Pence put on a strong display of how to be prepared, pivot, and punch back
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence won Tuesday night’s vice presidential debate by a landslide, offering a polished, poignant performance some are suggesting Donald Trump could learn from ahead of his second face-off with Hillary Clinton Sunday.
As Pence and Virginia Sen. Time Kaine clashed during the debate in Farmville, Virginia, the well-prepared Pence maintained his cool in the face of Kaine’s incessant interruptions. In deftly dodging Kaine’s darts and refusing to become bogged down by his attacks, the Indiana governor winsomely presented the Trump campaign’s strong vision for implementing change in Washington and restoring greatness to the nation.
“This is exactly what Trump needed,” Ingraham said. “But what could Donald Trump learn from the way Mike Pence handled himself?”
“This is exactly what Trump needed,” LifeZette Editor-in-Chief Laura Ingraham said Wednesday on “The Laura Ingraham Show.” “But what could Donald Trump learn from the way Mike Pence handled himself?”
Ingraham said despite the fact Pence and Trump are “totally different people” with vastly differing styles, the GOP nominee could nevertheless garner some practical insights.
“Donald Trump is not going to be Mike Pence. He’s not gonna be someone who doesn’t react to all attacks,” Ingraham said, noting that Trump cannot afford to “squander precious time” on trivial things that don’t matter.
“I think [Trump] can learn a lot from Mike Pence about the pivot, which is something you have to do in these debate settings. You can’t stay on whatever the moderator wants you to answer. You have to move to your points.”
Byron York, the chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner, told Ingraham the next debate for Trump will be his “last chance” to make up for his rough first performance.
“Remember we were saying that about the first debate, that it was so critical and Trump has this huge opportunity. It is a one-time opportunity. Well, it was kind of a one-time opportunity, but I do think he has another chance,” York said, noting that President Obama made a magnificent comeback in his second debate during his 2012 bid for re-election — after suffering a crushing defeat in the first one to then-GOP nominee Mitt Romney.
“It’s possible he could have another chance. But he has to be better, and to do that, he has to have been working this last week or so on a lot of this traditional stuff,” York said.
York and Ingraham pointed to how Pence spent weeks preparing for the vice presidential debate, participating in mock debates and reviewing Kaine’s old debate footage during his runs for the Senate and for Virginia governor. In stark contrast, Trump eschewed these “traditional” preparation methods.
“[Pence] was 12 years in the House of Representatives in the leadership and he’s been governor of Indiana for three years. He’s been studying and working with policy for years and years. Donald Trump has not, so he can’t just do that,” York said. “But, Trump is Trump, and he has the advantage on issues over Hillary Clinton. And if he performs well, then I think he really does have a chance to get back in it.”
Both Ingraham and York agreed that Trump should decrease the number of rallies he gives just before each of the two remaining events. The GOP nominee participated in a rally the day before the first debate, and he is scheduled to give another one the day before the second debate.
“I mean, I’m not giving him advice, but man — I would just have him stay put, get rested, and just focus on that debate, because I think the debate is really important,” Ingraham said.
York added, “Obviously, I think Trump thinks that it gives him a sort of push of energy, this extra boost, this wind under his wings to do that. But, a debate is not a rally, and this one truly is, I think, his last chance to come out and do well before a massive TV audience.”
If Trump can pull a solid second debate performance, the polls — which have been swinging up and down before meeting the middle in a continuous cycle for months — could stabilize and give Trump the edge he needs to win, York said.
Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, a campaign surrogate for Trump, agreed that Trump’s poll numbers depend on his ability to churn out a solid second debate performance.
“Now I think he can begin an ascent toward Election Day because the issues, as you indicate, reflect the concerns of the American people. Nobody is protecting their interests,” Sessions said. “So I think if we can get this message and this campaign back to those fundamental issues and why Donald Trump’s policies will make America stronger, better and more prosperous, then he’ll be on track to regain the lead that he had twice moving forward.”
In the end, Sessions believes that Trump has always had the edge over Clinton in terms of his campaign message and his willingness to both listen to and champion the concerns of the American people. If Trump can make this clear in the second debate, then he can build on Pence’s boost in momentum and claim victory on Election Day — because Clinton represents “the epitome of the global Establishment special interest camp.”
