MSNBC Panel: FNC Viewers Will ‘Thankfully Die Off,’ Chicago Code for ‘Black’

On Sunday’s AM Joy, during a discussion of recent mass shootings and gun control, host Joy Reid set up frequent guest Kurt Bardella to cheer for the deaths of Fox News viewers as host Reid described the “world view” advanced by conservative media as being “crusty” and “creepy.”

The MSNBC host also fretted over the tendency of Republicans to bring up the high homicide rate in Chicago during discussions of gun control, with panel member Tiffany Cross of The Beat D.C. suggesting racism as she called “Chicago” a “euphemism for black.”

Reid turned to Cross and complained: “Every time you try to bring up the issue of mass shootings and preventing them, you get the reflexive ‘Chicago.'” After the AM Joy host complained that the guns used in the Parkland school shootings were “perfectly legally purchased,” Cross began her response: “I think with the Republican party Chicago is their euphemism or subtext for ‘black,’ and we should just call that out for what it is.”

In her next question, Reid brought up older audience members of the conservative media as she turned to Bardella and posed: “At some point, does the conservative media run out of viewers because it is appealing to sort of an old kind of crusty, creepy, world view that these young people who are a big cohort of the American population do not share?”

It did not seem to occur to either Reid or Bardella that many younger people become more conservative as they get older and increasingly consume right-leaning media as Bardella responded: “I think there is some credence to the idea that, at some point, just the process of evolution, some of these viewers, they are going to thankfully die off, and that’ll be the end of that.”

After complaining that Fox News does not react to violent crimes by white men in the same as violence by immigrants, he concluded: “We’re at a point where Donald Trump and the Republican party, they are complicit in what’s going on in this country. The next time there is a mass shooting and nothing has been done to prevent it or stop it, the Republican party and Donald Trump own it and are complicit in it.”

Host Reid responded, “Absolutely,” before moving to her next question.

Source Article from

HLN Panel Embarrasses Liberal Media for Ignorance in Gun Ban Push

S.E. Cupp Unfiltered
February 26, 2018
9:14:48 PM Eastern

S.E. CUPP: Despite the left and the media putting guns in their crosshairs 24/7, the desired effect might be missed. As a matter of fact, the Florida Gun Show in Tampa reported 7,000 attendees on Saturday. A record number. That’s probably not an accident. Okay, let me introduce my table for tonight. CNN political analyst and Senior Congressional Correspondent for the Washington Examiner David Drucker, CNN political commentator and conservative talk show host Ben Ferguson and Unfiltered Senior Producer Andy Levi. Ben?


CUPP: So I asked you to take a look at this bill that Florida voted not to debate. They pitched this as an assault weapons ban. It was really targeted. And, in fact, there is like eight pages of guns that are banned in this bill, including some hunting rifles, including some shotguns, including some pistols.

FERGUSON: Including some things that are not even close to what they would refer to as an “assault weapon.” The scariest part about that bill was the shotgun part, and I wrote it down because it was amazing to me. “All the following shotguns, copies, duplicates or altered.”

So here is my question: If I have a shotgun that is semiautomatic which I do which is completely for hunting. It’s never used for anything else besides duck hunting and dove hunting. It is semi-automatic. Every one of the shotguns listed is semi-automatic, clearly, my gun is now a duplicate. Couldn’t it be banned because it works exactly like the other guns that are in there, even though it has nothing to do but anything but exclusively hunting? The gun that I own is literally solely made for 100 percent hunting, not home defense, it’s too big it’s too long.

CUPP: This bill is so broad and when people say “we’re not coming after your hunting gun.” We’re not coming after your self-defense handgun.

FERGUSON: Clearly they are.

CUPP: This would make a semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and a thumbhole stock. I have a gun with a thumbhole stock.

FERGUSON: Five rounds or more.

CUPP: It would make that illegal. What I don’t understand is as a hunter, having a detachable magazine if you are hunting multiple properties and you are getting in and out of your car, it makes your gun safer because you are not worried about leaving a round in the chamber every time you put it in your car. People who draft this kind of legislation clearly don’t think about that stuff. But why should we ever believe any lawmaker who says “we’re not coming for all your guns?”

ANDY LEVY: Oh. You absolutely shouldn’t. But what I always love about this they say it is common sense regulation, you know.

DAVID DRUCKER: Common sense gun safety.

