed attempts by Republicans in Congress to repeal and replace Obamacare, the president has decided to stop making federal monthly payments to insurance companies. The cost-sharing reduction subsidies totaled about 7 billion (dollars) this year, and they helped lower the out-of-pocket cost for about 7 million low-income Americans who bought insurance on the health care exchanges. The decision has rattled the health care marketplace, and it’s just with open enrollment set to begin in about two weeks. Nancy, when you look at the president’s decision, the first question, everyone’s big question, is: How does this affect people, low-income Americans? NANCY CORDES: It doesn’t affect them in the short term because rates have already been set for 2018. And if rates do go up in 2019 as predicted, their tax credits will go up as well. The big problem comes in if these insurers say, hey, we were promised these subsides; if you’re not going to give them to us, we’re leaving the marketplace, then that means everybody – not just low-income Americans, but everyone on the exchanges, 20 million people – end up with fewer choices, and in some cases no choices. If Republicans thought things were moving in the wrong direction before, that people didn’t have enough choice, you’re going to be stuck with people who have even fewer choices. ROBERT COSTA: Shawna, are we looking at higher premiums? SHAWNA THOMAS: What you have to understand is that some of the insurers, depending on what state they are – they are in, have already baked in the idea that they weren’t going to get these specific subsidies, and so they raised some of their rates already for 2018 based on that. There are other insurers in some states who also have an option to go to a higher rate if they don’t get this. But it’s all – a lot of people have already been given their letter saying this is what your rate will be for next year, go into the marketplace if you want to make a change. So some of this is baked in, but it’s partly why we’ve seen such higher rates in some states. And there are some states, as she said, who only have one insurer, some counties, like about 1,500 counties have one insurer. And there is a possibility that health insurance companies will say in states like Nevada and Arizona, where there are a lot of those counties, you know, we’re not going to do this. ROBERT COSTA: Inside the white House, Julie, they’re making the case that the current law, the way these subsidies were paid out to insurance companies, was unconstitutional, and because there was a federal court ruling that said so. But is there a political risk here for the White House? JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS: Well, there’s a huge political risk because I think, and what both Nancy and Shawna are pointing out, is that there are already problems where already – people are already experiencing some problems in the current system, the way the Affordable Care Act is. The marketplace is not perfect, and in the years to come there were already going to be possibilities of insurance companies dropping out, premiums going up. But instead of addressing that problem, what the president announced was that he’s actually going to be exacerbating that. And this is all predicated on a strategy of if he does this, somehow he believes that Democrats will have to come to the table and cut a deal with him to replace the Affordable Care Act. But it’s – it is the president who is taking this action. It is he who has decided not to pay these payments. And so if nothing does happen – if Congress continues to be able unable to cut a deal on this – I do think that he and Republicans, congressional Republicans, are going to bear a lot of that blame. And Republican leaders know that, and I think that’s the only possible path toward a solution here. ROBERT COSTA: Nancy, is that true? Are Democrats actually going to maybe think about playing ball on health care to try to get these payments back? NANCY CORDES: Well, they’re already negotiating with Republicans. You’ve got these high-level negotiations that have been going on between Patty Murray and Lamar Alexander in the Senate on a package of fixes that would potentially include Congress paying out these subsidies for the next two years, and Democrats will admit that’s how the law should have been written in the first place so they didn’t get into this situation. It was not a huge problem when you had President Obama in the White House, very willing to make these payments. President Trump in the White House, not quite as willing. But these negotiations are really, you know, anybody’s guess how they’re going to end up. When you’re trying to talk about not replacing Obamacare but fixing it, that’s a very fraught discussion between Democrats and Republicans, with a lot of possibilities that this will end in a stalemate. ROBERT COSTA: Michael, what’s the big picture here? The president’s trying to act unilaterally. It’s, in part, because the Republicans in Congress couldn’t get the job done. MICHAEL CROWLEY: It’s unbelievable. If you had said before Trump came in the picture, rewind two years ago and say Republicans are going to win the Congress and the White House but they’re not going to be able to repeal Obamacare, they’re not going to be able to come up with a substitute plan, you would find it hard to believe. And it kind of took Donald Trump to get us to this point. Two quick things I would add. One is on the question of what Democrats are going to do. I think part of it is – there could be kind of an intermediate fix, but if Trump thinks the Democrats are going to embrace one of these Republican plans, Democrats have to believe that plan is going to less hurtful to most Americans than the status quo, even after he’s made these changes. And I think at this point, a lot of Democrats still think that the Republican alternative plans are even worse than what Trump is doing. And one other thing, if we look at polling there has been polling specifically on the question of whether voters want to Trump to maintain the exchanges, maintain the current system, and whether they would hold him responsible for it falling apart or getting worse. Those numbers are not in Trump’s favor. So politically this is very dangerous. And if he’s counting on Democrats to come and bail him out, I don’t see that happening anytime soon. ROBERT COSTA: And, Shawna, there’s an important point to remember. President Trump has already made these CSR payments, cost-sharing reduction payments, throughout his presidency. Now, in October, he’s deciding not to. SHAWNA THOMAS: Well, I think some of this is because he has told his base that I am going to get rid of Obamacare, right? And this is one of many ways that you can kind of destroy Obamacare from the inside. You have this. You have the decision to not totally fund the advertising of Obamacare when open enrollment starts on November 1st. And you have a couple of other others that they’ve done that he’s hoping, I think, that it brings Democrats to the table because they are under so much pressure. But one of the things that I find interesting about this is if you are a fiscal conservative what the CBO has said about this specific thing that the president has decided to do is that it will actually increase the deficit, because the government will have to make up more money because of the way Obamacare is written. ROBERT COSTA: Nancy, I was talking to Charlie Dent, a congressman from Pennsylvania. He’s retiring, so he’s a little more candid. He said the Republicans are trying to pass tax reform. They have a budget coming up in December. They have to extend the debt limit. Now the president’s thrown health care into the mix. How are they going to get it all done? NANCY CORDES: This is yet another hot potato that they did not want to be juggling right now. It’s just like the DREAMers, which the president also put in their lap. They want to focus on tax reform. And now they have this very unpalatable decision. Do we fix the exchanges and get shellacked by our base for essentially propping up Obamacare, or do we potentially take the fall if premiums jack up and people lose coverage and we’re left holding the bag? So it’s yet another iron in the fire for Republicans. And it’s an iron in the fire they didn’t want to put there. For months they had been telling the president as he was threatening to do this: Don’t do it. It’s going to destabilize the markets. Give us some time. We’re trying to work on our own plan. But once it became clear last month that their plan is not going to see the light of day, they can’t get the votes, that’s when the president said, well, you know, looks like I’m going to have to take matters into my own hands. ROBERT COSTA: What’s the White House’s response to the idea that the markets could collapse or they could really struggle because of this decision? JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS: Well, I mean, I think that they would say in the short term that that’s not going to happen, that it’s going to take a while for the effects of this to be felt. And before that, we’re going to get a deal. I mean, I do think that they’re putting a lot of eggs in this basket of this is ratcheting up the pressure on Democrats and Republicans, frankly, to actually get something done that we’ve been asking them to get done. The problem for them is that, you know, there are deadlines and there are – there’s open enrollment. There are things that are going to start to happen that people who have now seen this decision are going to attribute to the fact that the president clearly wants to take actions that make the Affordable Care Act less effective. And Democrats are going to be very loath to step forward and make any kind of a deal that could result in them owning any of the responsibility for that. ROBERT COSTA: What does that deal look like, though, Julie, quickly? I mean, does it mean that the president’s going to push for border wall funding or border security money in exchange for these new health care subsidies to be