“This is about the concerns of the American people. They have been ignored. Hillary Clinton calls them ‘irredeemable deplorables.’ I mean, this is the mindset of the mainstream of Establishment power groups from globalists to Washington, D.C. They’re used to running things their way, and they’ve stiffed the American people in their interests,” Sessions concluded. “This is the kind of thing that creates an opportunity for us to elect somebody who’s in tune with where the people are, and I think Donald Trump’s message is there.”
When you see who Hillary takes money from, you have to wonder what she will do in return. She is already a known threat to our national security.
Hillary Clinton is being outspent by Bernie Sanders 3 to 1 and keeps going back to the same donors who have for the most part given the maximum donations, but don’t worry, she’s found some new donors.
A pro-Iran lobby group that is working against US interests and is actively trying to kill new antiterrorism laws will be at a fundraising event with her this weekend.
This Sunday, Clinton will attend a fundraiser hosted by Twitter executive Omid Kordestani and his wife Gisel Hiscock along with National Iranian American Council (NIAC) board member Lily Sarafan and Noosheen Hashemi, who serves on the pro-Iran advocacy group Ploughshares, a major funder of the pro-Iran agenda.
NIAC advocates against the pro-Israel community and on Iran’s behalf, they pushed against sanctions, have close ties to Barack Obama, pressured the US to abandon sanctions, and they spread propaganda the same way Press TV does. In 2013, they put out the lie that President Rouhani was a moderate and US papers lapped it up.
Ploughshares partners with NIAC and with the White House to pressure the Jewish community and others to back the Iran nuclear deal.
Iranian state-run media have referred to the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC) since at least 2006 as “Iran’s lobby” in the U.S.
It portrays itself in the media as an independent group of Iranian expatriates. But Sam Nunberg, director of the Legal Project at the Middle East Forum project, describes the NIAC as an Iranian “front group.”
And documents released during the discovery phase of a defamation lawsuit NIAC filed against Seid Hassan Daioleslam, editor of the Iranian American Forum and one of the regime’s most public critics, include correspondence with Mohammed Javad Zaif, then Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations. He later negotiated the nuclear “deal” with Iran.
They are working to block legislation that will require Iranians to enter the US without a visa. The legislation is meant to keep terrorists out of the country. Why do the Iranians want that, do you think?
Back in 2013, Javad Zarif, the Iranian Foreign Minister who negotiated the peace talks with Iran, told Mehr News that they would use our democracy and our divisions against us:
“The Republic of Iran has the power and capacity to challenge U.S. and Israel in the international arena. To achieve this we must believe in the abilities of ourselves and of our diplomatic team. If we think that there is a unified voice in America, we are mistaken. By utilizing the opposing views in the U.S. we can be the winners in the (diplomatic) scene, and, of course, we can take advantage of the Zionist regime’s weaknesses.”
Also in 2013, Hossein Naghavi, the speaker of the parliament’s Committee described Zarif’s plan to play our game:
“We consider enemies as enemies and believe that we should not let the Zionists (Israel) present themselves as victims. We believe the U.S. is not a super-power and we can defeat the U.S. and Israel in the diplomatic arena. We should believe in the power and capacities of the revolution and the country. The United States and the Zionists want to show that Iran has no room to play. But we have both the power and the capacity. We know the rules of the game and we can play the best game.”
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) aggressively lobbies on behalf of the Iranian government likely with direct communications to Tehran itself.
This group has ties to Hollywood, industry, Silicon Valley and the White House.
Iran’s representatives in the US will certainly expect favors for their donations.
RUSH: No, no. It’s really very simple. If you were looking for the United States, if you were looking for the president of the United States to say, “We are not going to tolerate this kind of behavior,” if you were looking for the president of the United States to say that we are gonna go to the end of the earth to find these people and take them out and do everything we can to wipe out the kind of terrorism taking place, this was not the speech for you.
If you were looking for the president of the United States to provide the world confidence and leadership that ISIS and other groups like it could be dealt with and taken out, this was not the speech for you because none of that was said. There wasn’t even an attitude that conveyed those thoughts. Do you know the only time Obama came alive during that speech today? Did you watch any of it? The only time he came alive, the only time Obama got passionate was when what? When he started talking about the migrants. When he started talking about the migrants and how we must keep our doors open. He started condemning people who think we need to keep Syrian refugees out of here, we need to keep Muslim refugees out of here, we only should let in Christians, he blew up.
