Connect with us

Politics

Decoding Trump: How he engaged, deflected or ducked my questions at Mar-a-Lago

Published

on

Decoding Trump: How he engaged, deflected or ducked my questions at Mar-a-Lago

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

Please enter a valid email address.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

Having trouble? Click here.

I came armed with a fistful of blue cards, and still didn’t get to half the questions, but Donald Trump made a whole lot of news in our Mar-a-Lago interview.

What’s revealing is how he chose to answer the most sensitive questions, or to deflect them, and how various media outlets chose to frame them.

Advertisement

Some, like the New York Times, ABC and the Hill, played it straight. Other operations, many of them left-leaning, cherry-picked quotes to make Trump look as awful as possible, while ignoring the reasonable-sounding things he said.

A classic example was when I asked the former president about the murder of Alexei Navalny in a Siberian prison camp. I thought he might duck because of his friendly relationship with Vladimir Putin.

But I put it to him point-blank: Is the Russian dictator responsible for the death of the opposition leader?

TRUMP: IF YOU’RE GOING TO BAN TIKTOK, BAN FACEBOOK TOO

Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump takes the stage to introduce a new line of signature shoes at Sneaker Con at the Philadelphia Convention Center on Feb. 17 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Advertisement

“Perhaps,” Trump said. “I mean, possibly, I could say probably. I don’t know. He’s a young man, so statistically he’d be alive for a long time…Certainly that would look like something very bad happened.”

Keep in mind that Trump has never even mentioned Putin in the same paragraph as Navalny, and now he’s saying “probably” responsible. Of course, Trump can’t prove it, and neither can I.

Here are some of the headlines:

“Trump Couldn’t Bring Himself to Condemn Putin for Alexei Navalny’s Death.”

“Trump Delivers Head-Spinningly Awkward Answer to New Question About Putin.” 

Advertisement

“Trump: ‘I Don’t Know’ If Putin Was Responsible for Navalny’s Death.”

You get the idea.

Which brings us to Trump’s rhetoric. I asked why he uses words like “vermin” and “poisoning of the blood” to describe illegal migrants – especially since the press says such language was used by Hitler and Mussolini.

Trump says he didn’t know that and then repeated “our country is being poisoned” – prompting a wave of headlines that he had doubled down on such harmful language.

TRUMP: BIDEN IS ‘BAD FOR ISRAEL’

Advertisement

I guess you could say that – and I’m not letting him off the hook – but the more telling part of his answer came next.

I asked the 45th president whether he uses “over the top” and “inflammatory” language to drive the media debate, meaning a focus on his words gets news outlets spending days on his turf, on his preferred issue, in the arguments over whether he went too far. And Trump didn’t deny it, saying he wouldn’t limit himself to “politically correct” verbiage.

“It also gets people thinking about very important issues,” he said. “That if you don’t use certain rhetoric, if you don’t use certain words that maybe are not very nice words, nothing will happen.” My theory, based on decades of observing him, was correct.

Then he went off on migrants coming from insane asylums and how crime will double – neither of which has been shown to be true on a major scale. 

Migrants in a line

Migrants line up at a remote U.S. Border Patrol processing center after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border on Dec. 7, 2023, in Lukeville, Arizona. (John Moore/Getty Images)

The same was true with NATO, when Trump caused a global uproar by saying he’d encourage the Russians to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO countries that don’t pay their fair share of defense costs.

Advertisement

That sounds like someone taking a pro-Putin stance, I said.

“It sounds like somebody that wants to get people to pay money,” Trump said. In other words, it was a negotiating tactic.

Half an hour before airtime, the media were awash in headlines about Trump saying there would be a “bloodbath” if he lost the election. So I watched that portion of his speech at an Ohio rally the night before.

There have been times when Trump used loaded words to signal the possibility of political violence. This wasn’t one of them.

TRUMP: I’LL DEBATE BIDEN ‘ANYTIME, ANYPLACE’

Advertisement

Trump was going on about Chinese cars and their impact on the American auto industry. Then he said if he wasn’t elected there would be a bloodbath – in terms of the impact on jobs. Then he went right back to talking about electric vehicles and industry competition.

Now some pundits said the mere use of the word bloodbath was like a bat signal, telling his supporters to get ready for violence. After all, he was so Machiavellian that he added, “That’s going to be the least of it.” But as I said, too many outlets were so in love with the bloodbath story that they wrenched it out of context.

Trump also said at the rally that some migrants were “animals” and “not people.” That’s unacceptable language, in my view, but remember what he said about inflammatory words driving the media debate. I wanted to decode his approach for viewers.   

Trump also made news on abortion. I asked him about a Times story that said he is discussing with advisers a national ban after 16 weeks of pregnancy – not knowing his campaign had dismissed it as fake news – and figured he’d dismiss the story.

Migrants who crossed the Rio Grande at the southern border

Migrants who crossed the Rio Grande and entered the U.S. from Mexico are lined up for processing by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on Sept. 23, 2023, in Eagle Pass, Texas. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

Nope. He essentially confirmed the 16-week story – saying he’d make a decision “pretty soon,” which would obviously be in that range – that had previously been attributed to unnamed sources. He said, despite my skepticism, that he wants to “make both sides happy.”

