January 27, 2016, - 4:58 pm

VIDEO: These Trump Comments Are Downright SCARY – Should Bother Any Conservative

By Debbie Schlussel

trumpcombover

These Donald Trump comments should trouble anyone and everyone who thinks of himself or herself as conservative. They are typical of the RINOs in Congress, including Paul Ryan. And we’ve had enough of establishment types from both parties who get together to screw the rest of us, haven’t we? Watch . . .

I’ve always had a good relationship with Nancy Pelosi. I’ve never had a problem. [Harry] Reid’s going to be gone. I always had a decent relationship with Reid, although lately obviously I haven’t been dealing with him, so he’ll use my name as the ultimate … of the billionaires in terms of people you don’t want. But I’ve always had a great relationship with Harry Reid. Frankly, if I weren’t running for office, I’d be able to deal with [Pelosi], I’d be able to deal with Reid — I’d be able to deal with anybody. But I think I’d be able to get along very well with Nancy Pelosi and just about everybody,” he said. “Hey look, I think I’ll be able to get along well with Schumer, Chuck Schumer. I was always very good with Schumer. I was close to Schumer in many ways. It’s wonderful to say you’re a maverick, and you’re going to stand up and you’re going to close up the country … but you got to get somebody to go along with you.

Hey, sounds like another four to eight years of Bush. Or what the Romney-Ryan Presidency would have been like.

In other words: business as usual in Washington.

Puh-leeze. Pelosi and Schumer are gonna help keep illegal aliens out? That’s their constituency.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly






34 Responses

It sounds exactly like John McCain, when HE ran for president. Talking about getting along w/ Democrats, and how guys like Joe Lieberman and Joe Biden(!) would be the first people he consults on important issues.

So we have Republican politicians telling us that we shouldn’t vote for Trump, but that Bush or Graham or Kasich are okay! Who’d have thunk it?

Infidel on January 27, 2016 at 5:35 pm

Yup.

Its an admission against interest.

Then again no one thinks Trump is a conservative.

What’s frickin’ hilarious is the GOP establishment is so upset over him when they’ve been doing exactly the same thing.

Cutting deals with Obama, Pelosi & Reid.

Their lack of credibility (and hypocrisy) is exactly why their warning against Trump falls on deaf ears.

NormanF on January 27, 2016 at 5:40 pm

    Bingo. The GOPe CREATED the D.Trump candidacy, in many ways.

    waynesteapartyworld on January 27, 2016 at 8:17 pm

They are disquieting comments, but I would add some qualifiers.

First, I would take these comments in the context of everything else he’s said; some of his comments suggest a liberal approach, and some of his recent positions have been anything but conservative. Some comments naivety about foreign affairs, but others such as banning Muslims, increasing military spending, his 2nd Amendment comments, etc. suggest a firm, if incomplete, right-wing attitude.

Trump may have meant to suggest that he can win leftist politicians to his side, in opposition to the traditional pattern of Republicans caving in to the Left. Maybe pollyanish, but in the context of everything else he’s said, I am reserving judgment as to his exact meaning.

I think the actual literal substance of what he said is correct. You have to work with others — the weakness in what he said is the implied suggestion that, by being susceptible to collaboration, the Leftists might have good motives. This suggestion is, of course, promoted by the ambiguity of his comments. He is fond of making ambiguous comments, and their frequency indicates that this fondness is probably intentional.

But given what he has stood up to in the last few months from the entire political establishment, I am reserving judgment. We know that the other politicians have already caved in; I still think it is possible that Trump will be different.

Little Al on January 27, 2016 at 5:45 pm

LA:

The revelation doesn’t change my intention to vote for Trump.

I expect politicians to make deals.

In fact, I appreciate Trump’s honesty more than I appreciate frauds who tell us they’ll stand on their principles and decide to compromise on them later.

I’m not expecting the man to be a saint. After all, Trump is running for President, not for the priesthood.

NormanF on January 27, 2016 at 5:51 pm

I am rooting for Cruz, and am glad that he rising to #2 in NH as well. I hope he gets the nomination, but if he doesn’t, Trump is my next choice.

Infidel on January 27, 2016 at 5:52 pm

Debbie and others, I think that Mr. Trump is doing this to appeal to possibly appeal to the moderate/centrist voters (about half of the US population according to scientific and anthropological polling tends to be ideologically centrist) so he can get their votes, but that’s my prediction and opinion where I could either be right or wrong?