reinstated? JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS: I haven’t actually heard the idea of any sort of other subject rider coming onto this floated. I do think that, you know, restrictions and potential waivers for states to be able to do what they want with regard to the insurance markets and insurance plans is something that they would really like to do. And I mean, that’s what a lot of the repeal and replace efforts were about before. I think it wouldn’t be surprising if they tried to pair that with the CSR payments. I just don’t know if that’s going to fly. NANCY CORDES: And part of the problem is that nobody really knows exactly what kind of plan the president wants. He seems to change his mind all the time – repeal it alone, repeal and replace it, just let it fail. And so Democrats would be very reluctant to get into a conversation with him without having any real understanding of where he wants to get to at the end of the day, other than better, cheaper, covers everybody. ROBERT COSTA: And we saw, Shawna, today, there are going to be legal challenges as well as political challenges. SHAWNA THOMAS: Yeah. There already are legal challenges. ROBERT COSTA: There already are. The attorney generals of California, Connecticut, Kentucky, Massachusetts. They all said Friday: We’re going to sue to make sure these payments keep up. SHAWNA THOMAS: Yes, but the thing is, there are no appropriations for these payments. And so you also might see insurance companies sue just basically to say there’s a law that says we have to make your ability to go to the doctor at a certain group of people cheaper. But you have to pay us. So this is going to go to court immediately, and whether there will be a stay put on it or not. But it is unclear – the president has the power to pay on this. And it is unclear if they can force him to or not. ROBERT COSTA: Nancy, when you look at the Affordable Care Act, this is pulling out one piece of thread with the subsidies. But the expansion of Medicaid remains. Other aspects remain. So this doesn’t take a hammer to the whole law. NANCY CORDES: Right, but the president is pulling at several different threads at the same time. You know, he issued executive orders this week saying that he wants to make it easier for small businesses to band together to get cheaper coverage, which sounds great, but which Democrats warn will mean that, you know, people will be getting coverage that might not necessarily offer everything that is required under Obamacare. It bifurcates the system. You’ve got some people getting one level of care, other people getting another level of care. He’s also working on allowing people to purchase insurance across state lines. And there is this fear, which is, you know, valid, among Democrats that, you know, yes, he can’t just eliminate the law, but he can do a lot to destabilize it. And at a certain point, you know, these markets are not invincible. They’re already in – you know, on shaky ground. Democrats and Republicans acknowledge that. ROBERT COSTA: It’s a fascinating debate about executive authority. And President Obama, who Julie covered so closely, and Nancy too, and Shawna and Michael, he used executive authority. Now President Trump’s using executive authority to counter that exact agenda. Let’s continue with this theme of the week, which is the president trying to undo what President Obama put in place. When President Trump entered the White House, remember, he promised to renegotiate what he called bad deals. And on Friday, he set his sights on what he says is the worst deal ever, the Iran nuclear agreement. The 2015 pact provides Iran relief from economic sanctions in exchange for limits on their nuclear weapons program. President Trump has recertified the deal twice before, albeit reluctantly. But not anymore. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) We cannot and will not make this certification. We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more violence, more terror, and the very real threat of Iran’s nuclear breakout. ROBERT COSTA: The Trump administration says Iran is technically complying with the agreement, but is violating the spirit of the deal. Michael, when they talk about the spirit of the deal they’re saying Iran’s complying, but if Iran’s complying then why make these kind of moves? Why disavow it today? MICHAEL CROWLEY: Well, partly because Trump has reached his breaking point. And part of the problem here for Trump is that under a law passed by Congress in 2015 – July of 2015 was when this deal was sealed by the Obama administration and, remember, several other countries – I think five other countries and then also Iran. The law required the president every 90 days to issue a declaration: Iran is complying with this deal. And Trump doesn’t want to have to keep doing that. Every time the 90-day mark comes around there are these stories saying Trump is going back on his campaign pledge to tear up the nuclear deal. And I think Trump feels like this is driving him crazy. He’s getting these bad headlines. So they’re trying to find a way to break out of this. And what the compromise solution here is, is for him to say – and let me add, international inspectors are saying that Iran is complying with the deal. So are senior administration officials, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. There have been a couple of little things along the margins you could really nitpick. Basically, they’re complying. So Trump actually on the kind of pure technical facts can’t say that Iran is violating the deal. So he broadens the lens and says it’s the spirit of the deal. Now, the spirit of the deal can mean a lot of things. And there is language in the law that says essentially if the president says it’s not in our national security interests he can say, OK, I’m going to – what people are saying is decertify the deal. That’s basically what he’s done here, on broad grounds saying that Iran’s bad behavior around the region and in general – he doesn’t like Iran – is his basis for doing this. ROBERT COSTA: On that behavior point, is there anything Iran has done since the pact was signed that would give the president some argument to make against it? MICHAEL CROWLEY: So, again, it’s a question of sort of how you – how wide the lens is going to be. OK, so Obama administration officials would say this was a deal about Iran’s nuclear program. And remember, it’s not a perfect deal. But Iran might have been 18 months away from building a bomb. Israel was talking about airstrikes. We were looking at a possible war in Iran – another war in the Middle East. And we did the best we could. And we didn’t have the luxury of pulling in everything Iran was doing around the region that we didn’t like, even though there was a whole bunch of that stuff. Trump’s approach is I’m not just going to focus on the nuclear deal. I think Iran is a big problem for what they’re doing everywhere in the Middle East, from Iraq, Syria, Yemen, supporting Hezbollah the menaces Israel. And that’s the conversation we need to be having. And so it’s almost just different categories that people are looking at. And the argument from Obama people is that Trump is just not – it’s just an apple and an orange. And Trump is just not dealing with the deal – with the nuclear deal on its own terms. But we are where we are. And so now it’s going to go to Congress. People have to understand. What Trump did today was not tear up the deal. But refusing to certify, it opens a window for Congress, which has 60 days to potentially impose sanctions that would constitute a unilateral American withdrawal. And at this point, it doesn’t look like it’s going to happen. Indeed, Trump is not even really asking Congress to do that. So he got the rhetoric that he wanted, he got the politics he wanted, but on the policy we will probably have something like a shaky status quo. ROBERT COSTA: Julie, when you look at the president’s decision to criticize the deal, but not totally walk away, was that because of the influence of the generals around him – General Mattis at the Pentagon, General Kelly in the White House? JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS: Well, I do think that, you know, when – he clearly knew what he wanted to do, which is rip up the deal. We heard him say it on the campaign trail. We’ve heard him say it since he’s taken office. But the fact is, as with so many other issues, what he’s found is that when it gets down to actually executing on that, even his own administration does not like that that’s a good course to take. Allies don’t think it’s a good course to take. They worry about the implications in the region. They worry about the implications in other regions, our ability to potentially negotiate a resolution to the dispute with North Korea and their nuclear program. I mean, there are a lot of concerns here. And so he – when he’s – to the degree that there’s been a process around this, and I think more than most issues that this administration has dealt with they have tried to really deal with this in a painstaking way and really review it. All of the information that he’s getting back from his own national security and foreign policy apparatus is telling him: You can’t just turn your back on this and unilaterally withdraw. So what he’s left with instead is kind of this half measure. And he’s actually taken a smaller fraction of a measure even than a half, because what he’s done is just kick it to Congress and said: You all figure out what you want to do here. And it’s kind of ironic because the Obama administration bent over backwards to kind of cut Congress out of this. They purposefully didn’t make it a treaty, so it wouldn’t have to go through the Senate. You know, it was really a deal that was done by – with a lot of executive power and prerogative. And in the end, Congress did have a say. But this president is really punting it back to Congress. ROBERT COSTA: So if it’s going to Congress, Nancy, it’s going to Capitol Hill we already see Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, he’s been a critic of the president. Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, a Trump ally. They’re working on some kind of agreement to adjust the Iran nuclear deal. NANCY CORDES: Right. They’ve got some legislation that would do things like snap back sanctions if Iran is found not to be in compliance with the nuclear deal. Things like that, that they say don’t trash the deal, that actually strengthen the deal. The challenge is going to be that they need to get 60 votes in the Senate. So they’re going to need to pick up Democratic support. That means Democrats who supported the president cutting this deal in the first place would then have to, you know, be in favor of a deal that essentially says that what President Obama cut wasn’t good enough. So the devil’s really going to be in the details there. And I think also Republican leaders are going to be watching the president for clues about whether he’ll accept sort of a fig leaf, something that he could tout and say: See, I made the deal stronger. Is that going to be good enough for him, or is he going to want, you know, a really specific serious set of deliverables? That is going to be a much heavier lift. SHAWNA THOMAS: Well, and isn’t this already in some ways kind of a fig leaf? Like, we keep seeing the president do this. He wants to do something that he said on the campaign trail he wanted to do – rip up the Iran deal, get rid of the Affordable Care Act – can’t do that, so he does something that basically makes it Congress’ problem. He keeps punting things to Congress. He’ll get to go out on the campaign trail now and say, look, I am hard on Iran, I want to get rid of this deal, now Congress has to do their job. One, Congress doesn’t even have to be involved. If he wanted to put the sanctions back on himself, the way it’s written he could. He could just waive what Obama did like magic. And, two, it’s – it puts in some ways Republicans in Congress in the worst possible situation, once again adding to all the things that you talked about that they have to deal with. Now you want us to deal with the enormity of a deal that was done by the executive branch that involves many other countries, a nuclear Iran. It puts them in a terrible box right now. JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS: Well, and he’s also boxed himself in because he set up this predicate whereby, in a certain amount of time, he said if you don’t take these actions, Congress, I am going to walk away from the deal. So we’re going to be all asking and writing stories and wondering 90 days from now, well, what’s he going to do? Is he going to do what Shawna said and unilaterally say this is over, or is he going to take what Congress gives him if they are able to even produce anything? MICHAEL CROWLEY: And it’s important to understand – it’s hard for members of Congress to explain this – but even people who really opposed sealing the – it wasn’t formally signed, it’s not a treaty, so I hesitate to use the word “signed.” ROBERT COSTA: Sure. MICHAEL CROWLEY: Sealing the deal in July 2015, even people who said don’t do it, this is a bad deal, it stinks, keep negotiating, they say now the horse is out of the barn, it’s too late for a bunch of reasons, including the fact that as soon as the deal was consummated we unfroze tens of billions of dollars of assets that Iran was able to access which we cannot claw back – it’s too late, and the consequences of undoing it now are not worth the trouble. And you can believe that even if you thought it was a terrible deal and you opposed it being signed in July 2015. But try to explain that as a member of Congress to your local TV station or a town hall. ROBERT COSTA: And Iran said today in their response, are you prepared to return us our enriched uranium, all of the cash, all of the parts of the deal? MICHAEL CROWLEY: Exactly. So Iran is essentially calling our bluff. And one thing you hear from a lot of Iran hawks is we can negotiate a better deal, and that to some degree Trump is using Congress as leverage for more negotiating power with the Iranians. Maybe, but really you don’t get something for nothing. And if – you know, the Obama administration tried really hard to get a good deal. I just don’t see how they go back and say to Iran give us more without something in return. ROBERT COSTA: We’re going to have to leave it there. Thank you, everybody. We could go on all night. (Laughter.) Our conversation will continue online on the Washington Week Extra, where we’ll take a closer look at three people behind the headlines this week. You can find that Friday night after 10 p.m. at PBS.org/WashingtonWeek. I’m Robert Costa. Thanks for watching, and have a wonderful weekend.

The Outsider Republican (1964) | Conventional Wisdom | Retro Report


They’re desperately trying to keep the people
in the galleries quiet because this looks like this is going off the rails. This is like the Conservative Woodstock. A new deal for the American People Extremism in the defense of liberty There is no substitute for victory The United States of America The drama of the 1964 convention starts with 1952. Conservatives were absolutely certain that the convention had been stolen from them. They’re convinced that they have to take back the party from what they call the Wall Street Republicans, the New York King Makers. And they back this guy named Barry Goldwater, who is this cowboy Conservative from Arizona over the moderate Nelson Rockefeller. I’m returning here to San Francisco today
to win in the contest for the nomination of my party. By the time that the convention rolls around,
Barry Goldwater really seems to have sewn up the nomination, but the establishment will not let well enough alone. They’re trying, even at the last minute at the convention
to run one of their own, a blue blood governor of Pennsylvania named William Warren Scranton. A lot of the journalists couldn’t believe
that this fellow out of Arizona with these strong opinions was going to get the nomination. Goldwater is far to the right of the mainstream of the Republican Party. He votes against the Civil Rights Act. He really seems like he’s very reckless when it comes to nuclear war. We want Barry! We want Barry! The Goldwater campaign is absolutely convinced
that unless they basically run this convention with military discipline, the Eastern establishment
will steal the Republican Party from the conservative base. If there is a victory, it’s not a victory
for Barry Goldwater; it’s a victory for the mainstream of Republican thinking. We were all prepped for weeks in advance of
the convention. We had the 36 hotels where delegates were staying. Each one had a radio
transmitter right to headquarters. We knew that people would pull the plug on speakers—on microphones. We had backup for all that stuff. They’re not going to give any quarter when
it comes to any platform planks, any procedural rules. They’re just going to vote down the
line for Goldwater. Now the liberal side who are horrified that
the public is going to see the Republicans as captive of extremists decide that they’re
going to put forward three platform planks: one promising to uphold the Civil Rights law,
another to denounce extremism, whether it comes from the Ku Klux Klan or the Communist Party, and another denouncing racism. They give these very soaring speeches and the Goldwater delegates just consider this an insult. So when the famous Rockefeller speech occurs,
the galleries erupted. The Republican Party is in real danger of
subversion by a radical, well-financed, highly disciplined majority. May we have order. May we order so that the governor may be heard. It was great drama. Here is the Governor
of the State of New York, who had just been a serious candidate for president, a millionaire,
billionaire, being booed by his party. Rockefeller wants this to happen. He wants the extremism of the Goldwater forces to be revealed for all to see. None of us knew how important television was.
Americans were seeing these screaming people. At a certain point things are so violent – the
passions against the media are so great, they literally start grabbing the spindles that
are holding these glass booths for the networks and shaking them. I grew up in the age of silent films. The first taste of radio any of us had was Roosevelt’s Fireside Chats. But television hits the emotion. Mr. President, Barry Goldwater… It’s the job of the nominee traditionally
to give this unifying speech, to kind of usher all that rancor under the bridge. But Barry Goldwater is so sick of these snooty, arrogant, Eastern elites telling him what to do and
treating his delegates like they’re, you know, children, that he decides, “the hell with it.” That’s the context for the most famous line of the convention. I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. The impact of the convention in 1964 was the
moderates in the Republican Party were right. Barry Goldwater was seen as a dangerous extremist. The convention pretty much killed us. I mean I had a sinking feeling that it was pretty much over. It was mitigated by the roar of
the crowds, but that’s very misleading. We lost by 15 million votes in the actual election, but I’d say because of Goldwater’s breaking the ice, so to speak, the conservative movement became very important within the Republican party. After Goldwater, we went on to Reagan. This idea that the Republican Party is fighting
a civil war between a conservative base and a moderate establishment endures today. The Jeb Bushes of this world are like the
old Rockefeller-Scrantons. The difference is that I don’t remember Barry Goldwater ever doing all of the nasty things that Trump has said. Even though a guy who is seen as the right-wing insurgent lives in a high-rise on Fifth Avenue, and has many positions that betray Conservative orthodoxy, Stylistically, the template is still there: the idea that you have this small band of string pullers, and the true authentic conservative red meat base. It seems like even with the craziness of this election, that basic architecture refuses to die.

