Trump’s Five Most Important Declarations At AIPAC Speech

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

by AARON KLEIN21 Mar 2016695

TEL AVIV – Here are the five most important aspects of Donald Trump’s speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, on Monday.

1 – Trump said he will “dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.”

My number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran. I have been in business a long time. I know deal-making and let me tell you, this deal is catastrophic – for America, for Israel, and for the whole Middle East.

However, he stopped short of pledging to immediately nix the international nuclear accord signed in Vienna last year. He stated at AIPAC that “at the very least, we must hold Iran accountable by restructuring the terms of the previous deal.”

Channelling the sentiments of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump said Iran should suffer immediate consequences for likely violating U.N. Security Council resolution 2231 by conducting a series of ballistic missile tests in recent days. Netanyahu last week called for Western powers to take “immediate punitive steps” against Iran for the missile tests.

Trump stated:

The deal is silent on test missiles but those tests DO violate UN Security Council Resolutions. The problem is, no one has done anything about it. Which brings me to my next point – the utter weakness and incompetence of the United Nations.

2 – Trump declared he will check Iran’s growing regional dominance.

The GOP frontrunner affirmed that as president he will “stand up to Iran’s aggressive push to destabilize and dominate the region.”

He outlined Iran’s support for terrorism worldwide, from Syria to the Gaza Strip to Lebanon and beyond. “They’ve got terror cells everywhere, including in the western hemisphere very close to home,” he said. “Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism around the world and we will work to dismantle that reach.”

This policy of countering Iran’s regional influence stands in stark contrast to President Obama’s own coddling of Iran, and the president’s orientation away from America’s traditional Sunni Arab allies.

3 – Trump said he opposes the United Nations unilaterally declaring a Palestinian state.

An agreement imposed by the UN would be a total and complete disaster. The United States must oppose this resolution and use the power of our veto. Why? Because that’s not how you make a deal.

Deals are made when parties come to the table and negotiate. Each side must give up something it values in exchange for something it requires. A deal that imposes conditions on Israel and the Palestinian Authority will do nothing to bring peace. It will only further delegitimize Israel and it would reward Palestinian terrorism, because every day they are stabbing Israelis – and even Americans.

He further threatened to veto “any attempt by the UN to impose its will on the Jewish state.”

4 – Trump vowed to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

We will move the American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem – and we will send a clear signal that there is no daylight between America and our most reliable ally, the state of Israel.

5 – Trump will treat Israel like an ally and not a “second-class citizen.”

When I become President, the days of treating Israel like a second-class citizen will end on Day One. I will meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu immediately. I have known him for many years and we will be able to work closely together to help bring stability and peace to Israel and to the entire region.

While this declaration may sound simplistic, it comes after seven years of Obama espousing policies some have argued are hostile to the Jewish state. And it comes on the heels of a turbulent relationship between Obama and Netanyahu, including a notorious May 2010 White House meeting in which Obama reportedly snubbed Netanyahu for dinner with Michelle and his daughters.  Also, the Obama administration faced accusations it encouraged the activism of nongovernmental organizations working to defeat Netanyahu in the 2015 elections in Israel.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race,White House, Donald Trump, Breitbart Jerusalem, President Obama, Benjamin Netanyahu, United Nations, Jerusalem,AIPAC, u.s.-israel relations

FLASHBACK – Glenn Beck: John McCain ‘Worse for the Country’ than Barack Obama

AP/Martin

by ALEX SWOYER23 Jan 2016Washington, DC0

Conservative radio host Glenn Beck – who recently erred in alleging that GOP frontrunner Donald Trump voted for President Obama in 2008 – previously said Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama.

“I think John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama,” Beck said to Katie Couric during an interview with CBS in 2009. “How’s that?”

CBS noted Beck also said,”He may have voted for Hillary Clinton over McCain had Clinton been the Democratic nominee in 2008.”

In a YouTube video posted on September 21, 2009, Beck tells Couric that McCain is “weird, [and] progressive like Theodore Roosevelt was.”

Trump posted a link to the interview onTwitter.