In any event, I’ll be honest with all of you, but I think either Rand Paul or Marco Rubio will be a fine president, now are both men perfected where I agree with their policies all the time? Answer is no, Rubio’s immigration policies are disappointing and Paul’s foreign policy are sketchy. To me, Donald Trump’s rhetoric is kinda frightening, mainly his economic and financial policies of being a protectionist and opposes international trading.

Bernie Sanders rhetoric is WAY too much of “utopianism”, mainly his policies regarding economics and finances, of him believing that everything should be free regardless, to me, his views are a fantasy and laughable. Hillary Clinton on the other hand is just outright corrupt to the core and exemplifies degeneracy in American politics!

Sean R. on January 27, 2016 at 9:46 pm

Porky Pig with a couple beers in him every day before 8:30 a.m. would be a better president than Barack Milhous Hussein Benito Obama.

I wouldn’t want to see Trump win, but I believe Donald Trump at worst would still be a wee bit better than Porky Pig.

Having said that, don’t expect America to recover, even if Ted Cruz wins and picks a true conservative vice president. We’re too far gone, and the populace at large is too uninformed, liberal and unwilling to undertake austerity measures.

We no longer live in a land where rugged individualism is celebrated. We live in a land where ‘getting over’ is not only celebrated, but being corrupt, selfish, thoughtless, inconsiderate and criminally inclined is also rewarded and encouraged.

Alfredo from Puerto Rico on January 27, 2016 at 11:26 pm

QUOTE: “I’d be able to deal with [Pelosi], …”

Can you even IMAGINE e.g. Barry Obama saying “I’d be able to deal with [brand name Republican here].”

After decades of cultural warfare by PBS, NYT, the television networks, etc., even non-progressives have been conditioned to think that while “conservatives” should compromise and “be reasonable” when dealing with “liberals” or “progressives.”

This is strictly a one-way street. Nobody would expect a self-respecting “liberal” or “progressive” to have to talk with reactionary fascist pigs, let alone “sell out their principles” to the evil Realm of Rightist Reaction.

Custos Custodum on January 27, 2016 at 11:43 pm

I do not have great expectations for Donald Trump. In a better world with real options, Donald Trump would not even be a factor. Instead, we now live in a steaming trash heap known as U.S.A. 2016. The candidates running for office are for the most part of fairly low quality or corrupt. American voters will get to choose between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, which is akin to picking the least worst vehicle at a used car lot.

Worry on January 28, 2016 at 2:04 am

“. . . which is akin to picking the least worst vehicle at a used car lot.” – Worry

ROTFLMAO!!! And all too true, sadly.

Alfredo from Puerto Rico on January 28, 2016 at 2:07 am

As a conservative, no, Trump’s remarks to not bother me at all. He’s speaking campaign rhetoric and between the lines, he’s trying not to alienate the many democrats who support him. You see, he’s well aware that cruz’s donors are funding his polls and claiming that his “supporters” are funding his appearances, when in fact, his global donors are funding everything it takes to take voters away from Trump. Between the lines, I read an extremely smart man saying what is necessary to win the election. Why? Because he said “I need to win this election not just for myself, but for America.” Yes, he does believe that – and I believe that too. By the process of eliminating the communists, socialists, democrats, corrupt members of congress (note that the RNC approved the activist muslim who was hired to attack Trump at the debate, and; it’s the republican House that approved a bill that forces us to undergo forced vaccinations and psychological testing for what THEIR doctors call “depression” – which is another means to confiscate our guns), political frauds, ineligibles and downright scary globalists, there is NO ONE else. Regardless what Trump says, his policies and plan are more conservative than any other candidate. I’m sticking with Trump.

marlene on January 28, 2016 at 7:34 am

Any arguments against Trump are moot. He is the only Republican candidate. Cruz, despite his support is not a NBC (natural born citizen) nor eligible by any stretch of the imagination. Born a Canadian citizen he’d be eligible for the Canadian Parliament except that he recently renounced his Canadian citizenship. But even if nominated he would have no chance against Hillary or any other Democrat. Rubio, the anchor baby is likewise ineligible for POTUS. So who else do the Republicans have?