Eric Trump sounds off on 2020 Democrats’ climate calamity


“WATTERS’ WORLD.” A WAR ON MEAT, PLASTICS, GASOLINE. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE EXTREME IDEAS DEMOCRATS PROPOSED DURING CNN’S 7-HOUR TOWN HALL ON CLIMATE CHANGE.>>LIFE ON EARTH IS AT RISK.>>WE ARE FIGHTING FOR THE SURVIVAL OF THE PLANET EARTH.>>THIS U.N. REPORT SAYS I GUESS IT’S 11 YEARS WE HAVE LEFT.>>THIS IS ON PAR WITH WINNING WORLD WAR II, MAYBE MORE CHALLENGING THAN THAT.>>DO YOU BAN PLASTIC STRAWS IN.>>I THINK WE SHOULD YEAH.>>WHAT ABOUT OFFSHORE DRILLING FOR OIL, WOULD YOU BAN IT?>>ABSOLUTELY. WE NEED TO TAKE COMBUSTUP VEHICLES OFF THE ORDER AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.>>THEY FAILED TO ACT AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. I AM PREPARED TO GET RID OF THE FILIBUSTER TO PASS A GREEN NEW DEAL. JESSE: DON’T NUKE THE FILIBUSTER IF YOU DON’T BELIEVE IN NUCLEAR ENERGY. JOINING ME, THE SON OF PRESIDENT TRUMP. ERIC TRUMP. ARE YOU HAPPY THE DEMOCRATS ARE RUNNING ON THIS PLATFORM?>>THEY ARE GOING TO GET RID OF OIL, FRACK, THAT’S NATURAL GAS. COWS, PLANES, YOU CAN’T HAVE A CARNEYMORE. — A CAR ANY MORE. IF YOU GET AN ELECTRIC CAR YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO CHARGE THE SELECT CAR. HOW DO YOU CHARGE AN ELECTRIC CAR IF YOU DON’T HAVE POWER PLANTS. JESSE: COAL POWERS 27% OF THE ENERGY IN THIS COWAN COUNTRY.>>ONE, IN THIS COUNTRY.>>HOW WOULD THE SENATORS GET FROM HAWAII TO WASHINGTON, D.C. IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE AIRPLANES. ARE THEY GOING TO ROW A BOAT? JESSE: I THINK THEY WILL DO HIGH SPEED RAIL UNDERNEATH THE OCEAN.>>THEY HAVE GOTTEN SO RADICAL PEOPLE CAN’T TAKE IT SERIOUSLY. MY FATHER SAYS I WANT THE CLEANEST AIR AND WATER IN THE WORLD. AND THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN DO TO ACCOMPLISH THAT THAT ARE SMART. CHINA IS LITERALLY PULLING UP TRUCKS TO RIVERS AND DUMPING GARBAGE INTO RIVERS. THEY ARE DUMPING LOADS OF GARBAGE IN OUR OCEANS EVERY DAY. NOBODY IS SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. JESSE: THE TRUMP ORGANIZE IS A GREEN ORGANIZATION. YOU GUYS MUST RECYCLE, I’M SURE YOU HAVE ELECTRIC-POWERED GOLF CARTS.>>MANY OF THE THINGS THAT ARE GREEN ARE SMART FROM A COMMERCIAL STAND POINT. YOU HAVE GOOD INSULATION IN BUILDINGS. AND YOU SPENT LESS MONEY ON ENERGY AND THERE IS A RETURN ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THERE ARE A LOT OF SMART THINGS PEOPLE CAN DO. BUT THIS IS RADICAL STUFF.>>SO RADICAL BERNIE WANTS TO BAN FACTORY FARMING. THEY ARE NOT THINKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THEIR PROPOSALS.>>HOW DO YOU WIN TEXAS IF YOU ARE AGAINST OIL AND GAS. NOT TO MENTION ALL OF THESE PROPOSALS CAUGHT 19 TRILLION DOLLARS. ONE OF THEM WAS MORE THAN THAT. ONE WAS $30 TRILLION. YOU INSTANTLY BANKRUPT THIS COUNTRY. JESSE: SOME OF THEM WANT TO DESTROY THE ECONOMIC PROSPERITY SO THEY CAN REBUILD IT IN A SOCIALIST IMAGE. THAT’S ANOTHER ISSUE FOR ANOTHER DAY. APPARENTLY THE RED MAGA HATS ARE SO UPSETTING THIS ONE AUTHOR, SHE SAYS THAT NOT ONLY SHOULD YOU NOT WEAR THE RED MAGA HATS, YOU SHOULDN’T WEAR ANY RED HAT IN THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE IT QUOTE SCARES PEOPLE. SO I CAN’T WEAR A PHILLY’S HAT.>>THE MIDDLE OF AMERICA DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THIS OR EMBRACE IT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BANNING PLASTIC STRAWS AND PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO WEAR RED HATS WHEN MY FATHER IS TRYING TO PROTECT THIS COUNTRY FROM CHINA AND TRYING TO REDUCE AFRICAN-AMERICAN UNEMPLOYMENT AND HISPANIC UNEMPLOYMENT AND FEMALE UNEMPLOYMENT. THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT LET’S BAN RED HATS AND GET RID OF A PLASTIC STRAW. THESE AREN’T SERIOUS ISSUES. JESSE: HOW GOOD ARE THINGS THAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT PLASTIC STRAWS. VEGANISM, THE COVER YOUR HAT. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ECONOMY OR WAR.>>THEY NO LONGER TALK ABOUT ISIS OR DIED BECAUSE THEY DON’T EXIST ANYMORE BECAUSE MY FATHER GOT RID OF THEM BECAUSE HE TOOK THE HANDCUFFS OFF THE TROOPS. OUR COUNTRY IS DOING PHENOMENALLY WELL. THIS IS A DISTRACTION. AND THAT WON’T PICK UP A SINGLE VOTE. JESSE: YOU WILL LOSE VOTES.>>DEBLASIO COMES UP WITH CRAZY PROPOSITIONS ALL THE TIME. HE HASN’T HAD A SINGLE PERSON VOTE FOR HIM. SO THESE PROPOSALS AREN’T WORKING. THEY ARE NOT RESONATING WITH PEOPLE. PEOPLE CARE ABOUT THEIR FAMILIES. PEOPLE CALL ABOUT PATRIOTISM. CAROLINAS. ALL RIGHT. CHANGING A LOT OF DIAPERS, ERIC TRUMP, THERE HE IS, DIAPER DUTY 24-7.

Scaramucci defends his turn against Trump


JESSE: ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI USED TO BE A HUGE TRUMP FAN. EVEN HAD A SHORT STINT AT THE WHITE HOUSE AS COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR. NOW A 180. HE REERVES TO HIM AS INCOMPETENT. IN MENTAL DECLINE, MELTING DOWN, AND SAYS THE GUY IS LOSING IT. JOINING ME NOW, ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI.>>I CAN’T BELIEVE I WAS LET BACK IN THE BUILDING. I ALSO SAID TRUMP-NOBLE LIKE A NUCLEAR MELTDOWN. JESSE: I KNOW YOU ARE JEALOUS OF SEAN SPICER FOR GOING ON DANCING WITH THE STARS *.>>I DON’T KNOW HOW TO DANCE. JESSE: IN THE BEGINNING OF THE PRIMARY, SCOTT WEARING, JEB BUSH, THEN YOU GOT ON THE TRUMP TRAIN. YOU ARE SAYING YOU MAY VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT IN 2020.>>I NEVER SAID I WAS GOING TO VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT. I WAS AT A CHILDREN’S FUNDRAISER WHERE VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN CAME AND ACCEPTED AN AWARD. I DON’T LIKE ANSWERING HYPOTHETICALS. THIS GUYS NO LONGER SUITABLE TO BE PRESIDENT. HE’S ACTING COMPLETELY NUTS. AND HE’S VERY UNSTABLE. LET’S GO OVER THE LAST TWO OR THREE WEEKS. HE’S ATTACKS THE FBI UNMERCIFULLY SINCE HE STARTED. HE’S GOING AFTER JEROME POWELL AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE. HE SAID WHO’S THE WORST ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE, PRESIDENT XI AND JEROME POWELL AND THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. JESSE: I DON’T THINK THAT HE’S BECOME WAYWARD. HE’S ALWAYS PUNCHED BACK HARD.>>I KNOW YOU ARE DEFENDING HIM. JESSE: I’M NOT DEFENDING HIM. I’M WORRIED ABOUT YOU. LET ME SHOW YOU WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE PRESIDENT A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.>>YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ZERO TO THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY THE LAST 11 MONTHS. YOU CAN’T SAY THERE WAS SOME LEVEL OF GENIUS IN TERMS OF HIS JUDGMENT. HE WILL LEAVE EVERYTHING ON THE FIELD NO MATTER HOUSE IN THERE WITH HIM. PEOPLE 50 YEARS FROM NOW WILL STUDY WHAT HE’S DOING. THE PRESIDENT IS 100% RIGHT. IT’S THE REASON HE’S GOING TO WIN. HE’S A GENIUS, AND A FEW MONTHS LATER YOU CHANGED COMPLETELY.