LEVY: Gun safety is the new thing now instead of gun control, I noticed. But it is common sense legislation. Yeah, well if you want to basically regulate semi-automatic rifles out of existence and since that is generally the only acceptable position in the media, I will have to agree that it is common sense legislation. But you pointed out, detachable magazine and a thumbhole stock, what that’s going to do is turn a whole bunch of people into felons because, as you said, there are legitimate hunting reasons for having their rifles.


FERGUSON: The majority of the guns I own are used for hunting. The majority of the guns that I own are not even remotely close to what would be considered a “high powered assault rifle.” Yet, there are multiple guns on that list that are now, they say, I should not be able to own or should not be able to buy. So, if I am a normal, average American who’s not obsessed with AR-15s and all the gadgets that go with them. I’m just a normal gun owner who is a hunter, I read that and I’m immediately going to go to my corner because you lied to me, you told me you were not going to take my guns.

CUPP: Or you will go and buy a bunch of guns and sign up to be an NRA member. This is—let me tell you the secret. This is how the NRA works. There is a Democrat in the White House, the NRA is going to tell you, “they want to take your guns.” When there is a Republican in the White House, the NRA is going to tell you, “don’t relax, they still are going to come and take your guns.” And stuff like this proves them right. And every time Democrats get on this reactive Bent, it drives gun sales up through the roof, and attendance at gun shows go through the roof, and NRA memberships.


FERGUSON: But if you look at that list, that is a bait and switch lie. And you can show it and prove it every time.

CUPP: Totally. And the media isn’t savvy enough because I saw a lot of people in the media when this bill was being discussed. The media isn’t gun savvy enough to know that. I talked to some reporter and anchors who hadn’t read it and still went on the air and insisted this is just going after military-style assault weapons.

FERGUSON: Going after shotguns.

CUPP: That is not true. That is not true. That was a lie. That was a lie.

FERGUSON: That you use for hunting.


Source Article from

Russian journalist walks off "ideological" Al Jazeera panel: "Putin has a very high percentage of support. And it’s not because people are stupid"

Journalist and TV host Vladimir Pozner.


Vladimir Pozner, one of Russia’s most-respected journalists, walked out of an Al Jazeera panel on the upcoming Russian election after it became clear that it would only be “an ideological debate” void of real analysis.

The Friday installment of Mehdi Hasan’s UpFront program on Al Jazeera English was devoted to Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 US election and the upcoming election in Russia, which incumbent President Vladimir Putin is predicted to win, according to polls.

The second part featured a 15-minute panel of experts, including Pozner, fellow journalist Evgenia Albats, and political activist Vladimir Kara-Murza. Albats and Kara-Murza, both outspoken opposition figures in Russia, took turns dismissing the upcoming vote as “not a real election,” after which came Pozner’s turn to speak, which he used to graciously bow out.

“When I was asked to participate in this program, I said I was not interested in getting into a debate. I am not a debater, I am a journalist. I am not opposition… I am not a big fan of Putin’s, but I like to try to be objective,” he said.

Comment: A rarity in mainstream journalism and politics these days: WikiLeaks: Al Jazeera now controlled by US Government

“People do go to the poll and they do vote. And for whatever reasons, Putin has a very high percentage of support. And it’s not because people are stupid. I say again, I am not a Putin supporter, but either you have to see things the way they are or you describe them the way you want them to be or want people to believe them to be,” Pozner said.

“What I am going to do is to let the two people talk and agree with each other on all the negative things they are going to say and I will do some other stuff that is much more interesting for me,” he added, explaining that he did not care to participate in “an ideological debate.”

As Pozner was leaving, Kara-Murza implied that he was a secret Putin supporter who was running away from honest debate, while Albats remarked that Russia’s Channel One, which she called part of a state propaganda machine, has an interview program hosted by Pozner. The discussion then drifted on to the perils of being an opposition figure in Russia and whether or not Putin will step down after his next term ends.

Explaining the move later on his webpage, Pozner said he was misled into thinking the program would be an honest attempt to show foreign viewers the complex situation with elections in Russia. He said the program was initially supposed to give airtime to other experts in addition to Pozner, and that he expressed concerns about the format after learning about the substitutions.

“I stressed that I would not take part in political debates, first, because I do not seek to argue with either Evgenia Albats or Vladimir Kara-Murza, and second, because the [Al Jazeera] audience knows absolutely nothing about Russia and will not understand anything, ultimately deciding that whoever speaks ‘smoother’ must be right. I was assured there would be no debate,” he said.

The Russian presidential election is scheduled for March 18. The term of office is six years and no president can have more than two terms in a row, which means that if Putin wins, he will not be able to seek re-election in 2024.