Jerry G on January 28, 2016 at 8:09 am

Debbie, You forgot to add:
1- that he would not return lands to the state that were confiscated for no apparent reason. He added the lands need to be looked after properly (paraphrase). What ever happened to the 10th Amendment? Or, only the Feds (he) can look after these lands.
2- His stance on ethanol as a “good” thing. Ethanol is the second biggest scam perpetrated on the American public (global warming being first). It is gubmint price fixing; it has risen the price of all foods (corn is the basic feed for all animals, and because of price fixing, farmers grow corn instead of other vegetables, so their prices go up; gas mileage increases by one half to one fifth; it pollutes with other contaminants that plants do not use such as nitrites, sulfates, whereas plants will digest CO2; it is POISON to engines, especially marine, 2-stroke (all lawn equipment) because alcohol (ethanol) is hydrscopic (draws water) and corrodes. I could go on.
3- His stance on eminent domain

Does this sound like a person GROUNDED in the Constitution and conservatism? Trump is a good man and a man of his word. However, his whole life he has been a dictator (and rightly so in his business–his way or the highway) without a grounding in law, much less the Constitution, (I’m referring to kickbacks, bribes, crony capitalism, “greasing the way”); therefore, he will continue to shred the Constitution, as Dear Leader has, for the common good as he interprets it.

Further, he says he’s a deal maker. Isn’t that why the country is in the position it is? Deals!! I do not want deals with progressives/communists/liberals. I want the Constitution strictly enforced and not “dealt with.” There was only one other POTUS who did just that who won two elections by landslides (second time by 49 states!)–Pres. Ronald Reagan— who also dealt with foreign countries as such. He invaded only one country–Grenada.

unholyone on January 28, 2016 at 8:13 am

    I forgot to add that the next POTUS may have the opportunity to appoint/nominate four Supreme Court Justices. I hope that person is grounded in the Constitution, as the Second Amendment (among others) is “hanging on” by one vote! It is further disturbing when Billary just mentioned Dear Leader would make a good Supreme Court Justice.

    unholyone on January 28, 2016 at 8:33 am

All I care about is for him to kick the illegal alien bums out of this country and when I write bums, I mean every single illegal, and for Trump to stop all of the ME, Asian, and African, immigrants from coming in here. Get rid of visa- overstay people, lower taxes, and so forth. He can do that without Harry or Nancy.

Dinak on January 28, 2016 at 8:49 am

Thank you Debbie for being unbiased and objective about Trump (as you are about everything).

You criticize him when he should be criticized (Right here) and you support him when he should be supported (What you wrote earlier about him skipping the debate).

I_AM_ME on January 28, 2016 at 9:34 am

I cannot believe we now have complete tea party organizations officially endorsing this buffoon, and supposed conservatives like hannity up his ass. Sickening!!

Say what on January 28, 2016 at 9:38 am

Sean R, problem w/ Rand Paul ain’t that his foreign policy is sketchy. It is that he happens to be right about the Sunnis – Saudis, Turks, et al but wrong about Iran. He also wrongly thinks Saddam & Assad were secular.

By itself, Rand Paul’s foreign policy would not be a problem, if he also completely kept Muslims out of the US. But unlike Trump, he’s not endorsed that: he’s endorsed a subset of that, which got voted down (which is why there are really no ‘establishment lanes’ in the race – it’s really a 2 man Trump vs Cruz race). End result would be the strengthening of the Shia crescent of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and as a result of the sanctions being lifted, Iran becoming a new regional superpower. His ‘neocon’ opponents like Rubio, Carly and Christie make the other mistake, when they rule out Russia as a partner, but embrace the likes of Turkey, Saudis, Qatar and Bahrein as partners.

The only foreign policies that make sense are those of Trump and Cruz. Trump is right that we should seek to work w/ Russia. Russia is our frenemy – while we oppose their ambitions in Ukraine (we do need to be mindful of the rights of ethnic Russians outside Russia, and not just give a carte blanche to Russia’s neighbors), there is no reason to oppose them in Syria. Ted Cruz is right – in Syria, the Sunni opposition outside ISIS is fictional, and we really do NOT have a dog in this war, aside from crushing ISIS. If Assad stays in power, Hezbullah continues to get supported, but on the bright side, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are no longer supported in Damascus, since they’ve chosen to throw their lot w/ some of the Sunni opposition. If Assad gets removed, even if ISIS doesn’t take over all of Syria, what you’ll get in Damascus won’t likely be an Alawite regime: instead, it’ll be an al Qaeda or Muslim Brotherhood linked regime, such as al Nusra, Khorasan or someone else. And it will be a lot weaker than ISIS, and vulnerable to being toppled and replaced by ISIS. And it will remain completely Israel hostile – like even Iraq’s CURRENT US installed regime is.