>>YOU ARE TAKING A LOT OF THINGS OUT OF THE CONTEXT. YOU ARE IN THE PRESS SO BE CAREFUL. JESSE: WE HAVE AN HOUR OF YOUR SOUND BITES PRAISING THE PRESIDENT.>>YES, I PRAISED THE PRESIDENT. I WAS ONE OF THOSE GUYS WHO PRAISED THE PRESIDENT. WENT TO WAR FOR HIM, GAVE HIM MONEY, GAVE HIM FAMILY TIME AND ENERGY. HE TURNED ON ME. JESSE: DIDN’T YOU TURN ON HIM FIRST?>>OF COURSE NOT. I WAS ON THE BILL MAHER SHOW. I AM SUPPORTING HIM ON THESE ISSUES. BUT THE RACIST TROPES AGAINST THE CONGRESSWOMEN. HE’S A FASCIST, HE’S GOING AFTER VIDS INDIVIDUALS. THE FIRST ANYTHING FASCIST MANIFESTO IS GOING AFTER PRIVATE CITIZENS USE YOUR POLITICAL POWER. HE ATTACKED MY WIFE ON TWITTER. JESSE: HE’S NOT A FASCIST AND YOU KNOW BETTER THAN THAT. I THINK YOU ARE — I’M NOT IN THE TAKE. I THINK HE’S A GOOD PRESIDENT. I’M A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT YOU. YOU DON’T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ME, BROTHER. JESSE: YOU ARE THE ONE MONTH CHANGED.>>THIS GUY MOVED THE GOAL POST. A FULL-BLOWN CRAZY. JESSE: A WEEK BEFORE YOU TURNED ON THE PRESIDENT YOU SAID LET’S RAISE MANNY FOR THE PRESIDENT. THEN A WEEK LATER –>>THAT’S MORE MISINFORMATION. DON WAS INVAULT TO THE SALT CONFERENCE. HE COULDN’T MAKE IT AS A RESULT OF A SCHEDULING CONFLICT. I TURNED TO HIM AND SAID HALF THE ROOM IS DEMOCRATS, HALF THE ROOM IS REPUBLICANS. IF YOU WANT TO RAISE MONEY FOR YOUR FATHER THAT’S FINE. THAT’S WHAT I SAID. NOW IT’S CONVOLUTED. JESSE: ONE THING — I AM JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENED.>>IF YOU ARE 9-12 FOR THE GUY AND NOT 13-12 FOR THE GUY, HE’S GOING TO TURN ON YOU. JESSE: YOU ARE SAYING HE’S GOING TO TURN ON ME?>>WHAT DO YOU DISLIKE ABOUT THE PRESIDENT. JESSE: WE CAN’T TALK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE’S HAIR. SOMEWHAT DO YOU DISLIKE ABOUT THE PRESIDENT. JESSE: DO YOU REALIZE YOU ARE GETTING USED BY THE MEDIA, CNN, MSNBC. DO YOU REALIZE WHEN THEY HAVE YOU ON TO BASH THE PRESIDENT. BECAUSE THEY HATES YOU. BUT NOW THEY LOVE YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE HITTING THE PRESIDENT.>>DO YOU THINK I CARE WITH OTHER PEOPLE THINK OF ME? WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK OF ME IS NONE OF MY BUSINESS. I THINK THE PRESIDENT HAS GONE CRAZY AND HE’S GETTING CRAZIER AND CRAZIER. I THINK HE’S IN FULL-LONE MENTAL DECLINE.>>NO, I’M TOTALLY THE SAME GUY. JESSE: ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE THE SAME GUY AND YOU ARE NOT GOING HOLLYWOOD? WE HEARD THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SEEN WITH AVENATTI. AND THE REALITY THING ON BRAVO.>>THOSE ARE THE TALKING POINTS. IF YOU WANT TO COMPARE ME TO AVENATTI. THERE IS A LOT OF MISINFORMATION. BUT I LOVE THE FACT YOU INVITED ME ON. I BETTER CAUTION YOU. YOU BETTER NOT SAY ONE SYLLABLE OUT OF JOINT FOR THE MANIAC. IF YOU DO HE WILL TURN ON YOU. CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR NEW ENGAGEMENT BUT HE WILL PROBABLY HIT YOUR FIANCE, TOO. JESSE: YOU WROTE THE BOOK WILL HOW MUCH INGENUITY HE HAS AND HOW SMART HE IS.>>YOU KNOW WHY PRESIDENT TRUMP NEVER TWEETED ABOUT THE BOOK? IT’S A VERY BALANCED BOOK. I ALSO WROTE FOR THE PRESS, THE PRESS IS NOT THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE. IF THE PRESS IS THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE? WHAT IS HE TALKING ABOUT? YOU CHECK OFF ALL THE DEMAGOGUERY. JESSE: NOT YOU MOOCH IS NEVER COMING BACK ON. “WATTERS’ WORLD.” YOU KNOW, WE HAD TO PROP UP ANTHONY’S CHAIR. IF HE STOOD UP — WE LOVE YOU.

Party In Trouble As Millennials Leave The Democratic Party


Democrats are gearing up for this massive
blue wave that is supposed to take place in this year’s midterm elections coming up in
November. And as we’ve mentioned before, most of the
special elections that we have had since Donald Trump took office, either democrats have won,
or, which, this is actually the case for every single special election that’s taken place
since Donald Trump became president, republicans have lost ground. So democrats look at all this, and they see
this as the blue wave. They understand that yeah, it’s coming. But hold up, because a very important new
poll has come out showing that millennials are abandoning the democratic party. In the last two years alone, according to
the latest round of polling, democrats have lost 9% of millennial voters. Their support among millennials is now at
46%. And keep in mind, if they were all to go out
and vote, millennials in the United States would make up the largest voting block in
this country. They do have the power to sway elections one
way or the other, if they show up. And that’s the biggest problem, is getting
them to come out there. But I think given the fact of what we’ve seen
these couple years, the activism, the action, I think getting them to come out and vote
isn’t going to be an issue anymore. But what is going to be an issue is that the
democrats are losing ground with the younger generation. And unfortunately for them, majority of millennials
now believe, falsely, I might add, that republicans are better at handling the economy than democrats. That’s something that has to be righted. Now, I know a lot of people in this millennial
age group were either too young or were not born yet during the times when we had trickle-down
economics in the United States. But even though I’m technically a millennial
by birth, I’m at the very tiptop of that age range, I remembered it, because I studied. I studied political science, I studied economics,
I studied economic policy, and I know what happened in the ’80s. I know what happened in the 2000s to 2008. I saw that. I reported on it. These kids didn’t have that same opportunity. Maybe they picked a different major in college. Maybe they weren’t interested at the time. But nonetheless, for some reason, right now
they think the republicans are more trustworthy on economic issues than the democratic party. That’s a very real problem for democrats right
now. If they can’t win back these millennial voters,
the party is going to die. And that’s not to say that all these millennials
are flocking to republicans. No. Republicans have their own problems with millennials. They don’t like them, either, and that’s where
a little bit of hope comes in. It’s not about republicans or democrats; it’s
about the largest voting block in this country not being satisfied really with either major
political party. And that’s going to open the door for more
parties to gain power, for new parties to form, and to possibly, maybe in the future,
have a government made up of multiple political parties who represent multiple different groups
of people with different beliefs and different feelings. Maybe at that point, if it happens, if millennials
continue to carry this torch of disdain for republicans and democrats, then just maybe
in 10 or 20 years, we might actually have a pretty decent federal government.