“Failing @GlennBeck lost all credibility. Not only was he fired @ FOX, he would have voted for Clinton over McCain,” Trump tweeted.

Beck called Trump a progressive and compared him to Obama during an interview on Fox News with Bill O’Reilly last week.

“He voted for Obama in ’08, come on Bill,” Beck argued as O’Reilly defended Trump from Beck’s criticism.

Beck later apologized and “pointed to a fake tweet as the reason he initially believed Trump voted for Obama.”

Beck also took part in the recent “National Review Against Trump” magazine edition that resulted in the National Review beingbucked from hosting an upcoming GOP primary debate.

Beck is expected to campaign alongside GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) after recently saying on Fox News, “Cruz is my guy.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race,Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, President Obama,Glenn Beck

Obama's last State of the Union address in three words: Disjointed, irrelevant and disappointing

WHITE HOUSE

By Edward Rollins

Published January 13, 2016

FoxNews.com

Facebook Twitter livefyre Email

As a long time observer of the political process and as someone who served twice in the White House, I remember the great anticipation for past State of the Union speeches.  It was an activity where many hundreds of hours and top level staff worked on the speech for many months before it was delivered. It was to be a recap of what had been accomplished and an agenda for the future.

I remember the excitement of the president going to Capitol Hill to address the nation, standing before the other branches of the government, the Congress and the Supreme Court, and either inspiring or informing all of just what the title states: this is the State of the Union.

Part of the drama has been the grand entrance into the people's House, the House of a Representatives and the president being mobbed by members trying to shake his hand or pat his back and for this one night he is treated like a rock star or to be more current like a reality TV star.

The repeated standing and applauding for the key phrases that appeal to the partisans in his party and the negative responses from the opposition.

Everyone is there!

Anyone  of importance in our government along with  the ambassador contingent  from the diplomatic community, is there on display for the nation to see.

This has historically been an opportunity for  a dramatic speech to the nation and the world and without question as important as any that a president might deliver. Tuesday night was the last of these that President Barack Obama will ever give.

As I watched the visuals, the new young Speaker, Paul Ryan, sitting alongside the vice president whom he tried to replace in the last election.  Biden, realizing daily that this is his last hurrah -- and privately telling people he wishes he would have run one more time against the faltering Hillary Clinton.

Speaker Ryan, who now holds more power than anyone except maybe the lame duck president, sits in a seat he never anticipated a year ago. He will be the one who sets the legislative agenda for the future and the president’s only retort is his veto pen.

I watch the one Socialist member of Congress, Senator Bernie Sanders mix and greet the members of the Joint Chief of Staffs of our military, with their stars on their uniforms and rows of medals on their chests.

There is not a member in this chamber who would ever have thought a year ago that Sanders would be viewed as a serious challenger to Hillary Clinton, as he now is.

For someone as skilled at giving a speech as our forty-fourth president, Mr. Obama failed miserably at either inspiring or informing us of the real State of the Union.

What he did do is give a political campaign speech. It was disjointed, irrelevant and disappointing. He is not running for a third term and the agenda he laid out is not what the country wants or feels. He looked tired and ready to move on.

He talked about how great we are as a nation. True,  but what he didn't do was set an agenda for his final year or for his legacy.

He set goals but failed to explain how we can accomplish them. He talked about leadership but has failed miserably as a leader.

On the very day the president is delivered his speech, the Iranian Navy captured two US Navy ships that allegedly were incapacitated and drifted into Iranian waters. Now Iran is holding these sailors hostage. Yet, there was no mention of this incident in the president’s speech.

This is an escalation of hostile behavior by the Iranians who just last month fired unguided missiles at our aircraft carrier , the Harry S. Truman, in the same waters. 

I can't imagine, if he was still with us, that President Truman would disregard these acts of hostility. He was a man of strength. With the country feeling that terrorism is one of our top problems, the president dismissed our concerns. Don't worry! We've got the strongest military in the world. We got Bin Laden.

This is what he said about Iran: "That’s why we built a global coalition, with sanctions and principled diplomacy, to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. As we speak, Iran has rolled back its nuclear program, shipped out its uranium stockpile, and the world has avoided another war."

