#and lobby for child labor laws to be relaxed | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

bountyofbeads · 6 years ago

Text

Elizabeth Warren Is Completely Serious https://nyti.ms/2KlW3oV

PLEASE READ and SHARE this FASCINATING, IN-DEPTH expose on Elizabeth Warren's life, her DEEPLY HELD BELIEFS and excellent POLICY prescriptions to ADDRESS INCOME INEQUALITY, CORPORATE POWER and CORRUPTION in policies. She is an AMAZINGLY INTELLIGENT strong woman.

#2020PresidentalCandidates

#2020Vision #VoteBlue2020 #2020PresidentialElection

Elizabeth Warren Is Completely Serious

About income inequality. About corporate power. About corrupt politics. And about being America’s next president.

By Emily Bazelon | Published June 17, 2019 | New York Times | Posted June 17, 2019 |

The first time I met Elizabeth Warren, she had just come home from a walk with her husband and her dog at Fresh Pond, the reservoir near her house in Cambridge, Mass. It was a sunny day in February, a couple of weeks after Warren announced her candidacy for president, and she was wearing a navy North Face jacket and black sneakers with, as usual, rimless glasses and small gold earrings. Her hair had drifted a bit out of place.

The dog, Bailey, is a golden retriever who had already been deployed by her presidential campaign in a tweet a week earlier, a pink-tongued snapshot with the caption “Bailey will be your Valentine.” Warren started toweling off his paws and fur, which were coated in mud and ice from the reservoir, when she seemed to realize that it made more sense to hand this task over to her husband, Bruce Mann.

In the kitchen, Warren opened a cupboard to reveal an array of boxes and canisters of tea. She drinks many cups a day (her favorite morning blend is English breakfast). Pouring us each a mug, she said, “This is a fantasy.” She was talking about the enormous platform she has, now that she’s running for president, to propagate policy proposals that she has been thinking about for decades. “It’s this moment of being able to talk about these ideas, and everybody says, ‘Oh, wait, I better pay attention to this.’” She went on: “It’s not about me; it’s about those ideas. We’ve moved the Overton window” — the range of ideas deemed to merit serious consideration — “on how we think about taxes. And I think, I think we’re about to move it on child care.”

Her plan, announced in January, would raise $2.75 trillion in revenue over 10 years through a 2 percent tax on assets over $50 million and a higher rate for billionaires. Warren wants to use some of that money to pay for universal child care on a sliding scale. As she talked, she shifted around in her chair — her hands, her arms, her whole body leaning forward and moving back. Onstage, including at TV town halls, she prefers to stand and pace rather than sit (she tries to record six miles a day on her Fitbit), and sometimes she comes across as a little frenetic, like a darting bird. One on one, though, she seemed relaxed, intent.

Warren moved to Cambridge in 1995 when she took a tenured job at Harvard Law School, and 11 years later, Mann, who is a legal historian, got a job there, too. By then they had bought their house; Warren’s two children from a previous marriage, her daughter, Amelia, and son, Alexander, were already grown. The first floor is impeccable, with a formal living room �� elegant decorative boxes arranged on a handsome coffee table — a cozy sunroom and a gleaming kitchen with green tile countertops. When Warren taught classes at Harvard, she would invite her students over for barbecue and peach cobbler during the semester. Some of them marveled at the polish and order, which tends not to be the norm in faculty homes. Warren says she scoops up dog toys before people come over.

For her entire career, Warren’s singular focus has been the growing fragility of America’s middle class. She made the unusual choice as a law professor to concentrate relentlessly on data, and the data that alarms her shows corporate profits creeping up over the last 40 years while employees’ share of the pie shrinks. This shift occurred, Warren argues, because in the 1980s, politicians began reworking the rules for the market to the specifications of corporations that effectively owned the politicians. In Warren’s view of history, “The constant tension in a democracy is that those with money will try to capture the government to turn it to their own purposes.” Over the last four decades, people with money have been winning, in a million ways, many cleverly hidden from view. That’s why economists have estimated that the wealthiest top 0.1 percent of Americans now own nearly as much as the bottom 90 percent.

As a presidential candidate, Warren has rolled out proposal after proposal to rewrite the rules again, this time on behalf of a majority of American families. On the trail, she says “I have a plan for that” so often that it has turned into a T-shirt slogan. Warren has plans (about 20 so far, detailed and multipart) for making housing and child care affordable, forgiving college-loan debt, tackling the opioid crisis, protecting public lands, manufacturing green products, cracking down on lobbying in Washington and giving workers a voice in selecting corporate board members. Her grand overarching ambition is to end America’s second Gilded Age.

[Elizabeth Warren has lots of plans.Together, they would remake the economy.]

“Ask me who my favorite president is,” Warren said. When I paused, she said, “Teddy Roosevelt.” Warren admires Roosevelt for his efforts to break up the giant corporations of his day — Standard Oil and railroad holding companies — in the name of increasing competition. She thinks that today that model would increase hiring and productivity. Warren, who has called herself “a capitalist to my bones,” appreciated Roosevelt’s argument that trustbusting was helpful, not hostile, to the functioning of the market and the government. She brought up his warning that monopolies can use their wealth and power to strangle democracy. “If you go back and read his stuff, it’s not only about the economic dominance; it’s the political influence,” she said.

What’s crucial, Roosevelt believed, is to make the market serve “the public good.” Warren puts it like this: “It’s structural change that interests me. And when I say structural, the point is to say if you get the structures right, then the markets start to work to produce value across the board, not just sucking it all up to the top.”