The Republican Party Is Hilariously Incompetent – The Ring of Fire


The republican party in the United States
is absolutely one of the most pathetic political parties probably anywhere on this planet. Now, before you go ahead and point out that
democrats have lost election after election after election after election. I understand that. The democrats suck at winning, but the republicans
suck at leading. Here’s what I mean. Monday night, obviously, the republican healthcare
bill in the senate failed because two republicans decided to defect, effectively killing that
piece of legislation. You know, this is not the first time that
the senate had to go back to the drawing board because they couldn’t get enough people on
board. And back when the house of representatives
was working on this legislation, they had to do the exact same thing a couple of times
as well, because they could get all of their little republican ducks in a row to support
their disastrous piece of legislation. So my question is this, the republican congress,
the republican senate has accomplished absolutely nothing since they all took office in January,
or since the new session started in January. They’ve accomplished nothing. They’ve been working on this particular healthcare
replacement bill all year long, and they have nothing to show for it. They’re the majority party, not just in the
legislative branch, folks, but in this country right now. They have the house, the senate, the white
house, the supreme court, the federal court system, state legislatures and state governments. A majority of both of those. How in the hell can you control the majority
of everything and still be such a failure? Furthermore, how do you manage to win enough
to claim all of these majorities, and still have no idea how to rule? You know, there was a republican member of
congress a few weeks ago, his name escapes me, but he said, “Republicans simply, we don’t
know how to rule.” And he was a sitting US senator. Said we don’t know how to rule. We don’t know how to lead. And that’s absolutely right. Republicans have no idea what they are doing. It’s the story of the post turtle. You see a turtle on a fence post, you don’t
know how he got there, you know he had to have had some help, and he has no idea what
to do now that he’s up on the post. That is what the republicans are. They’re post turtles. They don’t know what they’re doing, they don’t
know how to get down. But you know that they had a hell of a lot
of help, usually from corporations to get to the position that they’re in. And now, I guess they’re sitting there waiting
for their marching orders from corporate America, and all corporate America can come up with
in their collective voice is, “Cut our taxes.” And the republicans are sitting there in Washington
saying, “But we don’t know how, people are kind of pissed at us, and we can’t do the
thing that you’re telling us to do.” It really is pathetic, folks, when you think
about it. And what’s more pathetic is all the American
citizens out there defending the republican party and accusing the democrats of being
the obstructionists. Absolutely pathetic. Your party, your republican party controls
everything, and there so incompetent and unable to lead that they can’t accomplish anything. And again, that’s the best thing in the world
for the citizens of the United States, because there’s nothing that republicans have proposed
that would help anyone other than corporate CEOs and shareholders. So it’s good that they’re incompetent, but
at the same time it’s also laughably pathetic.

Jimmy Kimmel Breaks Down Democratic Debate


[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] THOSE OF YOU WHO WATCHED THE DEBATE EARLIER TONIGHT HERE ON ABC AND FORGOT TO TURN THE TELEVISION OFF, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. YOU KNOW, TONIGHT WE WATCHED THE THIRD DEMOCRATIC DEBATE, THIS TIME FROM HOUSTON, TEXAS. IT WAS EXCITING, YOU KNOW, WATCH BEING THE CANDIDATE THE TACKLE ISSUES IS AS CLOSE AS WE GET TO FOOTBALL. THEY ALL TRIED TO STAND OUT AND AVOID BEING ELIMINATED UNDER EXTREME TIME PRESSURE IN A TELEVISED EVENT. NOW LET’S PUT 45 SECONDS ON THE CLOCK AND GO. THIS WAS A LARGE CAST OF CHARACTERS. TO HELP VIEWER KEEP TRACK OF WHO WAS WHO, ABC DID SOMETHING SPECIAL. ♪ THE ELECTION IS QUICKLY APPROACHING ♪ ♪ AND WE’VE GOT DECISIONS TO MAKE ♪ ♪ WITH SO MANY PEOPLE TO CHOOSE FROM ♪ ♪ WE DON’T WANT TO MAKE A MISTAKE ♪ ♪ WE CAN ONLY SEND ONE TO THE WHITE HOUSE ♪ ♪ AND THE OTHERS WILL HAVE TO GO HOME ♪ ♪ DEMS THE BREAKS ♪ ♪ YEAH, DEMS THE BREAKS ♪ ♪ WHOEVER GOES HOME WILL SAY DEMS THE BREAKS ♪ [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]>>Jimmy: I WOULDN’T WATCH THAT SHOW. IT IS WEIRD THAT THEY PUT TEN CANDIDATES ON THE STAGE. HERE’S HOW, I’D PUT THE FOUR FRONT RUNNERS AT THE CENTER OF THE STAGE AND LET THE OTHER SIX DANGLE OFF THE STAGE BY THEIR FINGERTIPS. MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG WAS UP WAY PAST HIS BEDTIME. HE ALMOST DIDN’T MAKE IT TO THE DEBATE. YOU CAN SEE HE GOT STUCK IN THE CLAW MACHINE AT THE DAVE AND BUSTERS AT THE BAY BROOK MALL, BUT HIS MOTHER WAS ABLE TO FISH HIM OUT. THE MODERATORS TONIGHT WERE GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, DAVID MUIR AND JORGE RAMOS. THEY HIT THE CANDIDATES WITH ALL THE TOUGH QUESTIONS LIKE, IF ELECTED, HOW DO WE KNOW YOU WON’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’ROURKE SPEAK SPANISH DURING THE DEBATE. HE DID. WILL JOE BIDEN CHOKE ON HIS TEETH DURING THE DEBATE. HE ACTUALLY DID. JOE BIDEN DID, HE DID WELL TONIGHT. HE WAS FACING THE RIGHT DIRECTION. HIS PANTS WERE ON. IT WAS, IT WAS A GOOD OUTING FOR HIM. YOU KNOW, THERE WERE THREE WOMEN ON STAGE. IF ANY OF THESE WOMEN ARE ELECTED, IT WOULD BE HISTORIC, AND IF, IF BERNIE OR BIDEN WERE TO WIN, IT WOULD BE PREHISTORIC. BUT BERNIE WAS — [ APPLAUSE ] BECAUSE HE’S SO OLD IS WHAT I’M SAYING. THEIR AGE. BERNIE WAS VERY BERNIE TONIGHT. HE CAME RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE YELLING. HIS VOICE WAS CRAZY. IT SOUNDED LIKE HE SWALLOWED A FROG. HE WAS SCREAMING LOUDER THAN CAM NEWTON AT THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE. HE GAVE A STRONG WARNING TO GIVING AMERICANS AFFORDABLE THROAT LOZENGES.>>IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WE ARE SPENDING TWICE AS MUCH PER CAPITA ON HEALTH CARE AS THE CANADIANS OR ANY OTHER MAJOR COUNTRY ON EARTH.