I don't think so. Bad behavior by Iran is dismissed because President Obama wants to protect his sacred and risky deal.

The number one concern of the country is fighting terrorism. The recent home grown action by the terrorist killings in San Bernardino, California has made this more of a concern. But in spite of this, just this week the president is to release more prisoners from Guantanamo. It is still his top priority to close this prison in spite of strong objections from the Congress, the military and law enforcement officers.

Many of the prisoners already released have returned to the terrorist battlefield. "That is why I will keep working to shut down the prison at Guantanamo: it’s expensive, it’s unnecessary, and it only serves as a recruitment brochure for our enemies."

This is a speech that will not be remembered and will historically be irrelevant.

The man who was the most partisan president in recent history, talked about how disappointed he is that the partisan divide  has not healed.

The office of the presidency has been diminished under Barack Obama’s two terms. His party has been demolished at the State house level and in the loss of both Houses of Congress. But he still panders on.

This is not an historic presidency and he exemplified his "leading from behind" with a very forgettable farewell State of the Union. 

No wonder the country is desperately looking for new leadership.

Edward J. Rollins is a Fox News contributor. He is a former assistant to President Reagan and he managed his reelection campaign. He is a senior presidential fellow at Hofstra University and a member of the Political Consultants Hall of Fame. He is Senior Advisor for Teneo Strategy.

In State of the Union, Obama Confronts Americans’ Fears

www.nytimes.com

Slide Show | President Obama’s Last State of the Union Mr. Obama delivered his final State of the Union address on Tuesday.By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS and MICHAEL D. SHEARJanuary 12, 2016

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Tuesday set forth an ambitious vision for America’s future but conceded his own failure to heal the political divisions holding back progress, calling it a lasting disappointment of his tenure.

In a prime-time televised speech that avoided the usual litany of policy prescriptions, Mr. Obama used his finalState of the Union address to paint a hopeful portrait of the nation after seven years of his leadership, with a resurgent economy and better standing in the world despite inequality at home and terrorism abroad.

But Mr. Obama, who campaigned for president on promises of hope and change, and vowed when he took office to transform Washington and politics itself, accepted responsibility for falling far short of that goal.

“It’s one of the few regrets of my presidency, that the rancor and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better,” Mr. Obama said, adding that “a president with the gifts of Lincoln or Roosevelt might have better bridged the divide.”

He acknowledged that many Americans feel frightened and shut out of a political and economic system they view as rigged against their interests, even as he offered an implicit rebuke of Republicans who are playing on those insecurities in the race to succeed him.

“As frustration grows, there will be voices urging us to fall back into tribes, to scapegoat fellow citizens who don’t look like us, or pray like us, or vote like we do, or share the same background,” Mr. Obama said. “We can’t afford to go down that path.”

He repeatedly sought to contrast Republicans’ bleak appraisals of the state of the nation with his own upbeat assessment. He called his opponents’ version “a fiction” and defended his decisions, many of them flash points for the partisan divide. Mr. Obama implicitly singled out Donald J. Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate, for pointed criticism, saying that Americans must resist calls to stigmatize all Muslims at a time of threats from the Islamic State.

“Will we respond to the changes of our time with fear, turning inward as a nation, and turning against each other as a people?” Mr. Obama said. “Or will we face the future with confidence in who we are, what we stand for, and the incredible things we can do together?”

He also made an indirect but derisive reference to Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, another Republican presidential contender who has criticized Mr. Obama’s foreign policy and urged him to “carpet bomb” the Islamic State.

“The world will look to us to help solve these problems,” Mr. Obama said of global challenges, “and our answer needs to be more than tough talk or calls to carpet bomb civilians.”

The speech, a mix of Mr. Obama’s often lofty rhetoric and punchy, colloquial language, drew more scattered applause than in earlier years. The president appeared liberated by his decision not to present the usual menu of legislative proposals, although it lasted an hour and four minutes, longer than some past addresses. Mr. Obama spoke informally at times, and with occasional flashes of humor.

“Now I’m guessing we won’t agree on health care anytime soon,” he said at one point, as the sound of a single person clapping on the Republican side could be heard in the chamber. Mr. Obama smiled. “A little applause back there,” he said wryly.

Mr. Obama opted for symbolism to make some of his points, leaving a chair empty in the first lady’s guest box to symbolize the victims of gun violence. The other seats were filled by an array of guests including a Syrian refugee. Among the guests invited by Republican lawmakers was Kim Davis, the Kentucky court clerk who became a folk hero to social conservatives for refusing to sign marriage certificates for same-sex couples.

In his remarks, Mr. Obama said America should harness innovation and not be intimidated by it. He called for a “moonshot” effort to cure cancer, to be led by Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., who lost his son to the disease last year.

The address before a joint session of Congress departed from Mr. Obama’s past practice of outlining executive actions intended to sidestep gridlock in Washington.

Instead, Mr. Obama sought to pose and answer the four central questions his aides said were driving the debate about America’s future, including how to ensure opportunity for everyone, how to harness technological change, how to keep the country safe, and how to fix the nation’s broken politics.

He called for an end to gerrymandering — the gaming of political districts to ensure one party’s advantage — reducing the influence of secretive campaign contributions and making voting easier. Mr. Obama also called on Americans to get more involved in politics and participate, a theme of his first campaign and of his presidency.

The speech was one of Mr. Obama’s few remaining opportunities to shape the public conversation before the nation’s attention shifts to the campaign to replace him that is already underway. Except for a final address at the Democratic convention this summer, Tuesday night might have been Mr. Obama’s last big speech.

“I know some of you are antsy to get back to Iowa — I’ve been there,” he said at the start, acknowledging that the political focus is on the state, which holds the country’s first nominating caucuses.

Mr. Obama was determined that the address be forward-looking, aides said, even as his time remaining in the White House is limited. The president called for compromise with Republicans on an overhaul of the criminal justice system, approval of a broad free-trade agreement spanning the Pacific Rim and new initiatives to address poverty and the opioid crisis in the United States. He proposed to provide jobless workers with retraining in addition to the unemployment payments they already received.

In an effort to find common ground with Speaker Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, Mr. Obama noted that Mr. Ryan, a Republican, supports expanding a federal tax credit for low- and middle-income workers. “Who knows, we might surprise the cynics again,” he said, noting a bipartisan budget agreement they struck late last year.

And he repeated past calls for legislative action on his domestic initiatives that have fallen short, including raising the minimum wage, revising the nation’s immigration laws and enacting stricter gun restrictions.

He used the speech to trace the arc of his presidency and its major themes: the economic collapse and recovery, the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the push for free trade and climate pacts, and his failed bids for an immigration overhaul and new gun laws.

Mr. Obama also argued that the country’s most acute challenges emanate not from the strength of adversaries — a primary criticism of Republicans who portray the president as feckless in the face of mounting threats — but from their weakness.

He defended his approach to taking on the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, describing it as a dangerous threat to the United States that must be dealt with, but not an existential one, and not a force that warrants a commitment of American ground forces in Iraq and Syria.

The president also said the United States is uniquely positioned to rally other countries to solve global problems, highlighting his work in forging a nuclear deal with Iran, opening a new era of relations with Cuba, pressing for a global accord reached in Paris to combat climate change and efforts to stop the spread of Ebola.

Republicans, too, used the occasion to contrast their agenda and their values with those of the sitting president, and to offer their own, far more negative assessment of his tenure.

“The president’s record has often fallen far short of his soaring words,” Gov. Nikki R. Haley of South Carolina said in her official response, delivered immediately after Mr. Obama’s. “As he enters his final year in office, many Americans are still feeling the squeeze of an economy too weak to raise income levels.”

“Even worse,” she added, “we are facing the most dangerous terrorist threat our nation has seen since September 11th, and this president appears either unwilling or unable to deal with it.”

“If we held the White House,” Ms. Haley said, taxes would be lower, spending slowed and the military strengthened.

“We would make international agreements that were celebrated in Israel and protested in Iran, not the other way around,” she said, referring to the international agreement Mr. Obama pressed for that lifts sanctions on Iran in exchange for restrictions to its nuclear ability

The Nuclear Option— Executive Gun Control: Obama Creates ‘Crazy List,’ Disarms the Elderly

by CHARLES HURT6 Jan 2016906

When all the hectoring is finished, the professorial lecturing is done, all the political posturing is over, all that is left after executive gun control are tears. And crocodile tears at that.

Even for those of us long tired of the false hopes and outright lies from this White House, President Obama’s crude gunplay Tuesday was pretty shocking.

It was shocking for its hollowness. Shocking for its low-mindedness. Shocking for the complete disdain the man has for all the families of victims of gun violence that he trots out to carry his political water. And what for? To save a future life? Prevent a past death?

No. He even admitted on live national television that his raft of meaningless proposals will do nothing to prevent a single gun crime and nor would they have ever prevented one in the past.

“Each time this comes up, we are fed the excuse that common-sense reforms, like background checks, might not have stopped the last massacre. Or the one before that. Or the one before that. So why bother? I reject that thinking.”

In other words, Mr. Obama is saying: “Let’s make up some meaningless new gun laws just ‘cuz.”

Or, as his former chief of staff might say, “Never let a tragedy go to waste. Not when you can hector, lecture and grandstand over it. Score some political points.”

No, all of this executive action is designed entirely to create one giant charade that Mr. Obama understands, cares and is offering capable solutions to a problem he wants to fix.

Yet, nothing could be further from the truth.

“Every single year, more than 30,000 Americans have their lives cut short by guns. Thirty thousand. Suicides, domestic violence, gang shootouts, accidents. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost brothers and sisters or buried their own children,” he waxed on, as if he really intended to do something about it.

“Many have had to learn to live with a disability or learn to live without the love of their life. A number of those people are here today. They can tell you some stories,” he continued. “In this room right here, there are a lot of stories. There’s a lot of heartache. There’s a lot of resilience, there’s a lot of strength, but there’s also a lot of pain. And this is just a small sample.”

In the end, he offered nothing. Nothing that isn’t already the law. More paperwork. More busy work.

And tears. Empty tears. Meaningless tears. Fake tears.

Now it is possible that these “executive actions” by the president have a deeper, more sinister intent. They are the camel’s nose under the tent, designed to wend through the courts and prop up rulings that support the notion that a future president could, indeed, pass tougher gun restrictions by fiat.

Since voters refuse to elect lawmakers who want to strip citizens of their guns, maybe Mr. Obama can get unelected judges to do it.

To be sure, Tuesday’s announcement was an open admission that, indeed, the president does intend to use medical records from Obamacare to create a national “crazy list” of people, especially the elderly, who cannot have guns to defend themselves.

And certainly, these cynical antics reveal the president’s deep and disturbing disconnect from America. In the past, he has specifically praised the gun bans in Britain and Australia. Yesterday, he held up Communist China as his latest role model.

Suppose we should just be grateful, then, that Mr. Obama doesn’t really care to actually do something to stop the gun violence.

Charles Hurt can be reached at charleshurt@live.com and on Twitter via @charleshurt.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2nd Amendment, gun control, President Obama, Gun Rights,Executive Gun Control, Tears, 2ns Amendment

KIM JUNG UN GOES H-BOMB NUCLEAR

North Korea: We now have the 'H-bomb of justice'

www.cnbc.com

North Korea Wednesday tested a hydrogen nuclear bomb, state news agency KCNA reported, marking the politically-isolated country's first nuclear test in three years, a move that received condemnation from the U.S., Britain and Japan among others.

The report on the KCNA website came within hours of reports from various agencies that a large earthquake had been detected near a known North Korean nuclear test site.

According to KCNA, North Korea tested a miniaturized hydrogen nuclear bomb "in the most perfect manner," putting it in possession of hydrogen bomb capability, which it described as "the most powerful nuclear deterrent."

North Korea wanted what it called "the H-bomb of justice" as protection from the "ever-growing nuclear threat and blackmail by the U.S.-led hostile forces," according to the statement on KCNA.

It would use the weapons only if its sovereignty was encroached upon, the statement on KCNA said, but would not roll back its nuclear development until the U.S. had dropped its "vicious, hostile" policy toward the isolated Communist state.