But will people respond? Warren has been a politician for only seven years, since she announced her run for the Senate in 2011 at age 62. She’s still thinking through how she communicates her ideas with voters. “The only thing that worries me is I won’t describe it in a way that — ” she trailed off. “It’s like teaching class. ‘Is everybody in here getting this?’ And that’s what I just struggle with all the time. How do I get better at this? How do I do more of this in a way that lets people see it, hear it and say, ‘Oh, yeah.’”

In the months after Donald Trump’s stunning victory in 2016, Warren staked out territory as a fierce opponent of the president’s who saw larger forces at play in her party’s defeat. While many Democratic leaders focused on Trump himself as the problem, Warren gave a series of look-in-the-mirror speeches. In the first, to the executive council of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. on Nov. 10, she said that although there could be “no compromise” on standing up to Trump’s bigotry, millions of Americans had voted for him “despite the hate” — out of their deep frustration with “an economy and a government that doesn’t work for them.” Later that month, she gave a second speech behind closed doors to a group that included wealthy liberal donors and went hard at her fellow Democrats for bailing out banks rather than homeowners after the 2008 financial crisis. In another speech, in February 2017, to her ideological allies in the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Warren said: “No matter how extreme Republicans in Washington became, Democrats might grumble or whine, but when it came time for action, our party hesitated and pushed back only with great reluctance. Far too often, Democrats have been unwilling to get out there and fight.”

Warren fought in those early months by showing up at the Women’s March and at Logan Airport in Boston to protest Trump’s travel ban. On the Senate floor, opposing the nomination of Jeff Sessions to be Trump’s first attorney general, she read a letter by Coretta Scott King criticizing Sessions for his record of suppressing the black vote in Alabama, and Republican leaders rebuked her and ordered her to stop. The moment became a symbol of the resistance, with the feminist meme “Nevertheless, She Persisted,” a quote from the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, defending the move to silence her. Warren helped take down Trump’s first choice for labor secretary, the fast-food magnate Andy Puzder (he called his own employees the “bottom of the pool”), and she called for an investigation of the Trump administration’s botched recovery efforts in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria.

But somewhere along the way to announcing her candidacy, Warren’s influence faded. She was no longer the kingmaker or queenmaker whose endorsement Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders avidly sought during their 2016 primary battle. When Warren failed to endorse Sanders, the left saw her decision as an act of betrayal, accusing her of propping up the Democratic establishment instead of trying to take it down. (When I asked Warren if she had regrets, she said she wasn’t going to revisit 2016.) Sanders emerged as the standard-bearer of the emboldened progressive movement.

Trump, meanwhile, was going after Warren by using the slur “Pocahontas” to deride her self-identification in the 1980s and ’90s as part Native American. In the summer of 2018, he said that if she agreed to take a DNA test in the middle of a televised debate, he would donate $1 million to her favorite charity. Warren shot back on Twitter by condemning Trump’s practice of separating immigrant children from their parents at the border (“While you obsess over my genes, your Admin is conducting DNA tests on little kids because you ripped them from their mamas”). But a few months later, she released a videosaying she had done the DNA analysis, and it showed that she had distant Native American ancestry. The announcement backfired, prompting gleeful mockery from Trump (“I have more Indian blood than she has!”) and sharp criticism from the Cherokee Nation, who faulted her for confusing the issue of tribal membership with blood lines. Warren apologized, but she seemed weaker for having taken Trump’s bait.

Sanders is still the Democratic candidate with a guru’s following and a magic touch for small-donor fund-raising, the one who can inspire some 4,500 house parties in a single weekend. And he has used his big policy idea, Medicare for All, to great effect, setting the terms of debate on the future of health care in his party.

With four more years of Trump on the line, though, it’s Joe Biden — the party’s most known quantity — who is far out in front in the polls. Challenging Biden from the left, Warren and Sanders are not calling wealthy donors or participating in big-money fund-raisers. Sanders has been leading Warren in the polls, but his support remains flat, while her numbers have been rising, even besting his in a few polls in mid-June. Warren and Sanders are old friends, which makes it awkward when her gain is assumed to be his loss. Early in June, an unnamed Sanders adviser ridiculed Warren’s electability by calling her DNA announcement a “debacle” that “killed her,” according to U.S. News & World Report. A couple of weeks before the first Democratic primary debates, on June 26 and 27, I asked her what it was like to run against a friend. “You know, I don’t think of this as competing,” she responded. It was the least plausible thing she said to me.

In March, Warren demonstrated her appetite for challenging the economic and political dominance of corporate titans by going directly at America’s biggest tech companies. In a speech in Long Island City, Queens — where local protesters demanded that Amazon drop its plan to build a big new campus — Warren connected the companies’ success at smothering start-up rivals to their influence in Washington. She remarked dryly that the large amounts that businesses like Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple spend on lobbying is a “good return on investment if they can keep Washington from enforcing the antitrust laws.” She wants to use those laws to break up the companies instead — a move that no other major American politician had proposed.

After Warren started talking about the four tech giants, along with other critics, the Trump administration let it be known that it was scrutinizing them for potential antitrust violations. Conservatives have suspected social media platforms of bias against them for years, and with concerns about privacy violations escalating, big tech was suddenly a bipartisan target. Warren has specifics about how to reduce their influence; she wants to undo the mergers that allowed Facebook, for example, to snap up WhatsApp, rather than compete with it for users. Warren could unleash the power to bring major antitrust prosecutions without Congress — an answer to gridlock in Washington that’s crucially woven into some of her other plans too. (Warren also favors ending the filibuster in the Senate.) Warren wants to prevent companies that offer an online marketplace and have annual revenue of $25 billion or more from owning other companies that sell products on that platform. In other words, Amazon could no longer sell shoes and diapers and promote them over everyone else’s shoes and diapers — giving a small business a fair chance to break in.

