During Trump’s rambling, incoherent Rose Garden diatribe on Friday to promote his bogus “national emergency” declaration, a reporter asked him whether right-wing pundits had influenced his decision to declare an emergency in order to get around Congress and build a border wall.
“Could you tell us to what degree some of the outside conservative voices helped to shape your views on this national emergency?” asked NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell.
Trump immediately responded by showering praise on Fox News host Sean Hannity — a serial liarwho has been repeatedly caught pushing bigoted stories and smears — for leading the way on the right-wing agenda Trump pursues.
“Sean Hannity has been a terrific, terrific supporter of what I do,” Trump gushed.
“Not of me,” he added quickly. “If I changed my views he wouldn’t be with me.”
Trump then went on to describe the consistently racist Rush Limbaugh, who once called a 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton “the White House dog,” as “a great guy,” and marveled at his ability to “speak for three hours without a phone call” in front of “one of the biggest audiences in the history of the world.”
After Trump continued to swoon over Limbaugh’s broadcasting skills, O’Donnell interrupted him to ask if figures like Hannity or Limbaugh are deciding policy.
“They don’t decide policy,” Trump insisted, adding that if he “went opposite” from the ideas they support, they would not go along with him.
While Trump said that they don’t “decide” policy, his effusive praise for Hannity and Limbaugh when asked about their influence on his policy painted a much different picture.
And by insisting that these pundits would stop supporting him if he made decisions they didn’t like, Trump accidentally confessed the truth: He knows the right-wing figures he so admires might abandon him if he doesn’t do what they want.
In reality, though, it takes a lot for these pundits to abandon Trump. And the influence clearly goes both ways.
Contrary to what Trump said, Hannity quickly changed his tune and supported Trump’s decision to sign a bill funding the government after fuming about it at first. The New York Times reported that the Trump White House reached out to Hannity and Fox Business host Lou Dobbs to get them on board with the funding deal.
At the same time, Hannity and other right-wing media hotheads saw Trump dance to their tune as he invoked the “national emergency” declaration that they have been insisting on for months.
After celebrating Hannity and Limbaugh, Trump also praised columnist Ann Coulter because “she said ‘Donald Trump’” when she was asked who would win the 2016 election. He also said Laura Ingraham, one of his most loyal attack dogs, is “great,” and that Fox News host Tucker Carlson, a favorite of white supremacists, “has been great.”
Trump has long relied on right-wing media to do much of his thinking for him, enlisting Hannity in particular as an informal presidential adviser with frequent telephone calls.
Trump’s decisions to engage in destructive behavior, like shutting down the government or declaring a national emergency, have largely been based on the ranting he watches on Fox during his so-called “executive time.”
In exchange, right-wing media outlets have become Trump’s reliable propagandists, attacking his political enemies and legitimate reporters while unquestioningly promoting his administration’s destructive policies and rhetoric.
Trump owes his political career in large part to the right-wing press, since he used his frequent appearances on Fox News to promote his racist “birther” conspiracy theory against President Barack Obama.
Trump has now used the presidency to completely enshrine the most extreme right-wing voices that are the most detached from reality as the senior shapers of American policy. Their fingerprints are all over ideas of Trump’s that have disrupted the lives of millions of people.
In many instances, thanks to Trump, these absurd figures have far more influence than government agencies and departments staffed with high-level experts.
Thanks to Trump, people like Hannity and Limbaugh are now running the country.
Published with permission of The American Independent.
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Backed into a corner and with a dwindling set of options, President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he will declare a national emergency to secure funds for a border wall, even while he signs a government funding bill that allows for only $1.3 billion to be spent on barriers between the United States and Mexico.
And many of his vocal supporters — including those who are most virulently anti-immigrant — are not happy about the deal.
Daniel Horowitz, a conservative writer, an op-ed for The Blaze denouncing the bill after it came out, noting that it’s complexities and the rush to pass it pose many dangers for the president.
“That is exactly why Democrats are salivating to vote on this within a few hours of passage, which is exactly why Trump has a responsibility to oppose it immediately and demand at least a short-term clean continuing resolution so that he can digest the consequences of this bill,” wrote Horowitz earlier on Thursday. “If he cannot make that simple demand, which would not even trigger a phony shutdown, then his presidency is worthless.”
On Twitter, he argued that the legislation is actually the “worst amnesty bill ever,” arguing that provisions will allow undocumented immigrants to stay in the country by sponsoring unaccompanied minors.
“Over the years, immigration lawyers and judges have cleverly taken statutes and flipped them 180 degrees to use for amnesty,” he said. “Now Congress is green lighting it in plain language. You cannot imagine the cascading affects of this.”
Of course, Horowitz’s argument depends on fundamentally cruel and prejudiced views of immigration. But his reaction may come to shape the views of Trump’s anti-immigrant supporters.
Ann Coulter, another pundit known for her support of the president and her fiercely anti-immigrant views, was equally apoplectic about Trump’s strategy. She argued that by signing the funding bill, Trump will actually undermine his emergency declaration.
“To declare a national emergency, Trump will now have to argue that a bill HE SIGNED was unconstitutional,” she said. “Ask your new AG if this is a good idea.”
She continued, spitting fire:
There’s no coming back from this. No “emergency” or presidential powers will allow him to build the wall, ever, after he signs this bill. Trump has just agreed to fully open borders.
3:58 PM – Feb 14, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
3,457 people are talking about this
Writing for the National Review, Mark Krikiorian, the executive director of the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies, argued that the bill itself will offer a veto to localities if they don’t want border walls built on their land.
“And which party controls all local government in South Texas? Go ahead, look it up, I’ll wait,” he wrote. “Rio Grande City is the least Democratic community in the area, and even there voters supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 by more than three to one.”
He didn’t bother to raise the question about why people who actually live on the border don’t actually seem to think there’s a crisis there at all.
Krikorian continued: “Add to that the bill’s prohibition on border barriers in a range of public parks and spaces — such as the Santa Ana Wildlife Refuge, the Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, La Lomita Historical Park, or the National Butterfly Center — and the 55 miles of new fencing supposedly provided for in the bill might never get built at all.”
An article on the deal for Breitbart used more tepid language to describe the agreement, but it ran with the furious headline: “CONGRESS SENDS OPEN BORDERS BILL / EPIC IMMIGRATION SNEAK: LOADED WITH LAST-MINUTE ‘LANDMINES’ / TRUMP WILL SIGN IT — AND DECLARE NATIONAL EMERGENCY.”
IMAGE: Ann Coulter photo by Gage Skidmore via Flickr.
About The National Memo
The National Memo is a political newsletter and website that combines the spirit of investigative journalism with new technology and ideas. We cover campaigns, elections, the White House, Congress, and the world with a fresh outlook. Our own journalism — as well as our selections of the smartest stories available every day — reflects a clear and strong perspective, without the kind of propaganda, ultra-partisanship and overwrought ideology that burden so much of our political discourse.