>>Jimmy: HE HAD HIS TURN SIGNAL ON FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF. THAT WAS EMBARRASSING. I FELT BAD FOR HIM. [ APPLAUSE ] THIS WAS THE FIRST DEBATE WHERE JOE BIDEN AND ELIZABETH WARREN WERE ON STAGE TOGETHER. THEY’VE BEEN DESCRIBED AS FRENEMIES. IT’S A WEIRD SITUATION. ELIZABETH WARREN IS THE CANDIDATE MOST DEMOCRATS SAY THEY’D LIKE TO VOTE FOR, BUT THE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS THINK JOE BIDEN IS THE GUY THE COUNTRY WOULD VOTE FOR. BUT I DON’T KNOW. I DON’T THINK IT’S A GREAT IDEA TO TRY TO GUESS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WANT. THAT’S HOW YOU WIND UP EATING AT GOLDEN CORRAL. I THOUGHT YOU WANTED TO COME HERE. MOST OF WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATS WORRIED IS AFTER HILLARY, WILL ANOTHER FEMALE CANDIDATE BE ABLE TO BEAT DONALD TRUMP? WILL IT BE TOO RISKY? I THINK A FEMALE HAS A BETTER CHANCE AGAINST TRUMP, ESPECIALLY IN A DEBATE. WOMEN ARE MUCH BETTER AT HANDLING BABIES THAN MEN. IT’S A BIOLOGICAL FACT. SOME MADE WAVES, MOST NOTABLY, THE BUSINESSMAN, ANDREW YANG. HIS CAMPAIGN MANAGER SAID HE’D BE DOING SOMETHING NO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE HAS EVER DONE BEFORE, WHICH IS EXCITING TO HEAR, BECAUSE THERE CAN BE SO MANY THINGS. MAYBE HE WAS PLANNING TO EAT A TIDE POD ON CAMERA. OR RIDE IN ON AN OSTRICH. WHO KNOWS. BUT ANDREW YANG DID NONE OF THOSE THINGS. INSTEAD, HE GAVE AWAY CASH.>>I’M GOING TO DO SOMETHING UNPRECEDENTED TONIGHT. MY CAMPAIGN WILL NOW GIVE A FREEDOM DIVIDEND OF $1,000 A MONTH FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR TO TEN AMERICAN FAMILIES. SOMEONE WATCHING THIS AT HOME RIGHT NOW. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT CAN YOU SOLVE YOUR OWN PROBLEMS BETTER THAN ANY POLITICIAN, GO TO YANG2020.COM AND TELL US HOW $1,000 A MONTH WILL HELP YOU DO JUST THAT.>>Jimmy: LIKE A RADIO STATION CONTEST. THIS THOUSAND DOLLAR THURSDAY. THAT MAY BE THE MOST RIDICULOUS PROPOSAL I’VE SEEN ON THIS NETWORK, AND I’VE WATCHED EVERY EPISODE OF THE BACHELORETTE. HE ALSO HAD FUN WHEN HE TOOK THE STAGE TONIGHT.>>ENTREPRENEUR ANDREW YANG. [ APPLAUSE ]>>Jimmy: I’D LIKE TO SEE JOE BIDEN DO THAT. SOME OF THE CANDIDATES WENT AFTER JOE BIDEN, LIKE HE WAS SOME KIND OF DEAD BEAT DAD ON THE MAURY POVICH SHOW. JULIAN CASTRO IN PARTICULAR. THERE WAS ONE MOMENT WHEN CASTRO LASHED OUT AT BIDEN FOR FORGETTING SOMETHING, WHICH HE DIDN’T FORGET, BY THE WAY, AND BERNIE APPEARED TO LEAN OVER AND HELP JOE OUT. IT WAS KIND OF ENDEARING. IT MADE ME HOPEFUL FOR A REBOOT OF GRUMPY OLD MEN. B BETO O’ROURKE HAD A BETTER NIGHT. O HE LOOKS LIKE THE HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER YOU KNOW HAS WEED IN HIS DESK. HE CALLED DONALD TRUMP A WHITE SUPREMACIST AND ANNOUNCED A PLAN FOR A REPARATIONS BILL AND A NEW MADEA MOVIE BY THE END OF THE YEAR. CORY BOOKER WAS THE ONLY UNMARRIED CANDIDATE IN THE DEBATE. THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING, A SINGLE PRESIDENT. YOU SEE HIM ON TINDER. CAN’T SWIPE RIGHT ON A DEMOCRAT. HAVE TO SWIPE LEFT ON THEM, RIGHT? HE’S DATING ROSARIO DAWSON, THE ACTRESS. BUT EVEN THOUGH THEY LIVE TOGETHER A LOT OF THE TIME, UNTIL THREE DAYS AGO, SHE HADN’T OFFICIALLY ENDORSED HIM, WHICH IS, I MEAN, HOW MANY DISHES MUST THIS GUY LEAVE IN THE SINK? OVERALL, I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD DEBATE. I THOUGHT ABC NEWS DID A GREAT JOB. I DON’T KNOW WHO WON THE DEBATE, BUT WATCHING CANDIDATES DISCUSS THE ISSUES INTELLIGENTLY, USING REAL FACTS, I’D FORGOTTEN WHAT IT WAS LIKE. IT WAS LIKE WALKING OUT OF NORTH KOREA AND INTO A COSTCO. IT WAS THAT SAME. PRESIDENT TRUMP TOLD REPORTERS HE WOULD NOT WATCH THE DEBATE LIVE TONIGHT. SAID HE WAS GOING TO TAPE IT AND WATCH IT LATER AS A RERUN. THIS IS WHAT HE WAS DOING DURING THE DEBATE.>>THE LIGHT BULB. PEOPLE SAID WHAT’S WITH THE LIGHT BULB. I SAID HERE’S THE STORY. I LOOKED AT IT, THE BULB WE’RE FORCED TO USE, NUMBER ONE, MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE LIGHT’S NO GOOD. I ALWAYS LOOK ORANGE.>>Jimmy: YEAH. IT’S THE LIGHT BULB THAT MAKES YOU LOOK ORANGE. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TAN IN A CAN. [ APPLAUSE ] TRUMP ALSO ENTERTAINED THE GANG OF THE INSTITUTE WITH A ROUTINE ABOUT SLEEPY JOE BIDEN AND PRESIDENT XI. WE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO SLOW IT DOWN FOR TONIGHT’S EDITION OF DRUNK DONALD TRUMP.>>HE WANTS SLEEPY JOE. CAN YOU IMAGINE THOSE TWO GUYS IN A ROOM? XI, HA, AND HERE’S SLEEPY JOE, WHAT? WHERE AM I? WHERE AM I? JUST SIGN HERE, SLEEPY JOE. JUST SIGN HERE. ♪ ♪ [ APPLAUSE ]>>Jimmy: SO, IN BETWEEN HIS STANDUP FIGURES SHALL THE PRESIDENT IS STILL FIGURING OUT WHO’S GOING TO REPLACE HIS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER. THERE WERE REPORTS TODAY THAT HE WAS THINKING ABOUT GIVING THE JOB TO MIKE POMPEO WHO WOULD THEN HAVE TWO JOBS TO BE FIRED FROM IN THREE MONTHS, WHICH WOULD BE UNUSUAL BUT NOT UNPRECEDENTED. THERE WAS ONE OTHER SECRETARY OF STATE WHO ALSO ACTED AS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, HENRY KISSINGER, WHICH WOULD MAKE SENSE FOR TRUMP, BECAUSE NOBODY KISSINGER KISSINGER KISSINGERS HIS ASS LIKE MIKE POMPEO. HE MADE IT CLEAR HE HAS MANY OPTIONS TO FILL THIS MOST RECENT HOLE.>>A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT THE JOB. IT’S A GREAT JOB. IT’S GREAT BECAUSE IT’S A LOT OF FUN TO WORK WITH DONALD TRUMP, AND IT’S VERY EASY, ACTUALLY, TO WORK WITH ME. YOU KNOW WHY IT’S EASY? I MAKE ALL THE DECISIONS. THEY DON’T HAVE TO WORK.>>Jimmy: SOUNDS LIKE A TERRIFIC WORKING ENVIRONMENT. HE MAKES ALL THE DECISION, WHETHER THEY BE ORIGINAL RECIPE OR EXTRA CRISPY. OF ALL THE HORRIBLE THINGS HE’S BEEN TRYING TO DO, THERE’S ONE SUBJECT ON WHICH THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN CRYSTAL CLEAR, AND THAT IS THIS.>>I’M AN ENVIRONMENTALIST. I WANT CRYSTAL CLEAN WATER. I WANT CRYSTAL CLEAN WATER. WE’RE GOING TO HAVE CRYSTAL CLEAN WATER. CLEAN, BEAUTIFUL, CRYSTAL WATER. CLEAN, CRYSTAL CLEAN WATER. WE WANT CLEAN WATER. CRYSTAL. CLEAN, BEAUTIFUL, CRYSTAL WATER. NICE, BEAUTIFUL, CLEAN WATER.>>Jimmy: SO WHAT DID THEY ANNOUNCE TODAY? THEY’RE ROLLING BACK OBAMA’S CLEAN WATER ACT WHICH LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF CHEMICALS BUSINESSES CAN PUT IN OUR WATER. HOW DOES IT WORK. DID THEY WAKE UP AND SAY WHAT HORRIBLE THING CAN WE DO TODAY? I KNOW, LET’S POISON THE WATER. HE’S ROLLED BACK PROTECTION OF THE WATER, AIR, ENDANGERED SPECIES AND PUBLIC LAND. ALL HE CARES ABOUT IS ROLLING BACK WHAT OBAMA D IID. I’M SURPRISED HE DIDN’T ORDER SASHA AND MALEAH BACK INTO THE WOMB. THE CANDIDATES WERE WARNED BY ABC NEWS AND THE DNC NOT TO USE FOUL LANGUAGE, BECAUSE IF THERE’S ONE THING WE’VE LEARNED, IT’S THAT VOTERS WILL NOT TOLERATE A PRESIDENT WHO USES FOUL LANGUAGE. WITH THAT SAID, IT’S TIME FOR A SPECIAL DEBATE EDITION OF THIS WEEK IN UNNECESSARY CENSORSHIP.