OMG this interview is the gift that keeps giving for Donald Trump critics!
A second part of the ex-president’s interview with Bret Baier on Fox News aired Tuesday night, and this time they were able to get past Trump admitting to crimes on national TV and back to policy. After all, facing trial in August or not, Trump is still running for president — and still the likely Republican nominee. And, as we’ve only learned in the Trump era, for some reason there’s apparently no law against running for president while in prison. Sigh.
Innerestingly when it came to his thoughts on crime and punishment, he didn’t have any strong words to say about espionage or sedition. But he did address his plan to subject drug dealers to the death penalty. He just didn’t mean to!
He got into his usual style of bragging about his accomplishments, taking credit for granting clemency to Alice Marie Johnson, the 63-year-old grandmother who had been behind bars for two decades on nonviolent drug trafficking charges. It’s not the first time, as he paraded her out for the 2020 RNC and a Super Bowl commercial. Of course, we all know it wasn’t Trump’s idea…
Perezcious readers will remember Kim Kardashian was the one who convinced Trump to free Alice. She used her celeb status to get a meeting with the Starf**ker-in-Chief, then totally won him over with her impassioned plea. Not because he believe it was the right thing to do, of course, but because Kim Kardashian was so impressive. According to Jared Kushner‘s recollection of the events in his memoir, Trump and his lawyer were “starstruck” by Kim:
“Her emotion was raw, her joy contagious, her long suffering and love emanated from her smile. The president called me afterward. ‘Jared, that is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen. I’ve been around for a long time, and that was beautiful.’”
Kushner implied, however, that Trump never really seemed like he believed in the cause:
“Two days later, called me early in the morning and said, ‘Let’s do the pardon. Let’s hope Alice doesn’t go out and kill anyone!’”
But of course he’s taking credit for it now — without even a mention of Kim’s name. Naturally.
Trump began opining on the mercy he had bestowed on Alice, who had been “involved in selling marijuana — mostly marijuana” and got 50 years in prison for it. All credit to interviewer Bret Baier, who was very quick to point out:
“But she’d be killed under your plan.”
Trump was completely taken aback by this acknowledgement, blurting out just a perplexed:
Yes, Trump has been saying the US needs to enact tougher penalties on drug crimes, not more compassionate ones. And Baier caught him bragging about the opposite. Trump stumbled and sputtered:
“No, no, no. Under my…? Oh! Under that? Uhhh… It would depend on the severity.”
Baier pointed out she’s “technically a former drug dealer” who absolutely would qualify. Ludicrously, Trump seemed to have no conception of the inconsistency here. (It’s almost like he doesn’t actually believe in any of it, he’s just saying what he thinks people want to hear to get elected. Like when he mentions elsewhere in the interview that Republicans don’t want to hear about the COVID-19 vaccine, so he never brings it up.)
Where did the genius politician end up? Easy! Alice Johnson wouldn’t be killed under this law because she’s already been granted clemency! See? Solved that one. No worries! He really said:
“She wouldn’t be killed, it would start as of now. So you wouldn’t go to the past.”
HAHAHAHAHA! Sorry, but OMG we can’t believe he actually said that. He looked for which BS would work, and his brain told him that was a good answer!
Yes, Donald, we’re aware the policy would not mean that police would go and find Alice Johnson NOW, rip her away from her family and put her to death on the 50-yard line at the Super Bowl. What Baier was pointing out was that all the future Alice Johnsons would be put to death. They wouldn’t even get a chance for clemency.
It’s hilarious, you have to watch:
Trump’s best response here was the very weak supposition that if
“But she wouldn’t have done it if it was death penalty. In other words, if it was death penalty, she wouldn’t have been on that phone call.”
So now he’s saying the policy of executing all drug dealers would actually save all the nonviolent criminals by acting as such a strong deterrent that none of them ever would have done crime. What a crock of s**t. Sorry, but people don’t look at the consequences and weigh them rationally and CHOOSE crime. There are lots of ways people end up in these desperate situations, often poverty. Getting rid of all crime isn’t as simple as turning the US into a dystopian fascist society where all crimes are punishable by death. Let alone how horrific that would be, it’s just not true! That’s Trump’s best response. Everything else is a confusing mess.
Now all we’re wondering is… where the heck was Bret Baier in 2016? We can’t remember interviewers holding Trump even a little to account for his lies and bluster back then!
Source: Read Full Article