Advertisement

When Republicans grapple with abortion in the post-Roe world, Trump said, “you have to go with your heart. But beyond that, you also have to get elected.” He said that opposing the three exceptions – rape, incest, life of the mother – caused Pennsylvania Republican Doug Mastriano to lose the governor’s race in a landslide.

Then Trump went off on the Democrats and late-term abortions – which I said in one of several fact-checks are exceedingly rare.

He also made news on subjects ranging from Israel to TikTok.

The first time I met Donald Trump was in 1987, in New York, when he was promoting his first book “The Art of the Deal.”

Advertisement

And this, unprompted, is what he said to me:

“When I go up to New Hampshire – I’m not running for president, by the way – I got the best crowd, the best of everything in terms of reception. The politicians go up and get a moderate audience. I go up and they’re scalping tickets. You heard that? They’re scalping tickets. Why? Because people don’t want to be ripped off, and this country is being ripped off. I think if I ran, I’d win.”

I confess I did not then envision Trump, still a largely local real estate guy, in the White House, but now he’s going to head the Republican ticket for the third straight time.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Columbia University’s policy-making senate votes for resolution calling to investigate school’s leadership

Published

on

Columbia University’s policy-making senate votes for resolution calling to investigate school’s leadership

The Columbia University Senate in New York City voted in favor of a resolution calling for an investigation into the school’s leadership amid anti-Israel protests that have taken place on the campus for over a week.

A source within the school’s leadership confirmed the details of the resolution, saying it was adopted by a vote of 62-14, with three senate members abstaining.

The resolution alleges Columbia President Minouche Shafik violated established protocols when she authorized the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to enter the campus and arrest protesters last week.

Specifically, Shafik is accused of violating the due process rights of students and faculty when she authorized officers to enter the campus.

COLUMBIA STUDENT BANNED FROM CAMPUS AFTER REMARKS ABOUT ‘MURDERING ZIONISTS’

Advertisement

Columbia University President Minouche Shafik leaves the Low Memorial Library on the campus of Columbia University April 24, 2024, in New York City. (Fox News Digital)

The university senate does not have the authority to remove Shafik, as it is the university’s policy-making body, which is made up of students, faculty and administrators.

“The administration and Senate share the same goal of restoring calm to campus, so everyone can pursue their educational activities,” the university said. “We are committed to an ongoing dialogue and appreciate the Senate’s constructive engagement in finding a pathway forward.”

Shafik has increasingly faced calls to step down amid the spread of antisemitism on campus as well as ongoing protests against Israel that have disrupted classes. 

HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ACCEPTED TO COLUMBIA SAYING ‘NO THANK YOU’ DUE TO ANTISEMITISM: COLLEGE CONSULTANT

Advertisement
Pro-Palestinian supporters rally outside Columbia University

Anti-Israel agitators rally outside Columbia University April 23, 2024, in New York City. (Jeenah Moon/Getty Images)

On Monday, Shafik said in a statement she was “deeply saddened” by certain actions of agitators, who have formed an “encampment” on the campus and riled up students and faculty with anti-Jewish slogans and chants. 

The protest encampment sprung up on the campus lawn area at Columbia April 17, the same day Shafik faced bruising criticism at a congressional hearing from Republicans who said she hadn’t done enough to fight antisemitism. Two other Ivy League presidents resigned months ago following widely criticized testimony they gave to the same committee. 

U.S. House Republicans from New York have urged Shafik to resign, saying in a letter Monday she had failed to provide a safe learning environment in recent days as “anarchy has engulfed the campus.”

Fox News’ CB Cotton and Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Granderson: Arizona's indictment of Trump allies follows a sordid, racist history

Published

on

Granderson: Arizona's indictment of Trump allies follows a sordid, racist history

I’ve lived and/or worked in 10 states scattered across the country. Arizona was and remains the most complicated. The same state that elected the first openly gay mayor of a large U.S. city is also the state that did not want a federal holiday for Martin Luther King Jr.

Opinion Columnist

LZ Granderson

LZ Granderson writes about culture, politics, sports and navigating life in America.

Advertisement

Perhaps the cultural pendulum swings so drastically because the population shifts depending on the time of year — shoutout to you snowbirds.

Whatever the season, though, Arizona is not a liberal epicenter like New York. To get news like we saw this week — where an Arizona grand jury indicted 18 allies of Donald Trump, including Mark Meadows and Rudolph W. Giuliani, over their efforts to overturn the 2020 election — takes more than dislike of Trump or Republicans.

It takes facts.

And it should be no surprise to find that kind of evidence in Arizona, where election denial arises from a long history of other racist power grabs.

Advertisement

Let’s think back to 2020 in Arizona, even before the election drama. This was the same year when Scottsdale City Council member Guy Phillips, appearing at an anti-mask rally, made a joke with the dying words of George Floyd as police killed him: “I can’t breathe.”