He got passionate. He took out after Republicans, Republican presidential candidates. He was tougher and more critical on Republicans than he was on ISIS in this speech, but it was clear. Folks, does anybody doubt that we’re in a war, that we’ve been in a war since before 9/11. We have been in a war with the Islamists — well, you could say back to Thomas Jefferson days, but in the modern era, the first World Trade Center bombing in ’93. We have been at war. There have been repeated terrorism attacks, hijackings, you name it. We have been at war and way too many administrations have sought to ignore it and look the other way and downplay it, including the Clinton administration, including the Obama Regime, you name it, look the other way, it isn’t happening, because in no way, shape, manner, or form were they prepared to take any of the responsibility of dealing with it, much less acknowledge they had anything to do with it.
Clinton had everything to do with it by making us look like a phony paper tiger, by cutting-and-running out of Somalia, Black Hawk Down incident, there’s any number of historical events I could give you, but the fact of the matter is we have made it clear we can be had. And after 9/11 what did we do? From the highest levels of the State Department we started conducting seminars asking, “What’s wrong with us? What do we do? Why did we make them so mad? What have we done to so infuriate them?” We took it all on ourselves. It was our fault. College kids today have picked up that refrain in terms of political correctness. It must be something we’ve done to offend them. We’ve gotta find out what it is and assure them we mean them no harm.
But if you were looking for tough leadership, if you were looking for a president make it clear that he was gonna defend his country and other Western civilization countries, western democracies, if you were hoping that you were gonna get a president who was looking the world in the eye and saying that they were not going to be able to continue with this, this was not the speech for you because you didn’t get that. What you got from this president was you’re a bigot if you think we should stop helping these refugees.
He wants a hundred thousand a year. And I’ll guarantee you this, too. Whether Congress defunds the whole program, don’t bet on that, he’s gonna do it anyway. Folks, this last year coming up, I’m telling you, I don’t think people still have any idea what’s gonna go on, one year to go, one year to fully transform this country, one year to do whatever he has in mind, vis-a-vis the United States of America, one year. If he wants to keep those borders open and he wants — you know, southern border immigration is a much different thing than taking in these refugees. Don’t equate the two. They’re two separate entities. They’ve got different objectives.
Illegal immigration is one thing. We already have a set of laws on the books. All we’d have to do is enforce them but nobody wants to, we’re not doing so. But the southern border immigration problem is not at all similar to what Obama is doing with the expanded refuge importation program. But you will hear, he just comes alive when admonishing the bigots in this country. He even went so far as to say (imitating Obama), “We got people who think it’s okay to let in Christians but they don’t want the Muslims. That’s not who we are. That’s not American values. That’s not the America I know. That’s not the values that we have.” Blows his stack practically.
RUSH: Now to the Obama sound bites from his speech today. Right off the bat, this is Obama and his coming alive. This is the most energetic and passionate he was during the whole thing, by saying rejecting refugees — this is after what happened in Paris — rejecting refugees would be a betrayal of our values.
OBAMA: As we accept more refugees, including Syrians, we do so only after subjecting them to rigorous screening and security checks. We also have to remember that many of these refugees are the victims of terrorism themselves. That’s what they’re fleeing. Slamming the door in their faces would be a betrayal of our values.
RUSH: Right. Now, this is a theme, by the way, that’s being picked up by the international left. And I’ve seen it in a number of leftist websites publications, and that is, “Come on, the refugees are not the terrorists. The refugees are fleeing what happened in Paris. They’re not the people causing it.” When we have discovered that one of the terrorists in Paris on Friday night was indeed carrying a Syrian passport. Now, we think that’s the case. It could have been one of the victims. It could have been a forged passport or what have you, but nevertheless it was found.