>>LAST YEAR, DEMOCRATS [ BLEEP ]ED 40 REPUBLICAN [ BLEEP ]S IN THE HOUSE.>>I’VE MET PEOPLE [ BLEEP ] THEIR DOCTORS. I’VE MET PEOPLE WHO [ BLEEP ] THEIR NURSES, WHO [ BLEEP ] THEIR PHARMACISTS.>>YOU’VE GOT TO TALK ABOUT THE WORKING CLASS ISSUES. THE PEOPLE WHO TAKE A [ BLEEP ] AFTER WORK.>>THIS IS ABOUT HONESTY, BIG [ BLEEP ].>>IN MY DEBATE I WAS CALLED A [ BLEEP ] FROM THE IRON RANGE. WHEN SHE SAID IT, I SAID [ BLEEP ] YOU.>>THAT’S WHAT I WANT TO DO FOR YOU AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. [ BLEEP ] YOU.>>I KNOW HOW [ BLEEP ]. AND I KNOW HOW TO WIN. I [ BLEEP ] GIANT [ BLEEP ], AND I BEAT THEM.>>I AM ASIAN. SO I HAVE A LOT OF [ BLEEP ], [ BLEEP ].>>IF YOU WANT TO COMPARE [ BLEEP

Trump to propose ‘narrower definition’ for water protection


>>Sreenivasan: THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ROLLED BACK OBAMA-ERA REGULATIONS ON THE CLEAN WATER ACT THIS WEEK. THE RESTRICTIONS WERE ESTABLISHED TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF POLLUTION IN U.S. BODIES OF WATER AND TO PROTECT SOURCES OF DRINKING WATER FOR ABOUT 1/3 OF THE COUNTRY. CRITICS SAID THEY WERE AN EXAMPLE OF GOVERNMENT OVERREACH. JOINING ME NOW FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., IS CORAL DAVENPORT, “NEW YORK TIMES'” REPORTER COVERING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY. SO, WHAT WERE THE RULES THAT WERE BEING ROLLED BACK?>>HARI, THE RULE, WHICH WAS PUT FORTH BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IN 2015, IT WAS CALLED “WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES.” AND ESSENTIALLY, WHAT THAT RULE DID WAS CLEARLY DEFINE A LOT OF SORT OF SMALLER BODIES OF WATER– WETLANDS, TRIBUTARIES, STREAMS, EVEN DITCHES– AS… AS COMING UNDER FEDERAL PROTECTION AS WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES. THAT PROTECTION ALREADY EXISTED FOR VERY LARGE BODIES OF WATER LIKE THE CHESAPEAKE BAY OR MISSISSIPPI RIVER. AND THAT RULE REALLY CLEARLY DEFINED EVEN SMALLER BODIES OF WATER IN WETLANDS THAT DRAIN INTO THOSE SMALLER BODIES OF WATER AS BEING SUBJECT TO FEDERAL PROTECTION, AND THUS THEY COULDN’T BE POLLUTED. THEY COULDN’T HAVE RUN-OFF. LANDOWNERS AROUND THOSE BODIES OF WATER WOULD HAVE TO GET A PERMIT TO USE THE LAND IN CERTAIN WAYS. SO, THIS… THIS RULE DEFINING THESE BODIES OF WATER, PROTECTING THEM, IS WHAT WAS STRIPPED AWAY.>>Sreenivasan: THIS WEEK, WE HAD THE HEAD OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY CO-AUTHOR AN OP-ED THAT SAYS THIS WAS GOVERNMENT OVERREACH. WHAT DOES HE MEAN BY THAT?>>ESSENTIALLY, THE BIGGEST OPPONENTS OF THIS RULE WERE RURAL LANDOWNERS, REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS, GROUPS THAT SAID, “LOOK, THIS RULE IS… IS ALLOWING THE GOVERNMENT TO TELL US HOW WE CAN USE OUR LAND.” AND IT… IT WAS, TO A LARGE EXTENT. IT WAS SAYING, “IF YOU’RE ON A FARM AND YOU HAVE A STREAM OR DITCH THAT DRAINS INTO A LARGER BODY OF WATER, YOU HAVE TO GET A PERMIT FROM THE E P.A. BEFORE YOU CAN USE… USE YOUR LAND IN CERTAIN KIND OF WAYS THAT MIGHT POLLUTE THAT WATER.” AND SO, LANDOWNERS SAID, “YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LITERALLY COMING IN AND TELLING US WHAT WE CAN AND CAN’T DO ON OUR LAND.” THAT WAS THE OBJECTION TO THIS RULE.>>Sreenivasan: SO, IF YOU’RE A FARMER OR YOU’RE A GOLF COURSE OWNER, REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, THE KINDS OF PESTICIDES YOU MIGHT USE ON YOUR CROPS OR ON YOUR LAWNS MIGHT FLOW INTO ONE OF THESE DITCHES, AND THAT MIGHT GO INTO A LARGER BODY. THAT’S THE…>>EXACTLY. THAT’S THE COMPLAINT.>>Sreenivasan: ALL RIGHT. SO, NOW, WHAT WILL REPLACE THIS RULE?>>THE… THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS SAID THEY INTEND TO PUT FORWARD A NEW RULE, A REPLACEMENT RULE, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S VERSIONS OF THE “WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES,” BY THE END OF YEAR. AND ESSENTIALLY, IT’S JUST EXPECTED TO BE A MUCH NARROWER DEFINITION OF WHAT GETS THIS FEDERAL PROTECTION. SO, WETLANDS WILL… ARE NOT EXPECTED TO BE INCLUDED, FOR THE LARGE PART. THE OBAMA RULE INCLUDED PROTECTION FOR UNDERGROUND BODIES OF WATER. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAD A STREAM THAT DRAINED UNDERGROUND INTO A LARGER BODY OF WATER, THAT COUNTED. THOSE ARE NOT EXPECTED TO BE PROTECTED UNDER THE NEW RULES. SO, THERE’S A LOT OF SORT OF SMALLER BODIES OF WATER IN WETLANDS THAT WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO FEDERAL PROTECTION UNDER THE EXPECTED TRUMP RULE, WHICH THEY’RE SAYING THEY’LL PUT OUT BY THE END OF THE YEAR.>>Sreenivasan: NOW, THE OBAMA RULE WASN’T ALREADY INSTITUTED OR ROLLED OUT IN EVERY STATE IN THE COUNTRY, RIGHT?>>THAT’S RIGHT. IT… IT HAD BEEN… IT HAD BEEN ROLLED OUT NATIONALLY, BUT THERE HAS BEEN SO MUCH OBJECTION TO IT. IT’S BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN ABOUT HALF THE STATES AND NOT IMPLEMENTED IN ABOUT HALF THE STATES.>>Sreenivasan: OKAY. AND FINALLY, THIS IS NOT IN A VACUUM. IN THE POLITICAL CONTEXT, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT THE PRESIDENT CAMPAIGNED ON. HE THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS GOVERNMENT OVERREACH. AND FOR HIM, THIS IS A WIN FOR WHOM? HIS FARMER BASE?>>YES. I MEAN, THIS… THIS IS, AS YOU SAID, SOMETHING… THIS WAS A MAJOR ISSUE THAT THE PRESIDENT CAMPAIGNED ON. HE VOWED TO DO IT IN HIS FIRST WEEKS IN OFFICE. AND THIS DELIVERS A BIG WIN TO HIM FOR A MAJOR POLITICAL BASE. AND THAT’S… THAT’S RURAL LANDOWNERS, FARMERS. AND THAT’S A GROUP THAT HAS BEEN SORT OF FRUSTRATED WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP LATELY. THEY HAVE BEEN HURT BY SOME OF THE TARIFFS THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN PUT FORTH. THEY’VE BEEN HURT BY SOME OF THE ROLLBACKS ON ETHANOL MANDATES. SO, FARMERS HAVE BEEN FEELING A LITTLE BIT OF A BURN LATELY FROM TRUMP ADMINISTRATION POLICIES. THIS DELIVERS THEM A DIRECT WIN THAT THEY’D ASKED FOR THAT THE PRESIDENT CAMPAIGNED ON.>>Sreenivasan: ALL RIGHT, CORAL DAVENPORT OF THE “NEW YORK TIMES” JOINING US FROM WASHINGTON TONIGHT. THANKS SO MUCH.>>GREAT TO BE WITH YOU, HARI. THANK YOU.