“There’s a concerted effort to equate Warren with Bernie, to make her seem more radical,” says Luigi Zingales, a University of Chicago economist and co-host of the podcast Capitalisn’t. But Wall Street and its allies “are more afraid of her than Bernie,” Zingales continued, “because when she says she’ll change the rules, she’s the one who knows how to do it.”

Warren’s theory of American capitalism rests on two turning points in the 20th century. The first came in the wake of the Great Depression, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt seized the chance to protect workers and consumers from future economic collapse. While the New Deal is mostly remembered for creating much of the nation’s social safety net, Warren also emphasizes the significance of the legislation (like the Glass-Steagall Act) that Democrats passed to rein in bankers and lenders and the agencies (the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) that they put in place to enforce those limits. Warren credits this new regulatory regime, along with labor unions, with producing a golden era for many workers over the next four and a half decades. Income rose along with union membership, and 70 percent of the increase went to the bottom 90 percent. That shared prosperity built, in Warren’s telling, “the greatest middle class the world had ever known.”

Then came Warren’s second turning point: President Ronald Reagan’s assault on government. Warren argues that Reagan’s skill in the 1980s at selling the country on deregulation allowed the safeguards erected in the 1930s to erode. Republicans seized on the opening Reagan created, and Democrats at times aided them. (Bill Clinton signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999.) That’s how the country arrived at its current stark level of inequality. “The system is as rigged as we think,” Warren wrote in her 2017 book “This Fight Is Our Fight”— in a riposte to Barack Obama, who insisted it was not, even as he recognized the influence of money in politics. This, Warren believes, is what Trump, who also blasted a rigged system, got right and what the Democratic establishment — Obama, both Clintons, Biden — gets wrong.

The challenge for Warren, going up against Trump, is that his slogan “drain the swamp” furthers the longstanding Republican goal of discrediting government, whereas Warren criticizes government as “a tool for the wealthy and well connected,” while asking voters to believe that she can remake it to help solve their problems. Hers is the trickier, paradoxical sell.

Warren faces a similar challenge when she tries to address the fear some white voters have that their economic and social status is in decline. Trump directs his supporters to blame the people they see every day on TV if they’re watching Fox News: immigrants and condescending liberal elites. Warren takes aim at corporate executives while pressing for class solidarity among workers across race and immigration status. Trump’s brand of right-wing populism is on the rise around the world. As more people from the global south move north, it’s harder than ever to make the case to all workers that they should unite.

It’s a classic problem for liberals like Warren: Workers often turn on other workers rather than their bosses and the shadowy forces behind them. “Populism is such a slippery concept,” Michael Kazin, a historian at Georgetown University and author of “The Populist Persuasion: An American History,” told me. “The only real test is whether you can be the person who convinces people you understand their resentment against the elites. Trump did enough of that to win. Bernie Sanders has shown he can do it among young people. Can Elizabeth Warren pull it off? I’m not sure.”

It’s an inconvenient political fact for Warren that she’s far more associated with Harvard and Massachusetts, where she has lived for the last 25 years, than with Oklahoma, the childhood home that shaped her and where her three brothers still live and her family’s roots are multigenerational. If you include Texas, where Warren lived in her early 20s and for most of her 30s, she spent three formative decades far from the Northeast.

When she was growing up, Warren’s father worked as a salesman at Montgomery Ward and later as a janitor; neither of her parents went to college. (White women in this group broke for Trump by 61 percent in 2016, and white men supported him by 71 percent.) In the early 1960s, when Warren was 12, her father had a heart attack and lost his job in Oklahoma City. One day, after the family’s station wagon was repossessed, her mother put on the one formal dress she owned, walked to an interview at Sears and got a job answering phones for minimum wage. This has become the story that Warren tells in every stump speech. She uses it to identify with people who feel squeezed.

There’s another story that Warren tells in her book about the implications, for her own life, of her family’s brush with financial ruin. Warren was going to George Washington University on a scholarship — “I loved college,” she told me. “I was having a great time” — when an old high school boyfriend, Jim Warren, reappeared in her life.

He asked her to marry him and go to Texas, where he had a job at IBM. Warren knew her mother wanted her to say yes. “It was the whole future, come on,” she told me. “I had lived in a family for years that was behind on the mortgage. And a secure future was a good man — not what you might be able to do on your own.”

Warren dropped out of college to move to Houston with her new husband. “It was either-or,” she said. Many women who make this choice never go back to school. But Warren was determined to become a teacher, so she persuaded Jim to let her finish college as a commuter student at the University of Houston for $50 a semester. After her graduation, they moved to New Jersey for Jim’s next IBM posting, and she started working as a speech therapist for special-needs children.

Warren was laid off when she became pregnant, and after her daughter was born, she talked Jim into letting her go to law school at Rutgers University in Newark (this time the cost was $450 a semester). After she had her son, she came to terms with the fact that she wasn’t cut out to stay home. “I wanted to be good at it, but I just wasn’t,” she told me.

In the late 1970s, she got a job at the University of Houston law school. She and her husband moved back to Texas. A couple of years later, when their daughter was in elementary school and their son was a toddler, the Warrens divorced. In her book, Warren writes about this from Jim’s perspective: “He had married a 19-year-old girl, and she hadn’t grown into the woman we both expected.” (Jim Warren died in 2003.)