But the bottom line is with all of this happening, with all of these young men, able-bodied, military age fleeing — Bernie Sanders says ’cause it’s hot where they live because of climate change — Obama says, oh, yeah, we’ll check ’em out. Really? Who has confidence that we’re gonna do that? We can’t even find the illegals in this country, supposedly. What do you mean we’re gonna check ’em out? How many Fort Hoods is it gonna take? How many one-off terrorism acts, attempted terrorism acts by lone wolves or whatever in this country is it gonna take?
Why in the world would you want to commit suicide? This is what people don’t understand. You know, reasonable people who don’t define themselves politically. These are the people I’m talking about I wish we could teach to spot liberalism everywhere it is. We would be so far ahead of the game. But people that doesn’t want to think they’re watching politics, don’t want to see politics, don’t want to think politics is part of anything, even they are beginning to say, “Wait a minute. We just had another ISIS attack. They’re beheading people left and right. They’re making videos of it. They’re killing people left and right. People are fleeing everywhere.
We want to let people into this country during a period of time like this? Why would we commit suicide? Why would America take the risk? Even nonpolitical people are beginning to ask the question. Like what I heard today driving in to work. “Well, I’m really worried out there, Mark. I’m really, really worried. It might be the worst time in the world for my kids to be growing up.” You know, I’m flabbergasted listening to this. He’s talking about the Paris attack. And they’re worried, they were talking about sleeper cells here and how many might be planning attacks here in the United States, and I said, “Have you guys noticed what’s happening to the economy?” They hadn’t. It’s asking empty questions. (interruption) That’s what I mean, Fort Hood was not workplace violence. Well, I know they said it was. That’s why people don’t trust them now.
They’re asking us to not believe exactly what we see. They’re asking us to deny common sense. They’re asking us to deny what’s rational. They want us to believe them. “Ah, it’s workplace violent.” Really? Allahu Akbar. It happens every day. Snerdley shouts every other day last week, Allahu Akbar, got mad his computer, right, workplace violence. Okay, so there’s Obama making the case, he’s in Turkey, “We can’t shut down the refugees, we gotta let ’em in, that’s who we are, that’s how we open ’em up.” And this is when Obama, his critics are bellicose, and they pop off with tough talk. This is Obama tougher on Republicans than he ever is on ISIS. This is a press conference at the G20 summit, and White House correspondent Jim Avila. “Mr. President, if I could ask, I’d like you to address your critics who say your reluctance to enter another Middle East war and your preference of diplomacy over using the military makes the US weaker and emboldens our enemies.”
OBAMA: Some of them seem to think that if I were just more bellicose in expressing what we’re doing, that that would make a difference, because that seems to be the only thing that they’re doing is talking as if they’re tough. Folks want to pop off and have opinions about what they think they would do, present a specific plan. What I’m not interested in doing is posing or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with that has no relationship to what is actually gonna work to protect the American people and to protect people in the region.
RUSH: Did I just hear what I just heard? Did we all just hear that? Did he just say that he’s not gonna pursue some notion, he’s not interested in pursuing some notion of American leadership or of America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with. It has no relationship to what’s actually gonna work? If America winning doesn’t have any relationship to what’s gonna work, then what the hell are we working on? What’s the point? This is not the first time he has said this. This is not the first time he has questioned the whole concept of America winning as a phony premise. Gosh, I wish I could remember. It seems like it was early on in the first term. It might have been about Iraq. But this is the second, maybe the third time I have heard Obama denigrate the concept of America winning as somehow insignificant or beneath us intellectually within that it’s just a slogan. America winning is just a slogan. And what I guess is real is all these hashtags, #bringbackourgirls. Let’s drop some candles here for the victims of whatever happened and think we’re doing something. That’s what people on his side do.
But he really makes the case here, makes the point here that this is bitter clinger rabble-rousing. It’s just insignificant. This idea of America winning, it’s so backwards. We intellectuals are so far beyond the concept of America winning. That’s not what this is about. We’re not in this to win. That’s not why we’re doing what we’re doing. That’s his point of view here. American leadership, America winning, other slogans we can come up with. I’m not interested in that. That has no relationship to what’s actually gonna work to protect the American people. America winning has no relationship to protecting the American people?