"The U.S. is a gang of cruel robbers which has worked hard to bring even a nuclear disaster to the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korean], not content with having imposed the thrice-cursed and unheard-of political isolation, economic blockade and military pressure on it for the mere reason that it has differing ideology and social system," according to the statement.

"The present-day grim reality clearly proves once again the immutable truth that one's destiny should be defended by one's own efforts," the statement went on. "Nothing is more foolish than dropping a hunting gun before herds of ferocious wolves."

This is North Korea's first nuclear test since February 2013 and the fourth it has conducted in all.

DigitalGlobe | ScapeWare3d | Contributor An April 2015 photo of new nuclear test tunnel under construction at the Punggye-ri site. Japan reacts with anger

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe quickly condemned the test.

Abe said that Japan "absolutely cannot tolerate" a North Korean nuclear test, which he called a threat to Japan's security. Japan will make a firm response to North Korea's move, he added.

Shortly after, South Korean President Park Geun-hye said that North Korea would "pay the price" for its nuclear test, and that it would seek additional United Nations (U.N.) sanctions against its neighbor.

At the same time, according to South Korean news agency Yonhap, government officials noted that they needed to perform additional tests to ascertain that North Korea had actually tested a hyrdrogen nuclear device.

Intelligence sources told Yonhap that the device tested may not have been a H-bomb, while other Korean media cited defense sources as saying that North Korea may have added a small amount of hydrogen to the device tested..

Reuters reported that the Korean Meteorological Administration had detected no radiation from the apparent test.

Britain's Foreign Secretary Phillip Hammond said that such a test would be a "grave breach" of U.N. resolutions; North Korea is already under U.N. sanctions for having conducted previous nuclear tests, the first as early as 2006.

China's state news agency, Xinhua, wrote that the test was at odds with the goal of de-nuclearization, adding that any action that disrupted the stability of Northeast Asia was "undesirable and unwise." Xinhua is often read as a reflection of the thoughts of China's leaders.

Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department condemned the apparent breach of U.N. sanctions.

Reuters reported that the U.N. Security Council would hold an emergency meeting on Wednesday at 11 a.m. ET (4 p.m. GMT) to discuss the test, at the request of the U.S. and Japan.

Earthquake shakes won

Word of the nuclear test emerged shortly after 9 a.m. SIN/HK, when the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) said it had detected a magnitude 5.1 earthquake about 49 kilometers (30 miles) a known North Korean nuclear test site, according to its coordinates. The USGS said that earthquake, near the site called Punggye-ri, was about 10km below the earth's surface.

The Korean Meteorological Administration, meanwhile, said that it detected the epicentre of the quake at a depth of "0 kilometers." It put the magnitude at 4.2.

Follow CNBC International on Twitter andFacebook.

COMMENTS

Donald Trump Vows to ‘Unsign’ Obama’s Executive Gun Control

Carlos Osorio/AP Photo

by AWR HAWKINS3 Jan 20161,143

With President Obama’s executive action for gun control expected this week, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump let it be known that he will “unsign” Obama’s executive gun control once he is sworn in as president.

Obama is expected to expand background checks to cover more private gun sales, and to put more reporting requirements on licensed gun-dealers, according to statements from White House officials. He is working out the details on his actions with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on January 4.

According to CNN, Trump is vowing to undo the executive actions Obama will take this week.

While speaking in Biloxi, Mississippi, on January 2, Trump said:

There’s an assault on the Second Amendment. You know Obama’s going to do an executive order and really knock the hell out of it. You know, the system’s supposed to be, you get the Democrats, you get the Republicans, and you make deals. He can’t do that. He can’t do that. So he’s going to sign another executive order having to do with the Second Amendment, having to do with guns. I will veto. I will unsign that so fast.

Trump made a very similar statement during a January 3 interview on Face the Nation, when the told host John Dickerson, “The one good thing about an executive order is that the new president, when he comes in, boom, first day, first hour, first minute, you can rescind them.”

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter:@AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race,Donald Trump, 2nd Amendment, President Obama, Second Amendment, Executive Gun Control, Face the Nation, John Dickerson