Two years later, Warren asked Mann, whom she had met at a conference, to marry her. He gave up his job at the University of Connecticut to join her in Houston. At the university, Warren decided to teach practical classes, finance and business. In 1981, she added a bankruptcy class and discovered a question that she wanted to answer empirically: Why were personal bankruptcy rates rising even when the economy was on the upswing?

At first, Warren accepted the assumption that people were causing their own financial ruin. Too much “Tommy, Ralph, Gucci and Prada,” a story in Newsweek called “Maxed Out”later declared. Along with two other scholars, Jay Westbrook and Teresa Sullivan, Warren flew around the country and collected thousands of bankruptcy-court filings in several states. “I was going to expose these people who were taking advantage of the rest of us by hauling off to bankruptcy and just charging debts that they really could repay,” she said in a 2007 interview with Harry Kreisler, a historian at the University of California, Berkeley. But Warren, Westbrook and Sullivan found that 90 percent of consumer bankruptcies were due to a job loss, a medical problem or the breakup of a family through divorce or the death of a spouse. “I did the research, and the data just took me to a totally different place,” Warren said.

That research led to a job at the University of Texas at Austin, despite the doubts some faculty members had about her nonselective university degrees. (Mann worked at Washington University in St. Louis.) They finally managed to get joint appointments at the University of Pennsylvania in 1987, and she stayed there until 1995.

During this period, Warren was registered as a Republican. (Earlier, in Texas, she was an independent.) Her political affiliation shifted around the time she began working on bankruptcy in Washington. More than one million families a year were going bankrupt in the mid-’90s, and Congress established the National Bankruptcy Review Commission to suggest how to change the bankruptcy code. The commission’s chairman, former Representative Mike Synar of Oklahoma, asked Warren, now at Harvard Law School, to be his chief policy adviser. “I said, ‘No, not a chance, that’s political,’” Warren said in her interview with Kreisler. “I want to be pure. I want to be pristine. I don’t want to muddy what I do with political implications.”

But Synar persuaded Warren to join his team. It was a critical juncture. Big banks and credit-card companies were pushing Congress to raise the barriers for consumers to file for bankruptcy and harder for families to write off debt. Bill Clinton was president. He had run — much as Warren is running now — as a champion of the middle class, but early in his first term he began courting Wall Street. He didn’t want to fight the banks.

Warren flew back and forth from Boston to Washington and to cities where the commission held hearings. It was her political education, and the imbalance of influence she saw disturbed her. The banks and lenders paid people to go to the hearings, wrote campaign checks and employed an army of lobbyists. People who went bankrupt often didn’t want to draw attention to themselves, and by definition, they had no money to fight back.

By 1997, Warren had become a Democrat, but she was battling within the party as well as outside it. In particular, she clashed with Joe Biden, then a senator from Delaware. Biden’s tiny state, which allowed credit-card companies to charge any interest rate they chose beginning in 1981, would become home to half the national market. One giant lender, MBNA, contributed more than $200,000 to Biden’s campaigns over the years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Biden strongly supported a bill, a version of which was first introduced in 1998, to make it more expensive to file for bankruptcy and more difficult to leave behind debt. He was unpersuaded by Warren’s charts and graphs showing how the change would increase the financial burden on families. “I am so sick of this self-righteous sheen put on anybody who wants to tighten up bankruptcy,” Biden said during a Senate hearing in 2001.

The bankruptcy battles continued, and when Warren testified against the proposed changes to the bankruptcy code before the Senate in 2005, Biden called her argument “very compelling and mildly demagogic,” suggesting that her problem was really with the high interest rates that credit-card companies were allowed to charge. “But senator,” Warren answered, “if you are not going to fix that problem” — by capping interest rates — “you can’t take away the last shred of protection from these families” that access to bankruptcy offers. The bill passed two months later.

Biden’s team now argues that he stepped in to win “important concessions for middle-class families,” like prioritizing payments for child support and alimony ahead of other debt. When I asked Warren in June about Biden’s claim, she pursed her lips, looked out the window, paused for a long beat and said, “You may want to check the record on that.” The record shows that Warren’s focus throughout was on the plight of families who were going bankrupt and that Biden’s was on getting a bill through. He supported tweaking it to make it a little less harmful to those facing bankruptcy, and the changes allowed it to pass.

In the years since it became law, the bankruptcy bill has allowed credit-card companies to recover more money from families than they did before. That shift had two effects, Matthew Yglesias argued recently in Vox. As Biden hoped, borrowers over all benefited when the credit-card companies offered slightly lowered interest rates. But as Warren feared, the new law hit people reeling from medical emergencies and other unexpected setbacks. Blocked from filing for bankruptcy, they have remained worse off for years. And a major effort to narrow the path to bankruptcy may have an unintended effect, according to a 2019 working paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research, by making it harder for the country to recover from a financial crisis.

In 2001, a Harvard student named Jessica Pishko, an editor of The Harvard Women’s Law Journal, approached Warren about contributing to a special issue. She didn’t expect Warren to say yes. Students saw Warren as an example of female achievement but not as a professional feminist. “She didn’t write about anything that could seem girlie,” Pishko remembers. “She wasn’t your go-to for feminist issues, and she was from that era when you didn’t put pictures of your kids on your desk” to show that you were serious about your work. But Warren wanted to contribute. “She said: ‘I’m doing all this research on bankruptcy, and I want to talk about why that’s a women’s issue. Can I do that?’”