This is arrogant condescension and the whole idea here about winning and victory, intellectuals, in their world, that is blue-collar stuff, that’s hayseed, hick stuff, talking about winning and this and that. The intellectuals know there is no winning. There’s just containment. There’s appeasement, there’s cooperation, coalition. Winning? Come on, don’t waste my time. We’re so beyond winning. In his vaunted world of superior intelligence and being, winning is such a passe thing. Leadership, it’s so irrelevant to the real world today. But he wasn’t finished. He then lectured everybody on how we have to accept Muslims as well as Christians or we’re all just a bunch of bigots.
OBAMA: When I hear folks say that, well, maybe we should just admit the Christians but not the Muslims. When I hear political leaders suggesting that there would be a religious test for which person who’s fleeing from a war torn country is admitted, when some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution, that’s shameful. That’s not American. It’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.
RUSH: Oh, really? You know, it’s a common line that Obama uses all the time to make everybody think he’s an American traditionalist. Now, whatever he is, he’s not an American traditionalist. By that I mean traditional American values. He abhors them. They’re old, they’re out of date, they were never that good anyway. But when he comes out, “That’s not America. That’s not who we are,” that’s Obama trying to make you think that he thinks like you do. But he doesn’t.
RUSH: By the way, can anybody tell me who is it, he says “political leaders suggesting that there should be a religious test for these refugees, we should admit the Christians, not the Muslims,” who said that? Do you know anybody who said it? Well, I can’t think of anybody. And then he says “Some of these folks themselves come from families who’ve benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution.” Who’s he talking about? You know, I wish he would name names when he starts alleging all of these bigots are out there, I want to know who he’s talking about.
But I’ll guarantee you this, the low-information crowd and the Democrat Party thinks he’s talking about Republicans, and that’s the whole purpose of the comment, but he won’t name names. All these imaginary bigots out there. That’s not America, that’s not who we are. Really? We aren’t who we are the last seven years, if you ask me. We are not who we are. We’ve been doing things not the way we normally do them the last seven years, if you ask me.
RUSH: Okay. I have been informed that Obama was probably referring to Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz, because apparently Jeb Bush and Cruz suggested that Muslim refugees from Syria not be admitted to the US right now, refugees, and Rubio has said that we shouldn’t take in any Syrian refugees. Well, that’s fine. I don’t mind missing that. I must have missed that Friday night. No big deal. Fact of the matter is that Obama, that’s what jazzed him. Obama got more irritated as those guys than he is at ISIS.
Now, before you people go off half-cocked out there, I’m just telling you, that’s how he sounded. In this press conference today, Obama got animated and got passionate, energetic, when talking about that. When talking about ISIS, it was — what’s the word for it? It was impersonal. It was detached. It was as though he was talking theory and philosophy in the faculty lounge. He wasn’t talking about specifics, and there was no condemnation, to speak of, of ISIS. There was an acknowledgement that they’re bad guys, but there was no condemnation. Not like there was condemnation of these Republicans who think it would be wise to keep Syrian refugees out of America right now.
What do you think, folks? Given what’s happening, given what we see happening in Europe, Europe is being overrun. And there are a lot of people in Europe who are starting to wake up to the idea that this is not just a natural flow of people fleeing poverty or war or global warming heat or whatever, that it is part of a plan. People in Europe, because it’s so massive, because of the demands these refugees are making, because of the demographics of the refugees, even some wuss Europeans are beginning to get suspicious.
To me this is just common sense, we are at war. We have a terror group which is much more violent than Al-Qaeda, which we seem totally vexed by. If you listen to our own president, we’re vexed about how to deal with them. They were the JV team, then last Friday we had ’em contained. Obama even today said that despite this incident, they’re on the run. Those are not his exact words, but despite this incident that happened, we still have the upper hand with these people. And we don’t.
But you couple what’s happening on the Southern border with endless illegal immigration, sponsored by the Democrat Party. Well, we can’t leave the Republicans out of that one, either. This country’s being flooded and overrun. And forget the religion, forget terror. How about the US economy? How much does our compassion cost? We are $19 trillion in debt. We don’t have the money for all of this compassion. You know, that’s the thing that nobody is talking about here, except on our side.