Turkey, which is still in NATO, is no longer our ally – heck, even during the Iraq war, they refused to let us use their territory or bases. In fact, their presence in NATO illustrates how that organization is time warped in the 80s. If Russia is still to be considered our enemy, then that organization is really spread thin: a Russian attack on Latvia, for instance, would HAVE TO go unanswered: the West just can’t take on them militarily. If Trump is right and we can work w/ Russia, then we need to stop having so many troops in Iceland and Germany, and instead start moving them to the borders of Islam – Greece, Cyprus, Israel(!), South Sudan, et al.

I like the race the way it looks now – Trump vs Cruz. I just don’t want Trump to – by his decision of today – to go down, and take Cruz down w/ himself in the process, leaving us choosing b/w Rubio, Kasich and Christie. Rubio says all the right things, but I just don’t know what to believe about him, and I disagree w/ him strongly about his policy on the Sunnis.

Infidel on January 28, 2016 at 11:12 am

Jerry G, the ‘birther’ theory by which you exclude Rubio – that both parents have to be born in the US – would also exclude Trump (and previously Piyush Jindal)

Infidel on January 28, 2016 at 11:57 am

I think the Trump supporters are way off. This is the real Trump, an egomaniac who think she is the smartest person in the room. Most smart people don’t need to tell everyone how smart they are and how idiotic everyone else is. Look at Deb here, she doesn’t brag about how smart she is, she just proves it day in and day out by providing facts and information that scant other places do. Trump thinks he can make deals with Lefties? He is wrong, there is no motivation for them to make a deal, in business there is the profit motivation. This does not exist in government. Trump can’t fire anyone who doesn’t deal with him. So what does that leave him? Executive Orders ala Obama.

DaveC on January 28, 2016 at 2:22 pm

Here is the “ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM” I wish to introduce to all:

THE NATIONAL DEBT – BOTH FUNDED AND UNFUNDED LIABILITIES!!!

A few weeks ago after conversing with friends about politics, immigration, etc., I mentioned the DEBT. Subsequent to the conversations, I finally got motivated to create a spreadsheet to calculate DEBT AMOUNT @ ANY AMOUNT. THE AMORTIZED VARIABLE AMOUNTS CALCULATE AMORTIZATION @ $$$ RATE PER (SECOND, MINUTE, HOUR, DAY, WEEK, MONTH, YEAR) TIME DESIGNATIONS.

So, take the Estimated $200 TRILLION Debt – includes Unfunded Liabilities – Amortized at $1 Million per Second…How Long will it take to get to ZERO? BTW…NO INTEREST INCLUDED.

WHO WILL GET US OUT OF THIS DEBT ABYSS?

Dennis on January 28, 2016 at 3:12 pm

NO ONE, DENNIS!!!

It’s Weimar Republic Redux, . . .

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH . . .

THUMP!!!

Humpty Dumpty’s gonna have a weewee big fall, the biggest fall of any nation since the first man appeared upon the earth.

Alfredo from Puerto Rico on January 28, 2016 at 3:26 pm

    Hey Alberto! YOU ARE CORRECT!

    BTW…didn’t P.R. just default on a payment a few weeks ago?
    How does P.R. plan on getting back on track…if at all? Maybe us voters should pay attention to the situation.

    To paraphrase a longtime buddy who, while he was in the U.S.A.F. back in the ’60s, always said, “I don’t know how I can pay for this or that because I’M SO POOR THAT I CAN’T EVEN AFFORD TO PAY ATTENTION!”.

    WELCOME TO THE NEW U.S.A.

    ps: I do not know why the U.S. seems to think IMMIGRANTS ARE NEEDED. I AM SEEING MORE AND MORE NEWS ABOUT ROBOTS performing numerous tasks…complicated and otherwise. I read an opinion by one particular author who opined that Treasury Bonds would be pushed upon and sold to them at a low R-O-R and extended Maturation Periods.