The paper Warren produced, “What Is a Women’s Issue?” was aggressive and heterodox. In it, she criticized the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund for singling out Biden for praise in its annual report because he championed the Violence Against Women Act, which made it easier to prosecute domestic abusers. Warren thought his support for that law did not compensate for his role in pushing through the bankruptcy legislation, which she believed hurt women far more. “Why isn’t Senator Biden in trouble with grass-roots women’s groups all over the country and with the millions of women whose lives will be directly affected by the legislation he sponsors?” she asked. The answer raised “a troubling specter of women exercising powerful political influence within a limited scope, such as rape laws or equal educational opportunity statutes.

Warren wanted feminism to be wider in scope and centered on economic injustice. She urged students to take business-law classes. “If few students interested in women’s issues train themselves in commercial areas, the effects of the commercial laws will not be diminished, but there will be few effective advocates around to influence those policy outcomes,” she wrote. “If women are to achieve true economic equality, a far more inclusive definition of a women’s issue must emerge.”

She challenged standard feminist thinking again when she published her first book for a lay audience (written with her daughter), “The Two-Income Trap,” in 2003. Warren argued that in the wake of the women’s movement of the 1970s, millions of mothers streamed into the workplace without increasing the financial security of their families. Her main point was that a family’s additional income, when a second parent went to work, was eaten up by the cost of housing, and by child care, education and health insurance.

Conservatives embraced her critique more enthusiastically than liberals. Warren even opposed universal day care for fear of “increasing the pressure” to send both parents to work. She has shifted on that point. The child-care proposal she announced this February puts funds into creating high-quality child care but doesn’t offer equivalent subsidies to parents who stay home with their children. Warren says she’s responding to the biggest needs she now sees. More and more families are squeezed by the cost of child care; not enough of it is high quality; the pay for providers is too low. Warren is framing child care as a collective good, like public schools or roads and bridges.

“The Two-Income Trap” got Warren onto “Dr. Phil,” giving her a taste of minor stardom and the appeal of a larger platform. When the financial crisis hit, she moved to Washington’s main stage. At the invitation of Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader at the time, Warren led the congressional oversight panel tasked with overseeing the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program that Congress created to save the financial system. In public hearings, Warren called out Timothy Geithner, Obama’s Treasury secretary, for focusing on bailing out banks rather than small businesses and homeowners. Through a spokeswoman, Geithner declined to comment for this article. In his memoir, he called the oversight hearings “more like made-for-YouTube inquisitions than serious inquiries.”

But Warren could see the value of the viral video clip. In 2009, Jon Stewart invited her on “The Daily Show.” After throwing up from nerves backstage, she went on air and got a little lost in the weeds — repeating the abbreviation P.P.I.P. (the Public-Private Investment Program) and at first forgetting what it stood for. She felt as though she blew her opportunity to speak to millions of viewers. Stewart brought her back after the break for five more minutes, and she performed well, clearly explaining how the country forgot the lessons of the Great Depression and the dangers of deregulation. “We start pulling the threads out of the regulatory fabric,” Warren said. She listed the upheavals that followed — the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and 1990s, the collapse of the giant hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management in 1998 and the Enron scandal a few years later. “And what is our repeated response?” Warren said. “We just keep pulling the threads.” Now that the government was trying to save the whole economy from falling off the cliff, there were two choices: “We’re going to decide, basically: Hey, we don’t need regulation. You know, it’s fine, boom and bust, boom and bust, boom and bust, and good luck with your 401(k). Or alternatively, we’re going to say, You know, we’re going to put in some smart regulations ... and what we’re going to have, going forward, is we’re going to have stability and some real prosperity for ordinary folks.”

Stewart leaned forward and told Warren she had made him feel better than he had in months. “I don’t know what it is that you just did right there, but for a second that was like financial chicken soup for me,” he said.

“That moment changed my life,” Warren later said. Stewart kept inviting her back. In 2010, Congress overhauled and tightened financial regulation with the Dodd-Frank Act. In the push for its passage, Warren found that she had the leverage to persuade Democratic leaders to create a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Its job is to safeguard people from malfunctioning financial products (like predatory loans), much as the government protects them from — to borrow Warren’s favorite analogy — toasters that burst into flames. Warren spent a year setting up the C.F.P.B. When Obama chose Richard Cordray over her as the first director because he had an easier path to Senate confirmation, progressives were furious.

Warren was an unusual political phenomenon by then: a policy wonk who was also a force and a symbol. In 2012, she was the natural choice for Democrats recruiting a candidate to run against Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts, a Republican who had slipped into office, after Ted Kennedy’s death, against a weak opponent. Warren had another viral moment when a supporter released a homemade video of her speaking to a group in Andover. “You built a factory out there?” Warren said, defending raising taxes on the wealthy. “Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.” Brown called Warren “anti-free enterprise,” and Obama, running for re-election, distanced himself in an ad shot from the White House (“Of course Americans build their own businesses,” he said). But Warren’s pitch succeeded. She came from behind in the race against Brown and won with nearly 54 percent of the vote.