We continue to import all these people wherever they come from, the Southern border or war torn refugees from wherever in the Middle East. They’re incapable of providing for themselves. We’re settling them and locating them. And, by the way, Syrian refugees are already here in overwhelming numbers and they’re in practically every major city in the country. I have a graphic that I printed that I could show you on the Dittocam. I’m not sure how well it would show up, though. Whoever put the graphic together used very light shades of — well, I would say ink. Let me show it to you. I gotta turn the Dittocam off and I’m gonna zoom in here. Yeah, that’ll work.
Okay, what you’re gonna see when I turn the Dittocam back on is where Syrian refugees were placed. What you’re not gonna be able to see, probably, is the outline of the United States, the continental 48. It’s very, very faint here. So imagine that you are looking at the continental United States with New York in the Northeast in the upper right-hand corner, and LA in the lower-left hand corner, and Florida, Miami, in lower right-hand corner, and Seattle, upper left, and you will see, this is where Syrian refugees have been placed. The size of the circle matters. The bigger the circle, the more refugees. And in every major city here, folks, LA, San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, Seattle, New York, Washington, Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, Atlanta, St. Louis, Louisville, Memphis, Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth.
Let me show it to you here. And there you go. That’s where Syrian refugees already have been placed in the country. Now, we’ll grab a screenshot of this, put it up on the Dittocam, and I’ll send the graphic up to Koko so we can get a clean version of this up on the website so that you can see it. Dittocam coming off now, have to reposition it. But given what we know, just the common-sense aspect of this and what we see happening in Europe and the demands being made and the events taking place, what about the American value of self-preservation? What about the Constitution? What about the oath of office, defend and protect the people of the United States?
The president wants to provide all kinds of leadership in terms of our welfare state, but he does not want to provide leadership in vanquishing our enemies, or so it seems to me. If you want to come here and become a freeloader for the Democrat Party, the doors are open. Wherever you are in the world and the more dependent you are, the less capable of providing for yourself, the better. But when it comes to leadership around the world, vanquishing enemies of a free people, the United States doesn’t seem to be eager to get on that battlefield. The United States doesn’t seem to think that it’s our responsibility anymore, even to ourselves, much less our allies.
RUSH: “The mother of a Paris suicide bomber says her son ‘did not mean to kill anyone’ – and claims he may have blown himself up because of stress.” His name is Ibrahim Abdeslam. He blew himself up in the attack outside the cafe. He was one of three brothers said to be at the heart of the ISIS terror cell. The family has since claimed that Ibrahim, 31, may have been stressed. Stressed? What US college did he attend? (interruption) Well, they keep telling us that they’re stressed out on campus, that they’re worried, that they’re feeling unsafe and so forth. Just asking.
“Obama advisor: President Obama still plans to allow 10,000 Syrian refugees into the country over the next year, despite the terrorist attacks in Paris.” This is Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security advisor. “We have very robust vetting procedures for those refugees.” That’s a blatant lie, by the way. Congressman Peter King of New York rebuffed the Regime’s claim that there are robust vetting procedures in place. He was on Fox News Sunday. He said (paraphrasing): “I was listening to Ben Rhodes and what he just said about this robust vetting of refugees is untrue. There’s virtually no vetting. There aren’t any databases in Syria. There are no government records. We don’t know who these people are.” And that makes all the sense in the world.
What are we vetting them against? Okay, here is Amir Sahib Skyhook, he wants into the country. “Wait a minute, Amir, we’re gonna check you out.”
“Well, very good, you check me out but there are no records of me anywhere. I come from Syria, everybody has been blown up. There is no government building there. There are no records of me,” and he’s probably right. Where do we go to find out who Amir Sahib Skyhook is? (interruption) Why am I in trouble? (interruption) I just did an impersonation, for crying out. What am I in trouble for? Amir Sahib Skyhook? (interruption) Oh, come on. That’s just a take-off on Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.
Obama knows what he is doing.
He is not hiding it–he is not blowing a “dog whistle.” Rather, he is making a clear (and familiar) case that he is the victim of an organized conspiracy–not to arouse hatred, but to rally his base (including loyal, left-wing Jews) to his defense.
That is not incitement, but it relies on antisemitism nonetheless.
And that matters, not because it disqualifies Obama’s views from debate, but because it confirms he has not really reckoned with the nature of the enemy with whom he is dealing, for whom hating Jews is more than a marginal commitment.