Source Article from

CNN Panel Agrees: America Will Be ‘More North Korean’ With Military Parade

The Situation Room
February 6, 2018
6:45:45 PM Eastern

WOLF BLITZER: Before we get back to our specialists, we have breaking news. I want to quickly go to our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr. Barbara, the President apparently wants a big military parade, tell us about that.

BARBARA STARR: Well, a Pentagon spokesman confirmed that they are looking at dates on the calendar for a parade that Mr. Trump has told the Pentagon he wants as an expression of national unity and patriotism.


But, what are we really talking about here? There has not been a military parade typically by the U.S. military in many years. The last one really after Desert Storm in the 1990s.


So it’s going to be a difficult proposition. And it may be very controversial. The veterans have long wanted some kind of welcome home parade. This may be seen as something unduly militaristic overseas, may be seen as an expression of celebrating years of America’s wars abroad. Wolf?


STARR: Our colleague, Jeff Toobin, made a good point a few minutes ago. What we more typically see is America’s heroes marching down Broadway in New York. The canyon of heroes, the ticker tape. This has gone on for decades, throughout America’s wars. And those kinds of Broadway, New York, celebrations are really a true celebration of the service of those who go to war on behalf of the nation. It’s not very typical, frankly, to see American weaponry rolling through America’s city streets. It is something, I don’t know that anybody can predict how nations overseas, especially in the Middle East and Asia, might react to it all, Wolf?

BLITZER: Jeffrey, what do you think?

JEFFREY TOOBIN: Well, you know, I — we’re getting more North Korean every day in this country. You know, yesterday the President says people who don’t cheer are un-American and treasonous. And today, we’re going to start having big parades with tanks and missiles. And, you know, people have to decide whether they want to have that kind of country. I mean, we have a country where we celebrate our troops, as Barbara said when they come home from battle in lower Manhattan and we throw ticker tape. But the idea in peacetime, simply having tanks roll through the streets of Washington that’s—to use a phrase the President likes to use – in my experience that’s un-American.

REBECCA BERG: And one of the reasons we don’t tend to have those military parades in America, is just the sense that being the power that we are, we don’t need to show off our military might like countries like North Korea or Russia might need to.


DAVID SWERDLICK: If you’re the President and you think what nation needs is a military parade, to me that’s like what Jeffery said, that’s like North Korea, that’s like a middle-aged guy who goes out and gets an earring and ponytail. That’s trying to prove something that just simply doesn’t need to be.

BLITZER: Very quickly.

KAITLAN COLLINS: We can already see the future what’s going to happen here. This parade will probably go forth on Veteran’s Day or whenever the White House is proposing a date. Democrats and critics will automatically draw conclusions this is like North Korea, that the President is acting like a dictator, and White House will, in turn, say those people aren’t patriotic and they don’t love our troops that they don’t want a military.


Source Article from

CNN Panel Chastises GOP for Using ‘Innuendo’ to ‘Tar and Feather’ FBI

The Lead
January 25, 2018
4:23:09 PM Eastern


JAKE TAPPER: Congressman, let me start with you. The secret society story exploded after Senator Ron Johnson the Republican Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee was on Fox News talking about the secret society text. Sources now say that was in reference to a gag gift, that the text was a joke. What do you think? And do you think Congressional Republicans perhaps should have waited to learn more before pushing the narrative of a secret society?

MIKE ROGERS: Absolutely. I think the most dangerous place on Capitol Hill now is between any hearing of this and a microphone. I don’t care Democrat or Republican. And this shows me how dangerous, hopefully, shows them how dangerous it is. If there’s 50,000 texts of which they’re going through the forensic capability of retrieving now, you should wait until you say anything, about a secret society or anything, until you know. One text out of, clearly, more than 50,000 does not a conspiracy make. And this is what worries me about this is they are running out there with whatever they see that they like in order to try to impugn in a very big public way, the FBI’s investigation.


TAPPER: Laura, what do you think of this? Especially what do you make of the selective leaks? For instance, we found out about the existence of the words “secret society” before we even found out the context of it.

LAURA COATES: Well, you are seeing here is a tarring and feathering in the public square because they’re congressmen out there who believe that innuendo has become exceptionally persuasive in the court of public opinion. When you have Robert Mueller and his team who are refusing to leak on their own or give information about either the state of the investigation or the result of the investigation or the process of information, people are looking for bread crumbs and trying to put it out there themselves.