Voters of color could determine the results of the 2020 presidential election. In the primaries, African-Americans constitute a large share of Democrats in the early-voting state of South Carolina and on Super Tuesday, when many other states vote. In the general election, the path to the presidency for a Democrat will depend in part on turning out large numbers of people of color in Southern states (North Carolina, Virginia, possibly Florida) and also in the Rust Belt, where the post-Obama dip in turnout among African-Americans contributed to Hillary Clinton’s squeaker losses in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Warren has work to do to persuade people of color to support her. In the last couple of Democratic primaries, these voters started out favoring candidates who they thought would be most likely to win, not those who were the most liberal. Black voters backed Hillary Clinton in 2008 until they were sure Barack Obama had enough support to beat her, and in 2016 they stuck with her over Bernie Sanders. This time, they have black candidates — Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Wayne Messam — to choose from. And voters of color may be skeptical of Warren’s vision of class solidarity transcending racial division. As it turned out, Warren’s case that most white people voted for Trump because of economic distress, and “despite the hate,” as she said right after the election, didn’t really hold up. A study published last year found that among white voters, perceived racial or global threats explained their shift toward Trump better than financial concerns did. What does that say about the chances of winning as a liberal who tries to take the racism out of populism?

When Warren makes the case about what needs to change in America by leaning on the period from 1935 to 1980, she’s talking about a time of greater economic equality — but also a period when people of color were excluded from the benefits of government policies that buoyed the white middle class. In a video announcing that she was exploring a presidential bid, Warren acknowledged that history by saying that families of color today face “a path made even harder by generations of discrimination.” For example, the federal agency created during the New Deal drew red lines around mostly black neighborhoods on maps to deny mortgage loans to people who lived in them.

Warren spoke about this problem years before she went into politics. Redlining contributed to the racial wealth gap, and that had consequences Warren saw in her bankruptcy studies — black families were more vulnerable to financial collapse. Their vulnerability was further heightened by subprime and predatory lending. In “The Two-Income Trap,” Warren called these kinds of loans “legally sanctioned corporate plans to steal from minorities.”

In March, Warren took a three-day trip to the South. She started on a Sunday afternoon, with a town hall — one of 101 she has done across the country — at a high school in a mostly black neighborhood in Memphis. It’s her format of choice; the questions she fields help sharpen her message. The local politicians who showed up that day were African-American, but most of the crowd was white.

The next morning, Warren drove to the Mississippi Delta. Her husband, Mann, was on spring break from teaching and along for the trip. Warren’s staff welcomes his presence because Warren loves having him with her and because he’s willing to chat up voters (who often call him “Mr. Warren”). In the small town of Cleveland, Miss., Warren sprang out of her black minivan in the parking lot of a church to shake the hand of an African-American state senator, Willie Simmons. They were meeting for the first time: He had agreed to take her on a walking tour after her campaign got in touch and said she wanted to learn about housing in the Delta.

Simmons and Warren set off down a block of modest ranch houses, some freshly painted, others peeling, preceded by TV crews and trailed by the rest of the press as her aides darted in to keep us out of the shot. The scrum made conversation stagy, but Simmons gradually eased into answering Warren’s questions. He pointed out cracks in the foundations of some houses; the lack of money to repair old buildings was a problem in the Delta. They stopped at a vacant lot. The neighbors wanted to turn it into a playground, but there was no money for that either.

Warren nodded and then took a stab at communicating her ideas to the local viewers who might catch a few of her words that night. She hit the highlights of the affordable housing bill she released in the Senate months earlier — 3.2 million new homes over 10 years, an increase in supply that Moody’s estimated would reduce projected rents by 10 percent. When the tour ended, Simmons told the assembled reporters that he didn’t know whom he would support for president, but Warren got points for showing up and being easy to talk to — “touchable,” he said.

That night, Warren did a CNN town hall at Jackson State University, the third historically black college she has visited this year. Warren moved toward the audience at the first opportunity, walking past the chair placed for her onstage. She laid out the basics of her housing bill, stressing that it addressed the effects of discrimination. “Not just a passive discrimination,” Warren said. “Realize that into the 1960s in America, the federal government was subsidizing the purchase of homes for white families and discriminating against black families.” Her bill included funds to help people from redlined areas, or who had been harmed by subprime loans, buy houses. The audience applauded.

Warren also said that night that she supported a “national full-blown conversation” about reparations for slavery and Jim Crow. She saw this as a necessary response to the stark wealth gap between black and white families. “Today in America — because of housing discrimination, because of employment discrimination — we live in a world where the average white family has $100 and the average black family has about $5.” Several Democratic candidates have said they support a commission to study reparations. Ta-Nehisi Coates, author of the influential 2014 Atlantic article “The Case for Reparations,” said in a recent interview with The New Yorker that Warren was the candidate whose commitment seemed real because she had asked him to talk with her about his article when it came out years ago. “She was deeply serious,” Coates said.

Warren is often serious and doesn’t hesitate to convey her moral outrage. “I’ll own it,” she told me about her anger. She talked about women expressing to her their distress about sexual harassment and assault. “Well, yeah,” Warren said. “No kidding that a woman might be angry about that. Women have a right to be angry about being treated badly.”

Trump gets angry all the time; whether a woman can do the same and win remains a question. Warren’s campaign is simultaneously working in another register. On Twitter, it has been posting videos of Warren calling donors who have given as little as $3. They can’t believe it’s her. When the comedian and actress Ashley Nicole Black tweeted, “Do you think Elizabeth Warren has a plan to fix my love life?” Warren tweeted back and then called Black, who finished the exchange with a fan-girl note: “Guess who’s crying and shaking and just talked to Elizabeth Warren on the phone?!?!? We have a plan to get my mom grandkids, it’s very comprehensive, and it does involve raising taxes on billionaires.”

After Trump’s election, Warren and Sanders said that if Trump followed through on his promise to rebuild the economy for workers and their families, they would help. If Trump had championed labor over corporations, he could have scrambled American politics by creating new alliances. But that version of his presidency didn’t come to pass. Instead, by waging trade wars that hurt farm states and manufacturing regions more than the rest of the country, Trump has punished his base economically (even if they take satisfaction in his irreverence and his judicial appointments).

Warren has been speaking to those voters. In June, she put out an “economic patriotism” plan filled with ideas about helping American industries. By stepping into the vacuum for economic populism the president has left, Warren forced a reckoning on Fox News, Trump’s safe space on TV, from the host Tucker Carlson. Usually a Trump loyalist, he has recently styled himself a voice for the white working class.

Carlson opened his show by using more than two minutes of airtime to quote Warren’s analysis of how giant American companies are abandoning American workers. Carlson has warned that immigrants make the country “poorer and dirtier” and laced his show with racism, but now he told his mostly Republican viewers: “Ask yourself, what part of the statement you just heard did you disagree with?” He continued, “Here’s the depressing part: Nobody you voted for said that or would ever say it.” The next day, a new conservative Never Trump website called The Bulwark ran a long and respectful essay called “Why Elizabeth Warren Matters.”

A month earlier in Mingo County, W.Va., where more than 80 percent of voters cast a ballot for Trump, Warren went to a local fire station to talk about her plan for addressing the opioid crisis. It’s big: She wants to spend $100 billion over 10 years, including $50 million annually for West Virginia, the state with the highest rate of deaths from drug overdoses. In Trump’s latest budget, he has requested an increase of $1.5 billion to respond directly to the epidemic. Against a backdrop of firefighters’ coats hanging in cinder-block cubbies, Warren moved among a crowd of about 150. Many hands went up when she asked who knew someone struggling with opioids. She brought up the role of “corporations that made big money off getting people addicted and keeping them addicted.” People with “Make America Great Again” stickers nodded and clapped, according to Politico.

If Warren competes for rural voters in the general election (if not to win a red state then to peel off enough of them to make a difference in a purple one), her strong support for abortion rights and gun control will stand in her way. Lately, she has framed her argument for keeping abortion clinics open in economic terms, too. “Women of means will still have access to abortions,” she said at a town hall on MSNBC hosted by Chris Hayes of the effects of new state laws aimed at closing clinics. “Who won’t will be poor women, will be working women, will be women who can’t afford to take off three days from work, will be very young women.” She finished by saying, “We do not pass laws that take away that freedom from the women who are most vulnerable.”

Biden and Sanders have been polling better with non-college-educated white voters than Warren has. David Axelrod, the former Obama strategist and political commentator, thinks that even if her ideas resonate, she has yet to master the challenge of communicating with this group. “She’s lecturing,” he said. “There’s a lot of resistance, because people feel like she’s talking down to them.”

Warren didn’t sound to me like a law professor on the trail, but she did sound like a teacher. Trying to educate people isn’t the easiest way to connect with them. “Maybe she could bring it down a level,” Lola Sewell, a community organizer in Selma, Ala., suggested. “A lot of us aren’t involved with Wall Street and those places.”

Warren may also confront a double bind for professional women: To command respect, they have to prove that they’re experts, but once they do, they’re often seen as less likable. At one point, I asked Warren whether there was anything good about running for president as a woman. “It is what it is,” she said.

When I first talked with Warren in February, when her poll numbers were low, I wondered whether she was content with simply forcing Democratic candidates to engage with her ideas. During the 2016 primaries, when Warren did not endorse Sanders, she wanted influence over Hillary Clinton’s economic appointments should she win the presidency. Cleaving the Democratic administration from Wall Street — that was enough at the time. She could make a similar decision in 2020 or try to get her own appointment. If Warren became Treasury secretary, she could resuscitate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Trump has worked to declaw, and tip all kinds of decisions away from banks and toward the families who come to her town halls and tell her about the loans they can’t pay.

By mid-June, however, when I went to Washington to talk to Warren for the last time, she was very much in the race. New polls showed her in second place in California and Nevada. She had more to lose, and perhaps as a result, her answers were more scripted, more like her speeches.

Warren, like everyone in the race, has yet to prove that she has the political skills and broad-enough support to become president. But a parallel from another country suggests that perhaps bearing down on policy is the best strategy against right-wing populism. Luigi Zingales, the University of Chicago economist, comes from Italy, and he feared Trump’s rise back in 2011, having watched the ascension of Silvio Berlusconi, the corrupt billionaire tycoon who was elected prime minister of Italy in the 2000s as a right-wing populist. After Trump’s victory in 2016, Zingales pointed out in a New York Times Op-Ed that the two candidates who defeated Berlusconi treated him as “an ordinary opponent,” focusing on policy issues rather than his character. “The Democratic Party should learn this lesson,” Zingales wrote. He now thinks that Warren is positioned to mount that kind of challenge. “I think so,” he said, “if she does not fall for his provocations.”

Warren and I met in her Washington apartment. The floor at the entrance had been damaged by a leak in the building, and the vacuum cleaner was standing next to the kitchen counter. I said I was a bit relieved by the slight disarray because her house in Cambridge was so supremely uncluttered, and she burst out laughing. She sat on the couch as we spoke about the indignities to come, the way in which her opponents — Biden, Trump, who knew who else — would try to make her unrecognizable to herself. What would she do about that? Warren leaned back and stretched her feet out, comfortable in gray wool socks. “The answer is, we’ve got time,” she said. “I’ll just keep talking to people — I like talking to people.”