    Regards, Good Luck, Stay Safe…

    Dennis on January 28, 2016 at 4:01 pm

      Yes, the U.S. Democrat Party associated Governor of Puerto Rico, Alejandro Garcia Padilla, who may in fact be a distant relative, came riding in to town promising pie in the sky, no austerity measures, and that he was the salvation of Puerto Rico.

      A couple months in to his administration, people began to realize that this FOO (Friend of Obama) had perpetrated the same fraud as The Teleprompter-In-Chief. Since his inauguration a few years ago, Governor Garcia has even been called a dictator publicly by other politicos and talk radio. But as it is here, it’s too late.

      Puerto Rico is also finding out that having no Plan B for life without the U.S. safety net of tax breaks for big manufacturing and other corporations was a bad idea. Of course, no idea is ALWAYS a bad idea.

      In addition, Puerto Rico is looking back on its past, and wondering if the agreement made with the U.S. in 1952 to say Phuk Yieu Thieu to agriculture and go whole hog on manufacturing, was such a good idea after all.

      For years, the Puerto Rican government has been encouraging people to grow as much of their own food as possible. Vast tracts of some of the world’s most storied and arable farmland lie unused.

      Of a people grown lazy, fat, uninformed and disinterested by the welfare state mentality, it’s hard to reeducate them en masse to the idea of working the land. We will have lost 15% of our population as of the 2000 Census by the end of this year. People find it easier to run off to the U.S., where they have relatives, and by reason of already being full citizens, can suck an even larger breast than what PR, with its less than full “entitlement” subsidies, can provide in its territorial status.

      What is inevitably left in such places is a society full of old people like me, a few other hangers on, and criminals. Full blown Third Worldism. It’s alive and well in PR, and coming to a neighborhood near you all in the USA. I have unfortunately, also been stuck in the NYC area for over five months now.

      With all its warts, I’d rather be down on the farm, but I have a lot of advantages down there most people don’t. I just have to bust my 59 year old, somewhat damaged butt to reap the rewards.

      Alfredo from Puerto Rico on January 28, 2016 at 5:57 pm

Trump will always be a business man.

Todd on January 28, 2016 at 3:57 pm

I have some trepidation about a Trump presidency, but in this case I think he was responding to a Liberal mentality oriented question (trying to trip him up) in a rather clever way. I think this puts the onus on the Dems to EITHER acknowledge that he can deal with them and thus is a legitimate option for those looking to ‘step outside’ of the Dem party OR deny his claim and virtually admit up front they will try to sabotage him (for the record) so that he can use it against them later. This would probably be a wash concerning his base, but a slight upside in attracting voters who are straddling the Dem Party fence.

YCHtT on January 28, 2016 at 10:00 pm

Two things-
First,we need a constitutional amendment that any candidate for president MUST be able to pass the same standards and background investigation of a federal law enforcement officer, since as President they are the chief Law Enforcement officer over the land. No criminal history in their past, no extensive drug use, no associations with anti-American organizations. This would have kept us from having several presidents in our recent history, and would keep HRC from being able to apply for the job as well. Also all of their public records must remain just that – public. No sealing of school grades, etc.

Second, any man who is as vain as Trump is about his hair has no business being in public office. I personally do not trust any man who is not man enough to accept whatever God has given him on his head. This includes coloring of hair, plugs, and whatever on earth that THING is on top of Trump’s dome. You want to be taken seriously? Get a real haircut. Until then, I won’t pay attention to you.

Disgusted with Media on January 28, 2016 at 10:16 pm

    Disgusted-

    Although I agree with your first point in principle, it may leave us POTUS-less and therefore with a new form of government.

    Regarding your second point- I won’t touch it for fear of repercussion by PETT… People for the Ethical Treatment of Tribbles

    YCHtT on January 29, 2016 at 2:44 am

So you’re saying that if the likes of Paul Ryan sell out to the liberals, then that automatically means that anyone else making a deal with the liberals will sell out to them too?

Remember, Trump wrote the book on negotiating and deal making. I feel confident that if anyone could get a great deal for our side, he’s the one.

Charles Rector on February 4, 2016 at 4:16 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field