So when you have these selective leaks, what they are trying to do is put in their back pocket some type of information that could attack the credibility of the investigation, even before the results of that investigation are given. And if innuendo is going to be enough to persuade the public, we’re in for a scary ride.


Source Article from

China is stealing solar panel jobs from American workers – Will Trump send a tough trade message?

Image: China is stealing solar panel jobs from American workers – Will Trump send a tough trade message?

(Natural News)
All along the campaign trail, then-candidate Donald Trump emphasized how China has been aggressively manipulating its own currency in order to shadily gain an upper hand economically. And now the communist regime has been exposed for colluding to steal American jobs, particularly in the solar industry, which the International Trade Commission (ITC) is pushing now-President Trump to address, and quickly.

According to recent reports, the ITC has presented the president with a solid case proving that China’s solar manufacturing companies have been colluding with one another, all with the blessing of the country’s communist government, to steal technical, strategic, and financial data from American solar firms in order to illicitly. In the process, they’ve been effectively thieving jobs away from blue-collar American workers, many of whom voted for Donald Trump based on his platform of “America First.”

The case shows that China’s solar manufacturing industry’s illicit actions have been a “substantial cause of serious injury to the domestic (solar) industry.” The ITC was able to collect substantial evidence showing that the Communist Party’s 11th, 12th, and 13th Five-Year plans all unequivocally called for China to target and capture the solar power market, using any means necessary. Evidence of this is so indisputable, in fact, that the ITC voted unanimously back in September to make a definitive declaration, which now sits on the president’s desk for review, and hopefully swift, responsive action.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has already issued indictments against at least five Chinese military officers who were specifically caught in the act of stealing American solar secrets from various corporate networks. After obtaining these secrets, Chinese solar companies were able to develop their own cheap knock-off versions of solar technology using American expertise, which they continue to sell on the American market – often without stating their country of origin.

“While international trade is a powerful force for economic development and opportunity, letting a communist dictatorship target and destroy one American industry after another, using its military to help, is the exact opposite of ‘free,’” writes Greg Autry for, urging the president to put an immediate stop to this anti-American agenda.

America needs to enact tariffs, quotas on solar cells and modules coming from China

Despite the endless shipments of Chinese-made products that arrive on America’s shores every day, the Chinese dictatorship is hardly a friend of the United States. Back in the fall, it was revealed that China has been shipping in deadly opioid drugs into the U.S. as part of a “chemical warfare” campaign against Americans – all under the leadership of past presidents like Barack Obama, who did absolutely nothing during his eight-year term to stem the tide of Chinese manufacturers stealing America’s intellectual and scientific property.

Many are hoping that this type of thing will stop under President Trump, who in no uncertain terms has aggressively brought to the limelight the ongoing threat that is China’s constant intrusion into American commerce. What’s currently happening with alternative energy, anyway, is costing tens of thousands of Americans their jobs, all the while allowing China to hijack the technology that many of these same Americans helped develop in the first place.

“Trump should choose the very strongest responses in this case,” Autry adds in his condemnation of China’s continued actions against American interests. “I’d encourage him to enact both a tariff and a quota on imported cells and modules. Doing so will leave no doubt about the outcomes for cheaters in other categories.”

“Regardless of what happens in solar, bold action today will avoid a repetition of this disaster in the future as the Chinese set their targets on additional American industries – including automobiles and airliners,” he concludes.

Sources for this article include:



Source Article from

Pathetic! ‘Hardball’ Panel Offers Gooey, Criticism-Free Love Letter to Liberal Media

MSNBC’s Hardball
January 17, 2018
7:03 p.m. Eastern

CHRIS MATTHEWS [on Huckabee Sanders criticizing Flake]: Well, that was pathetic. Anyway, then there was the theater of the absurd for weeks, the President has been teasing in an award ceremony of sorts for “THE MOST DISHONEST & CORRUPT MEDIA AWARDS OF THE YEAR.” He wrote “Subjects will cover dishonesty and bad reporting in various categories from the Fake News Media.” Last week, he wrote: “The Fake News Awards, those are going to the most corrupt and biased of the Mainstream Media, will be presented to the losers Wednesday, January 17th.” Of course, that’s today. At her briefing today, Sanders promised something later today. But as of this hour, it’s still a mystery what it is. That’s the absurd. Here’s the reality. According to the Committee to the Protect Journalists, 42 were killed last year doing their jobs. Another 262 were imprisoned, 21 arrested on charges of false news. Those were the phrase used.