That kind of brazen racism is not unique for the area.

Scottsdale is a former sundown town that is nearly 90% white. Black people made up less than 2% of the population.

After pushback Phillips apologized, blaming the remarks on adrenaline, whatever that means. As if resisting mask requirements required a teaspoon of racism to be effective.

At the time of his remarks, my family had just moved to the Phoenix suburb, and I was beginning to think we had made a terrible mistake. On multiple occasions I was called the N word by drivers in pickup trucks with large Trump flags flapping from them.

Advertisement

Overt racism played well with a lot of voters. Months after mocking Floyd’s death, Phillips not only made it out of the primary but also ended up dangerously close to being reelected. Colton Duncan, Republican Kari Lake’s campaign manager when she ran for governor, retweeted a racist post about Native Americans on Indigenous Peoples Day in 2022. Lake herself has talked about going to war with Mexico over the migrant crisis. This year she is leaning into the racist “replacement theory” rhetoric as she runs for Senate against Rep. Ruben Gallego.

She launched her campaign in Scottsdale, by the way.

That’s not to suggest all of Maricopa County is filled with people who are racists. Only that the largest county in the state has a lot of them. Enough to sustain political careers of people who have said and done some vile things. This is the state that gave us Sen. Barry Goldwater, who opposed the Civil Rights Act. Arizona also attempted to pass “show me your papers” legislation.

It’s a cloud that continues to hang over the area, a constant reminder that how far we’ve come is not nearly far enough. And underneath that cloud of racial grievance, a group of citizens chose to make a stand for Trump, the king of racial grievances. It’s little wonder out of all the states to challenge the election results, no state worked harder through multiple recounts and lawsuits than Arizona. In fact, Lake still suggests the election was stolen even after the indictments reiterate that simply is not true.

What has been true is Arizona politics swinging between the unacceptable and the remarkable. After it was discovered the mayor of Tempe was gay, recall efforts were kicked into high gear. One of the key people to help fight them off? Republican Sen. John McCain — who resisted having out LGBTQ+ members in the military.

Advertisement

From the outside that makes little sense. But after living in Arizona, and witnessing the constant tug-of-war between progressive and conservative policies, the one thing that is clear is neither political philosophy defines the state. There is hatred, there is love, and then there is truth. The indictments may be characterized as a liberal attempt to punish Trump. It’s not that simple. Arizona isn’t liberal or conservative. The same goes for these indictments.

@LZGranderson

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Tennessee Gov. Lee signs bill allowing concealed carry for public schoolteachers

Published

on

Tennessee Gov. Lee signs bill allowing concealed carry for public schoolteachers

Tennessee teachers and staff will be allowed to carry concealed handguns on public school grounds under legislation signed into law by Gov. Bill Lee on Friday.

Lee, a Republican, had announced his support for the proposal just the day before while flanked by top Republican legislative leaders who had helped shepherd the bill through the GOP-dominant General Assembly.

“What’s important is that we give districts tools and the option to use a tool that will keep their children safe,” Lee told reporters.

TENNESSEE NEARS LAW BANNING ADULTS FROM HELPING MINORS FIND, RECEIVE SEX REASSIGNMENT CARE

As the idea of arming teachers began to gain support inside the General Assembly, gun control advocates and families began swarming to the Capitol to show their opposition. During the final vote, protesters chanted “Blood on your hands” and many members of the public who oppose the bill harangued Republican lawmakers after the vote, leading House Speaker Cameron Sexton to order the galleries cleared.

Advertisement

FILE – Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee responds to questions during a news conference Tuesday, April 11, 2023, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/George Walker IV, File)

According to the statute, which becomes effective immediately, parents and other teachers will be barred from knowing who is armed at their schools.

A principal, school district and law enforcement agency would have to agree to let staff carry guns, and then workers who want to carry a handgun would need to have a handgun carry permit and written authorization from the school’s principal and local law enforcement. They would also need to clear a background check and undergo 40 hours of handgun training. They couldn’t carry guns at school events at stadiums, gymnasiums or auditoriums.

The legislation is the biggest expansion of gun access in the state since last year’s deadly shooting at a private elementary school in Nashville where shooter indiscriminately opened fire and killed three children and three adults before being killed by police.

Lee initially asked lawmakers to keep guns away from people deemed a danger to themselves or others in response to the shooting, the Republican supermajority ignored that request.

Advertisement

Many of the Covenant families had met with Lee and lawmakers hoping to persuade them to drop the idea of arming teachers. In the final days of the legislative session, Covenant families said they had collected nearly 4,300 signatures from Tennesseans against having public school staffers carry weapons on school grounds.

“There are folks across the state who disagree on the way forward, but we all agree that we should keep our kids safe,” Lee said Thursday.

It’s unclear if any school districts would take advantage if the bill becomes law. For example, a Metro Nashville Public Schools spokesperson, Sean Braisted, said the district believes “it is best and safest for only approved active-duty law enforcement to carry weapons on campus.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending