Ann Coulter: Did Anyone Talking About Trump’s Speech Actually Hear It?

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by ANN COULTER15 Jun 2016787

The media have lost their minds after Trump’s magnificent speech on Monday. It’s all hands on deck, no attack is too extreme. Their main point is: DO NOT LOOK AT THAT SPEECH. It has “words that wound.” Much too dangerous even to read it.

Instead of reporting what Trump said, the media give us the “gist” of it (in the sense of an unrecognizable distortion). It was awful, Hitlerian, beneath our dignity as a nation. They lie about what he said and then attack their own lies as if they’re attacking Trump.

The Washington Post’s headline, which got their reporters banned from Trump’s press briefings, was: “Donald Trump Seems to Connect President Obama to the Orlando Shooting.”

I guess OK, You’re Right, didn’t sound professional, so the Post pretended not to understand Trump’s speech, at all. We can’t makes heads or tails of it, but he seems to be saying …

One thing Trump is not, is unclear.

Contrary to the Post’s headline suggesting that Trump had posited some crazy theory about Obama secretly meeting with Omar Mateen to plot the attack — No, this gun is much better for a mass shooting, Omar — Trump criticized the Obama administration policies that are not keeping us safe. (It’s completely unprecedented to respond to a mass murder by criticizing the policies that allowed it to happen!)

After San Bernardino and Orlando — also, the Boston Marathon, Fort Hood, Little Rock, Chattanooga and Times Square — quite obviously, Trump is right.

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Washington Post: We’re confused. What do you mean?

How about: Washington Post seems to Connect President Bush to Abu Ghraib

Washington Post, May 26, 2006: “Bush has … addressed Abu Ghraib the same way he did last night: Expressing regret without responsibility.”

Or: Democrats Seem to Connect President Bush to Anti-Americanism in Muslim World

Washington Post, May 20, 2005: “It is certainly true that the Bush administration, at Guantanamo and at Abu Ghraib, is responsible for a good deal of anti-Americanism in the Muslim world.”

Or: Washington Post Seems to Connect President Bush to Missing WMDs and Katrina Deaths

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Washington Post, April 5, 2006: “How much was President Bush personally responsible for taking the country to war under false pretenses, or for the botched response to Hurricane Katrina? To hear the White House tell it, it wasn’t really his fault.”

In his speech, Trump said:

“The killer was an Afghan, of Afghan parents, who immigrated to the United States. His father published support for the Afghan Taliban, a regime which murders those who don’t share its radical views. The father even said he was running for president of that country.

“The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here.

“That is a fact, and it’s a fact we need to talk about.

“We have a dysfunctional immigration system which does not permit us to know who we let into our country, and it does not permit us to protect our citizens.”

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Immediately after Trump’s speech, MSNBC’s Katie Tur “fact-checked” Trump, announcing that he had incorrectly said Omar was “born in Afghan.”

What did Tur think this meant? “Afghan” isn’t a country. Didn’t she pause for a moment and realize that what she thought he said makes no sense? Journalists with their outsized sense of importance say, No, no, that’s not what I heard. It says in my notes right here, you said, “blue carrots for Eisenhower.” I stand by my notes.

Obviously, what Trump said was that Omar was “born an Afghan.” Which he was.

The media began indignantly informing us that Trump was wrong because — as The Washington Post put it: “The shooter was born in Queens to parents who emigrated from Afghanistan.”

With the media, you’re an “American” when you commit the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, an “Afghan” when you’re applying to college. You’re an “American” when you shoot up the San Bernardino community center, a “Pakistani” when you’re offended by Trump’s remarks. You’re an “American” when you slaughter troops at Fort Hood, a “Muslim” when the Army realizes it can’t fire you.

This can lead to confusion. After the Post snippily corrected Trump on Omar not being an “Afghan” on Monday, on Tuesday, the Post admitted he was. Headline: “Orlando gunman said he carried out attack to get ‘Americans to stop bombing his country,’ witness says.”

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

The Atlantic’s Ron Fournier, Dispenser of Conventional Liberal Opinion, wrote an article on Trump’s speech titled “A Victory Lap in Blood” that would make any social justice warrior proud.

Like the rest of the media’s reviews of a speech they apparently didn’t read, there were no quotes from Trump’s speech. Instead, Fournier ran through a string of accusations, SJW-style: “You didn’t call it,” “You are helping ISIS recruit terrorists,” “You are dividing Americans …”

Trump never claimed he “called it,” but, if he ever does, Fournier has a fantastic takedown:

“You didn’t warn that an American man named Omar Mateen, a well-educated security guard investigated by the FBI for suspected ties to terrorism, would legally purchase a weapon made for warfare and use it to slaughter 49 people at a popular gay nightclub.”

Hillary Clinton is presidential because she wants to dramatically increase the number of unvetted Syrian refugees we bring in. But Trump is an embarrassment because he doesn’t have superhuman powers to know that a “man named Omar Mateen” would attack an Orlando nightclub.

Fournier repeated the fake fact currently sweeping the nation about Trump thinking he deserves congratulations, writing, “Donald Trump wants a pat on the back.”

But then Fournier made the fatal mistake of quoting Trump’s tweet allegedly saying this: “Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism, I don’t want congrats, I want toughness & vigilance. We must be smart!”

Fournier’s “Trump wants a pat on the back” was 12 words away from Trump saying, “I don’t want congrats.” Even the most bored reader is probably going to make it that far.

Now you see why reporters aren’t quoting Trump and have to hope you won’t read the speech for yourself.

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANN COULTER 
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Read More Stories About:

2016 Presidential Race, Big Journalism,National Security, Ann Coulter, Donald Trump, Washington Post

Ann Coulter: A Slow-Talker and a Homeless Guy Walk into a Bar…

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by ANN COULTER27 Apr 20162

Apparently, John Kasich and

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

97%

 are at their most appealing when no one is paying attention to them, which, conveniently, is most of the time.

After Cruz won cranky Wisconsin last month — only the fourth actual election he’s won — voters decided to give him a second look. But two seconds after people said, “OK, let’s give this guy a try,” he cratered. You might say a little of Ted Cruz goes a long way. Voters can’t stand Cruz any more than his Senate colleagues can.

Listening to Cruz always makes me feel like I have Asperger’s. He speaks so slowly, my mind wanders between words. As Trump said, there’s a 10-second intermission between sentences. I want to order Cruz’s speeches as Amazon Audibles, just so I can speed them up and see what he’s saying

The guy did go to Harvard Law School, so I keep waiting for the flashes of brilliance, but they never come. Cruz is completely incapable of extemporaneous wit.

Now that Cruz has been mathematically eliminated, he’s adding Carly Fiorina to the ticket. She’s not his “running mate,” but his “limping mate.” It’s an all-around lemon-eating contest.

Voters quickly moved on from Cruz and tried Kasich. But he turned out to be the spitting image of a homeless man. He’s got the slouch, the facial tics, and a strange way of bouncing his head and looking around that makes you want to cross the street to avoid him. It looks like he cuts his own hair, and his suits are Ralph Nader cast-offs. He wolfs down food like a street person, has a hair-trigger temper, and rants about religion in a way that only he can understand.

Kasich is constantly proclaiming that illegals are “made in the image of God,” and denounces the idea of enforcing federal immigration laws, saying: “I don’t think it’s right; I don’t think it’s humane.”

When asked about his decision to expand Medicaid under Obamacare — projected to cost federal taxpayers $50 billion in the first decade — he said: “Now, when you die and get to the, get to the, uh, to the meeting with St. Peter … he’s going to ask you what you did for the poor. Better have a good answer.”

He lectured a crowd of fiscal conservatives on his Obamacare expansion, saying, “Now, I don’t know whether you ever read Matthew 25, but I commend it to you, the end of it, about do you feed the homeless and do you clothe the poor.” He also attributed the law to Chief Justice John Roberts and said, “It’s my money, OK?”

Voters thought they were getting a less attractive version of Mitt Romney with Kasich, but it turns out they’re getting a more televangelist version of Ted Cruz.

They’re also getting a less warm and personable version of Hillary Clinton. Last week, Kasich lashed out at a reporter who asked a perfectly appropriate question, going from boring campaign boilerplate to irritated browbeating in about one second flat. As much as I enjoy watching reporters being berated, this was deranged.

Kasich: Listen, at the end of the day I think the Republican Party wants to pick somebody who actually can win in the fall.”

Reporter: But if you’ve only won Ohio?

Kasich: “Can I finish?”

Reporter: “If you answer the ques–”

Kasich: “I’m answering the question the way I want to answer it. You want to answer it?” (Snatches voice recorder from reporter’s hand.) “Here, let me ask you. What do you think?

When giving a speech to Ohio EPA workers a few years ago, Kasich suddenly went off topic and began shouting about a police officer who had given him a ticket three years earlier. “Have you ever been stopped by a police officer that’s an idiot?” he began. He proceeded to tell the riveting story of his traffic violation to the EPA administrators, yelling about “this idiot! … He’s an IDIOT!”

Based on the dashcam video immediately released by the police, Kasich had been in the wrong, and the officer — you know, “the IDIOT” — was perfectly polite about it.

With Trump it’s exactly the opposite. The more people see of him, the more they like him. The usual pattern is: Trump says something perfectly sensible, the media lie about it, then voters find out the truth and like him more and the media less.

Ironically, it’s Kasich who has been complaining the loudest about the alleged billions of dollars of “free media” Trump has been getting. It turns out not getting “free media” was a godsend for Kasich and Cruz.

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANN COULTER 
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race, Big Journalism, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter: New York Commemorates Patriots Day!

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by ANN COULTER20 Apr 20161,516

So that you won’t be fooled by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow claiming Second Amendment supporters were celebrating the Oklahoma City bombing this week — as she has on April 19 in years past — Tuesday was the anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord, a date all Americans used to know.

This year, New Yorkers celebrated by voting to keep the country that was christened in blood at Lexington and Concord.

Until Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem, most Americans knew as little about Paul Revere’s ride as Rachel Maddow does today.

Listen my children and you shall hear 

Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere, 

On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-five; 

Hardly a man is now alive 

Who remembers that famous day and year. 

Suspecting that the British would soon be mobilizing to crush the brewing rebellion, American patriots had been watching and waiting. When rebel leader Dr. Joseph Warren received a secret message that the British were planning to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock in Lexington that night, he immediately alerted Paul Revere and two others in their clandestine group.

By pre-arrangement, each rider took a different route to Lexington. If any two were captured by the British, the message would still be delivered. The fate of a nation was riding that night.

The most famous of the three — except to Rachel Maddow — was Paul Revere, who later wrote a detailed account of his momentous ride.

Revere had instructed the sexton of a Boston church to climb to the top of the steeple — unobserved by the church’s Loyalist minister — and signal the patriots of Charlestown with lanterns to indicate which route the British were taking: One if by land, and two if by sea. (Please tell me most American schoolchildren still know that line.)

Revere crossed the Charles River, sneaking past a British warship, to the Charlestown patriots waiting for him. For such an important mission, they had chosen a surefooted horse named Brown Beauty. Revere saddled Brown Beauty and took off for Lexington, alerting rebel leaders — and evading British patrols — along the way.

As planned, these town leaders spread the message to the local militias, a communication network that proceeded with “astonishing speed,” in the words of historian David Hackett Fischer, author of the book, Paul Revere’s Ride.

At around midnight, when Revere arrived at the Lexington home where Hancock and Adams were in hiding, the guard chastised Revere, telling him to stop making so much noise. “Noise?” Revere replied. “You’ll have noise enough before long! The Regulars are coming!”

The second rider, William Dawes, arrived soon thereafter, and the third man, lost to history, never made it.

Wondering why the British were mobilizing so many troops for a simple arrest, the men realized that the British were planning to seize the rebels’ artillery, stored in Concord.

So Revere and Dawes headed to Concord, again setting off the alarm throughout the countryside. On their way, they met a young, wealthy doctor, Samuel Prescott, who was returning from a late evening with his fiancee. Prescott, a “High Son of Liberty,” offered to ride with them since he knew the terrain and knew the people.

Halfway to Concord, they were captured by the British, but Dr. Prescott managed to escape and ride on, alerting the towns all around Concord. In the wee hours of the morning, he stopped at his home in Concord to wake his father and brother, also doctors, whereupon his brother, Abel, saddled up and took the warning south.

The Battle of Lexington at sunrise next morning, April 19, would not have given Americans much hope. British troops made short work of the disorganized and massively outnumbered militiamen.

But Concord was a different story. This was the shot heard “round the world.”

By the time the British reached Concord, militias from dozens of towns had received the call and were ready for battle. The town’s minister, William Emerson — grandfather of Ralph Waldo Emerson — urged on the rebels, slapping one terrified young solider on the back and saying, “Stand your ground, Harry! Your cause is just and God will bless you!”

Although still outnumbered, the Americans hit the British so hard, they retreated all the way back to Boston, with the militias bird-dogging them the whole way.

Having seen the Americans fight, the leader of the British forces, Lord Hugh Percy, who had taken a dim view of the Colonists until then, concluded, “[w]hoever looks upon them as an irregular mob, will find himself very much mistaken.”

Hancock and Adams were safe, the rebels’ ordnance secure, and the war that gave birth to the greatest country in human history had begun.

But today, the comfortable inheritors of that country would rather allow it to become a dumping ground for the Third World than risk being called “racist.”

In all, about 50 Americans were killed in the Battle of Concord. By population, that’s the equivalent of more than 6,000 Americans dying in a single military action today.

But today, Republican political consultants would rather throw away the country those brave patriots died for, than risk their cozy salaries, jobs and status.

Following the Battle of Concord, Dr. Prescott left his fiancee, his family and his wealth to fight for the revolution. A few years into the war, his ship was captured by the British. No one ever heard from him again. His fiancee waited for him for eight years, until finally, a returning soldier reported that Prescott had died in a Nova Scotia prison. His fiancee married, then died young.

But today, most pundits would rather promote open borders and watch our country disappear than lose their TV gigs.

Dr. Prescott’s brother, Abel, was badly injured by the British at the Battle of Concord. He died from his wounds a few months later — nearly a year before the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

But today, rich ranchers and farmers would rather see the country Abel died for overwhelmed with foreign cultures than give up their cheap foreign labor.

So far, seven of the 13 Colonies have spoken: Georgia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia — and, on the anniversary of Lexington and Concord, New York. All seven held elections, not party-rigged conferences or caucuses. All of them have gone for Trump. It looks like the 13 Colonies are trying to save America, once again.

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANN COULTER 
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race, Big Journalism, Ann Coulter, Rachel Maddow,Lexington and Concord, Paul Revere, Battle of Concord

Ann Coulter: Liberal and Conservative Media Unite Against Trump

by ANN COULTER20 Jan 20165489

We have never had total war against a candidate like we’re seeing with Donald Trump. All elements of national media are uniting to stop him.

Look for a fake Trump scandal to break — probably from a conservative news outlet — right before the Iowa caucus.

A few months ago, an alleged Trump quote from a 1998 People magazine interview was circulating on the Internet, claiming Trump said that if he ever ran for president, he’d run as a Republican because Republican voters are “the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up.”

I pay a lot for Nexis, and Trump has never said anything remotely resembling this.Snopes.com investigated, too, and also concluded the quote was a fake. But you can probably still find some idiot tweeting it out right now.

Last week, Glenn Beck “retweeted” a post allegedly tweeted by Trump the day after the 2012 election, saying: “I always vote for the winners! Congratulations to My Friend, @BarackObama!”

If that doesn’t sound like Trump, it’s because Trump never said it. Beck’s retweet sure made it look real, but you can check Trump’s Twitter archive.

All the stories about Trump being a fraud keep turning out to be the real frauds. I assume that, like most sentient beings, he’s changed his mind about some things. But the one consistent thread running through his entire life is his love for this country and his fellow Americans.

The attacks on Trump from the “conservative” media calling him a socialist, a Democrat, a flip-flopper, a fake conservative are just name-calling. I notice that the accusers never include examples, not true ones, anyway. Here are some examples of how Trump has always been for Americans first. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a president who likes us more than he likes foreigners — and the rich donors who employ them?

In 1986, Trump saw a TV broadcast with Annabell Hill, whose 67-year-old husband had committed suicide 20 minutes before their family farm was to be auctioned off in a foreclosure sale, hoping the life insurance money would be enough to save the farm. It wasn’t.

Trump immediately called Annabell, promising to save her farm and pledging $20,000 toward the effort. “Last night when he called, my heart went pitter patter,” Annabell told ABC’s “World News Tonight.” “I never talked with a man with that much money before. And he assured me that one day the land would be mine. I thought, after I hung up, ‘This can’t be true, this just can’t be true.'”

As Trump explained to The Atlanta Constitution at the time, “I’ve seen what’s happened to farmers, but I was particularly interested in a lovely woman I saw, Annabell Hill.”

Within a month of Trump’s launching a national campaign with two other businessmen to save Annabell’s farm, they had raised more than $100,000. One of the businessmen, Frank A. Argenbright Jr., said, “That is thanks totally to Mr. Trump and his organization. Most of the money has come from the New York area.”

By Christmas that year, Annabell and her entire family flew to New York to burn the mortgage in the lobby of Trump Towers and have Christmas dinner with the Trump family. The lovely Annabell said, “Well, we have a real celebration not only to celebrate the birth of Jesus but also to celebrate the goodness in men’s hearts.”

Thirty years ago, Trump wasn’t thinking about running for president. And yet, this is how he explained his campaign to save Annabell’s farm, as quoted by The Associated Press: “We give a lot of money to foreign countries that don’t give a damn about us, but we don’t help the American farmers.”

Two years later, Trump was interviewed by Larry King at the 1988 Republican National Convention. Please look up this interview — it’s fabulous.

Two things will be of particular interest. First, watch how Trump keeps circling back to praise Dan Quayle. King doesn’t even ask him about Quayle — a figure of media ridicule at the time because of his Midwest conservatism. It’s Trump who keeps doggedly bringing up Quayle, in order to say, he’s a “very impressive guy” who did “a great job — I don’t mean a good job, I mean a great job.”

Second, Trump expressly rejects King’s characterization of him as an “Eastern Republican,” or a “Rockefeller Republican,” saying the people he does best with are “the taxi drivers and the workers.”

Trump’s business is real estate, and real estate can’t be outsourced. His flag is planted in this country. If America goes down, his empire goes down.

Conservative pundits keep assuring clueless viewers that Trump is not a “real Republican.” They seem not to grasp that most viewers are saying, That’s fantastic! Thanks for reminding me. (I look forward to conservative talk show hosts 20 years hence billing themselves as “Trump Republicans.”)

Looking at what the party has become, I certainly hope he’s not a “real Republican.” I know he’s a real American. Those used to be the same thing.

Follow Ann Coulter on Twitter @AnnCoulter.

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Big Journalism, 2016 Presidential Race, Donald Trump, Ann Coulter

Coulter: Nikki Haley ‘a Bimbo’ — ‘Accidentally Elected Because She’s Pretty’

by PAM KEY14 Jan 20161239

Thursday on Fox News Radio’s “John Gibson Show” conservative columnist Ann Coulter discussed the official Republican State of the Union response from Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC) took aim at her for using the forum to criticize Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump.

Coulter referred to Haley as “bimbo,” to which host John Gibson objected to the term.

Coulter went on to add, “You’re policing my language? I’m saying something I think is true, I think she is a bimbo … Do we have to add that to the list of words that can’t be used now? Because the list is getting bigger than the dictionary.”

Gibson interjected, “Well I think it describes a certain kind of person which I don’t think fits her.”

Coulter answered, “Yeah a not very bright female. Actually they are not always females but they often have those qualities, the feminine qualities.”

Gibson asked, “Can we proceed without calling her that kind of name?”

Coulter asked, “You’re joking?”

Gibson said, “No I’m not.”

Coulter continued, “Can you email me a list of what words can’t be used … Bimbo? … It’s going to be hard to describe how she was chosen. She is a woman who was accidentally elected because she’s pretty and isn’t very bright, can we say that?”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

Read More Stories About:

Breitbart TV, 2016 Presidential Race, Donald Trump, immigration, Ann Coulter, Gov. Nikki Haley

Watch: Ann Coulter, Liz Mair Face Off Over Donald Trump on MSNBC

by JEFF POOR12 Jan 20160

Monday on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” conservative columnist Ann Coulter and Republican strategist Liz Mair debated the merits of the candidacy of Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump and the eligibility of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) to be president of the United States.

Partial transcript as follows:

MAIR: In 2013, you were out there saying Ted Cruz was a natural-born citizen and eligible to run for office. People can check my Twitter feed, I retweeted your tweet from 2013 today.

COULTER: I changed my mind.

MAIR: Well you were right the first time … Ann also said that Mitt Romney was the “perfect” and best Republican candidate.

COULTER: He was, there was no Trump back then.

MAIR: And she kissed Chris Christie’s backside up the wazoo.

COULTER: Until he went bad on immigration.

MAIR: This is not. Yeah–

COULTER: In fact, my ideal ticket is Trump-Romney. That’s what I’m really hoping for. That’s the dynamite combo.

MAIR: And that’s the proof right there that you are in no way conservative, and in no way interested in conservative policy.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Read More Stories About:

Breitbart TV, 2016 Presidential Race, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Chris Matthews, Ann Coulter, Liz Mair, Hardball