MATTHEWS: Tell me what’s the danger of the press, just using the press as his tackling dummy, if you will, because he doesn’t like objective reporting, not opinion like Eugene. He is afraid, it seems to me, of front page facts that are thrown out there as part of regular daily reporting. He doesn’t want that objective reality confronting his behavior. 

KATIE TOWNSEND: These relentless attacks on the credibility of journalists, the use of the fake news term repeatedly, calling the press the enemy of the people, these have real world effects, not just here in the United States where we’ve seen an uptick in threats against members of the media just simply doing their jobs but also abroad. I think as both Senator McCain and Senator Flake pointed out today, the President’s words matter. They have an impact when the President of the United States uses the term “fake news” to criticize reporting that he doesn’t like, that language is used as a license by people like Assad in Syria, Duterte in the Philippines to call reporting — they don’t like fake news. 


DEMOCRATIC SENATOR RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (Conn.): When the history of this time is written, Chris and I’ve said it before on this very show, the heroes will be our free press and the judiciary bulwarks of our democracy. When the President says he won the popular vote, when he says that the crowd at inaugural was the biggest ever, the press has stood up to him. Think about what we would not know now about Russian meddling in our election, about the attempts to cover up and obstruct justice, whether it’s the Air Force One statement or the Trump Tower meeting, and Katie is absolutely right. The real world effects are staggering, not only abroad where 262 journalists have been imprisoned over the last year alone, the most dangerous year to be a journalist in the world[.]


EUGENE ROBINSON: You and I have been doing this for a long time. As a journalist you have to have a thick skin, right? You have to a thick skin because guess what, if officials love everything you write, then you’re probably not doing a very good job. You’re supposed to hold them accountable. What President Trump is doing is something different. He’s trying to erase the line between what is true and what is not true. He wants to erase the line between reality and his own convenient fantasy, his own version of reality. To have a democracy, we have to have a chronicle of events that we all agree on and we have to have an encyclopedia of facts we all agree on and then we can argue what to do with those things and what those events mean and what those facts mean. But — but he’s trying to warp reality to suit his own political purposes, and his own ego half the time. I think it’s more psychological than political, but it’s very dangerous. 


TOWNSEND: Well, Chris, I think that and I want to underscore too that Senator Flake is absolutely right in how important it is that Republicans as well as Democrats speak out against this type of rhetoric. This is a bipartisan issue or it should be or a nonpartisan issue. Press freedom is not only a bulwark of American democracy, but it’s also, I would say, an American value. And I think in terms of what needs to be done, as I said, we’ve seen the uptick in threats against journalists, not only threats to take them to court but physical threats and physical attacks on journalists not just abroad but here in the United States and so I think this rhetoric we’re seeing from the President underscores precisely why it’s important for organizations like ours to continue to support journalists.

MATTHEWS: Well, I’m telling you as a consumer of print, you’re a consumer like him. You get up and have your coffee at 7:00 in the morning usually and you look at papers like The New York Times, which is an amazing newspaper, it covers the world and it’s all there in print. You just open it up. The whole world — it covers everything. You get The Washington Post with the best political coverage. It’s all over the coverage. You learn so much in maybe an hour at the breakfast table. By the time you’ve had your cereal and coffee, you are really damn informed with pretty damn objective facts. I don’t know anywhere in the world we benefit from this system and to have this clownish leader making fun of one of the best things we have in the country as a free press, it’s wonderful especially if you have curiosity like we all do. We want to know what’s going on.


BLUMENTHAL: I think that dismissing it as a clown show is a disservice to how threatening and how dangerous it really is because it is undermining and corrosive to our democracy and the real threat here is that people will lose faith although frankly, what I hear in Connecticut is that folks are watching MSNBC.


BLUMENTHAL: They’re watching this show. They’re watching other cable. They’re reading at levels never before seen, and I think it is that kind of reaction that should be inspiring to many of us.

Source Article from

CNN Panel Doubts Presidential Doctor, Claim He’s Just a ‘Trump Fanboy’

CNN Tonight
January 16, 2018
10:34:01 PM Eastern

DON LEMON: So we heard today from a doctor who recently examined the President and he said the President is in excellent health. Watch this.


Dr. RONNY JACKSON: If the president had a healthier diet over the last 20 years, he might live to be 200 years, I don’t know. He has incredible genes I just assume.

I was not going to do a cognitive exam. I had no intention of doing one. The reason that we did the cognitive assessment is plain and simple: Because the president asked me to do it.

His overall health is excellent. Are there a few things he could do to make himself a little healthier? With the diet and exercise, absolutely.

I would say he sleeps four to five hours a night. And he’s probably been that way his whole life. That’s probably one of the reasons he’s been successful.

LEMON: [Laughing] Sorry. Clean bill of health. Incredible genes, right?

FRANK BRUNI: Apparently. Listen, I want to — let’s take it at face value. And we spend so much time criticizing the president, as we should, that’s our job. I want to say, the fact that he came out and answered questions for an hour today, that surprised me, and I think that surprised you, Dana. That’s a good thing. And so, do I believe every single number there? Not exactly.

LEMON: I was just chuckling at how energetic he was, not what he was saying about the president. But I mean –

BRUNI: He seemed like a Trump fanboy if you think about it yeah.

LEMON: When he said 239 pounds — I know I’m being a girther, but, come on.

BRUNI: We rightly complain all the time about this administration’s lack of responsiveness to us. That guy came out here for an hour today, he answered a lot of questions, let’s give credit where it’s due.

DANA BASH: And I just thought it was very, very telling that he explicitly said that he wasn’t going to do what he called a cognitive test, but the president wanted him to do the test and then go out and report on it. That is so, so telling.

RYAN. That’s right. That’s right. That’s right.

LEMON: Thanks, everyone. I appreciate it.

Source Article from

MSNBC Panel Claims Trump Doesn’t Care About Hawaii Since They Voted Against Him

January 15, 2018
7:44:27 PM Eastern


CHRIS MATTHEWS: Here’s how the President responded hours later.

DONALD TRUMP: Well, that was a state thing. But we’re going to now get involved with them. I love that they took responsibility. They took total responsibility. But we’re going get involved. Their attitude and what they want to do, I think it’s terrific. They took responsibility. They made a mistake. We hope it won’t happen again. But part of it is that people are on edge. But maybe eventually we’ll solve the problem so they won’t have to be so on edge.

MATTHEWS: As Harry Truman would not have said, the buck stops at Honolulu. Jason, wouldn’t take any responsibility for it.

JASON JOHNSON: He took no responsibility for it. And he could have a said something comforting. I’m thinking—

MATTHEWS: He is the head of state.

JOHNSON: He is the head of state. He could say, “Hey, look, we’re going to make sure Korea is not a threat.” I’m thinking like, if Reagan had said this is –

MATTHEWS: He did sort of say that. He said, “We hope it won’t happen again, but part of it is people are on edge, but maybe eventually we’ll solve the problem so they won’t have to be on edge.”

JOHNSON: Which is like government gobbledygook. I don’t know what that means if I live in Honolulu. I want to hear a president say, “I’ll keep you safe no matter the circumstances.” He didn’t do that.

MATTHEWS: Those people were running, Vivian.

VIVIAN SALAMA: They were terrified, rightfully. And you know what, I keep on thinking is President Trump has a tendency now to respond quicker to states where he pulled off a win in 2016. And so here you have Hawaii.

MATTHEWS: You mean like Texas? Unlike California.

SALAMA: Texas, Florida. Not Puerto Rico. That’s for sure. Not California. And so here you have a situation in Hawaii where first of all he did not get a win there. And second of all, they voted against the travel ban. They are one of the states that has filed a lawsuit against the travel ban. And so I think a number of factors may be at play here.

MATTHEWS: What do you think about– Look, I’m not big on this completely, the Trump bashing. But I do—I guess sometimes I am. What do you make of this playing golf on Martin Luther King day? Treating it as a sunny holiday in Florida, not as anything respectful or honoring of a difficult challenge to our country which has been race and civil rights. And it’s still a challenge. And treated as sort of a day to baste in the sun.

JOHNSON: Well, first of all, a lot of people do that. Not just the president of the United States. A lot of people barbecue. I would rather Trump be himself than continue to dishonor Martin Luther King by giving disingenuous speeches in front of people who don’t believe him.

MATTHEWS: You don’t want him at the statue?

JOHNSON: I would rather him not be at the statue, I would rather him not be at a museum jumbling through threw history he didn’t care about and only checked through Wikipedia.


Source Article from

Full Panel: Marijuana Legalization Might Be The One Thing Americans Agree On

David Brooks, Danielle Pletka, Mark Leibovich and Joy Reid join the Meet the Press panel to talk about the fallout from the decision by Attorney General Jeff Sessions to enforce marijuana laws

Watch TV shows, movies and more on Yahoo View.

About NBC Meet the Press

Interviews with news makers from around the world every Sunday morning. See More

Check out more stuff on Yahoo View

Source Article from