Stop Iran Deal Rally. Washington D.C. 9/9/2015
Nationally-renowned author and Conservative talk show host Mark Levin sent a defiant message to GOP leadership Wednesday afternoon at the Stop Iran rally at Capitol Hill.
In his fiery speech, Levin demanded they do more to stop the deal. He also took aim at Democrat leadership in both the legislative branch and the White House, suggesting that the Iran deal shows how far to the left the Democratic Party has fallen.
“Never before has a President of the United States. Never before has a political party consented to funding and arming the enemy. Never before has a President entered into agreements with a terrorist regime that holds American hostages; that has killed and maimed thousands of American soldiers, and that seeks nuclear weapons and ICBMs (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles) to attack his own country,” said Levin.
“Barack Obama makes Neville Chamberlain look like George S. Patton,” the former Reagan staffer added.
Levin highlighted the dangers involved if the deal were to be implemented in Congress.
“This phony deal allows the Iranian terrorist regime to inspect its own nuclear sites; to continue uranium enrichment; to build advanced centrifuges; to perfect their ICBMS; to spend $150 billion dollars on terrorism, and in the end, to secure nuclear warheads,” he said.
He then had some choice words for the Democratic Party.
“As one Democrat after another… supports this surrender, It’s clear that the Democrats no longer represent the party of Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy. It’s now the Democrat Party of Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky and Barack Obama,” said the nationally-syndicated conservative talk radio host.
“The Democrat Party will have blood on their hands as a result of this deal for the rest of time. And let me be clear, this deal sows the seeds of war.”
He focused on the threat posed by a rogue and radical Iranian regime. “The enemy is emboldened, and the enemy will be well-armed and seek regional and world domination.”
“How do we know” that Iran is so ill-intentioned, Levin asked. “They told us so.”
Levin urged Republicans to stand up against the agreement, recommending that GOP leadership take the scaffolding set-up for the ongoing repairs of the Capitol Building and “use it on their damn spines.”
“The Republican Party, particularly their leadership, has abandoned the Constitution and the Treaty Power of the United States Senate. It is recklessly and deliberately avoiding any serious confrontation with a disastrous imperial president. They can stop this,” he said. “They can invoke the Treaty Clause right now. They can suspend the filibuster rule and vote against lifting sanctions right now. They can stand between Obama and the Iranian terrorist regime and protect our nation and our allies, but they won’t. Gone is the party of Dwight D. Eisenhower; gone is the party of Ronald Reagan.
“Instead we get the party of [Senator Mitch] McConnell and [Senator Bob] Corker and [Speaker of The House] Boehner,” Levin added, as the audience voiced their disapproval with GOP leadership. “Tell Republicans: this is not about getting along with Obama, it’s about stopping Obama. It’s about Americans’ interests. It’s about our children and the future generations.”
“And a final word: Let me warn the 7th-century throwbacks who like to chant ‘Death to America’ in their home country. We Americans have been threatened by better than you. We Americans have been threatened by forces far stronger than you, and we’ve obliterated every damn one of them,” he concluded, as the audience applauded and broke out into chants of “U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A.”
Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) warned of catastrophic consequences should the Iranian nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama administration pass Congress, including death and the possibility of nuclear conflict.
Appearing during an hours-long rally on the Capitol lawn where speaker after speaker railed against the deal, Republican leadership and President Obama, Cruz warned that the Obama administration would become “the leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism” if he deal goes through.
“It’s worth remembering that if this deal goes through we know to an absolute certainty that people will die,” Cruz said.
Trump, who took the stage to REM’s “It’s the End of the World as We Know It,” said that he has “been doing deals for a long time” but has never seen one like the Iran accord.
“I’ve been making lots of wonderful deals, great deals, that’s what I do,” Trump said. “Never ever, ever in my life have I seen any transaction so incompetently negotiated as our deal with Iran. And I mean never.”
Trump had choice words for Obama and Congressional leadership.
“We are led by very, very stupid people. Very, very stupid people. We cannot let it continue,” Trump told crowd, eliciting large cheers. He said America “can’t beat anybody” and vowed that would change if he is elected president.
“We will have so much winning if I get elected that you may get bored with winning. Believe me!” Trump said. “You’ll never get bored with winning.”