Emily Bazelon is a staff writer for the magazine and the author of “Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration.”

1 note · View note

stricklandwitch · 5 years ago

Text

~ Trigger Warning: Labor, Birth, Snippy Supernaturals. ~

~~~~~~~

The blonde had been up late. She had been trying to get everything in the nursery done before she had to reluctantly follow someone’s orders to relax. The room was perfect so far. Earlier on in the week, Persephone and Harper painted the nursery and TJ’s room. The nursery was reminiscent of a beautiful sunset which perfectly matched TJ’s warm yellow room. The hybrid was in the middle of arranging all the furniture in the room once again that day when she felt a cramp radiate through her stomach. She groaned quietly in pain and breathed heavily for a minute before the pain went away. Ten minutes passed by before the pain came back followed by a warm trickling liquid rolling down her thighs. Seph quickly went into action and called the hospital to let them know she was on her way then called Harper to meet her at the hospital. The blonde quickly grabbed her small suitcase then got TJ ready. She placed the child in his old carrier then grabbed the second one and off to the hospital they went.

Persephone sat up in her hospital bed, the contractions getting closer together. The blonde shuddered in pain as her nails dug into the fabric of the bed. She didn’t remember TJ’s birth hurting this much, and she read labor with twins would be similar to labor with a single. She didn’t understand why there was so much pain. The blonde felt a masculine hand wrap around hers. She looked up to see Abel, and her lips curled up into a tiny tearful smile. “Abel. You’re here.”

The male lifted her hand up to his lips and pressed a gentle kiss to the back of her hand. “Of course, love. I’ll always be here.” His other hand went up to her head and his fingers lovingly ran through her hair. “What can I do to help? Where’s TJ?”

The blonde took a deep breath. “The nurse went to get the doctor to see how far along I am.” She squeezed his hand as the pain intensified. “TJ is with Harper in the lobby. She offered to stay out there with him till Jeremy and Annie got here.”

The mention of Harper’s name had the vampire’s brow raising, but he didn’t ask any questions. Instead, he nodded and replied. “Alright. Is there anything I can get you? A cold cloth? Ice chips?”

Seph shook her head. “No. Just please stay. With me. Please.” The look on the hybrid’s face was enough for him, so the male moved closer to her bed and stayed beside her.

Finally, after a couple of minutes, the doctor came in. “Hello, Persephone. Let’s see how far we are now.” The female went over to the fetal monitor and moved it closer to Persephone. She put two electrodes on the hybrid’s rounded stomach. The doctor finally grabbed the stool and rolled it in front of the girl. Persephone laid back and put her feet up in the stirrups. The doctor put her gloves on and moved one of her gloved hands to check the blonde’s dilation. Persephone could see the doctor look at the fetal monitor in concern. And that scared the blonde more.

“Doctor Byers… What’s wrong?”

The doctor rolled back. “Well, Ms. Strickland,” she started as she took her gloves off, “you’re at full dilation and effacement, but neither baby is progressing.” The female went back over to the monitor and studied for a moment. “And I’m worried about Baby A. Her heart rate is very slow.”

Seph looked up at Abel then looked back to the doctor. “Will she be okay? What should we do? I just want them out safely,” she said in a panicked tone.

Dr. Byers turned back to the hybrid. “I want that, too, Persephone. The safest way to get them out is a C-section. It’s fairly common in births with multiples. The risks are very low, and mother and babies should be okay.”

The blonde stayed silent for a moment before finally nodding. “Okay. Let’s have a C-section.”

The doctor gave Seph a warm and hopeful smile. “I will get an OR ready. A nurse will be in shortly to prep you. See you in there.”

Seph looked up at Abel as the doctor left. But he gave her a reassuring smile. “You’ll be fine, my love. I’ll be in the lobby waiting for you.” The vampire let his thumb stroke over the back of her hand, and he leaned down and placed a kiss on her forehead. The nurse came in then with sickly sweet smile on her face. The couple stayed quiet just sharing a look as the nurse explained what was going to happen to her and assuring her that she and the babies would be safe. Persephone said a quick goodbye to Abel before being wheeled out of the room.

Abel went back out to the waiting room. His attention was immediately drawn to the little boy he was fond of. But he was in the arms of a tall brunette. ‘Ah, this must be the Harper Persy was talking about,’ he thought to himself. The brunette was playing a game with TJ, probably trying to distract him from wondering where his mother is. With a smile on his face, Abel went over to the two. “Oh, my goodness, TJ, you’ve gotten so big. Hi, buddy.” He went to pick the child up, but Harper pulled the child onto her lap to protect him.

The brunette gave him a glare. “I don’t know who the hell you think you are.”

Jeremy piped up from where he was sitting with Annie. “This is Abel, the love of our dearest Persephone’s life. Nice to see you again, Tylan.”

The vampire gave the younger Strickland a look. “Jeremy. A pleasure as always.” His attention turned back to the female and the child. TJ had a large grin on his tiny face and his arms were stretched out, so Abel leaned down and took the child from Harper and bounced him around slightly. “Hello, little love. How you doing? I missed you so much, bud,” Abel cooed to the child. He then looked to Harper and asked, “And who might you be?”

Jeremy opened his mouth to answer, but Harper’s glare and Annie’s smack to his arm made him quiet again. The brunette reached up to TJ and patted his little hand before answering. “Harper. Persephone’s best friend.”

“And lady love,” Jeremy muttered under his breath. He gave a shrug to Harper when her shape gaze turned to him once again. “Just saying.”

Abel raised his brow. “It seems like I have missed a lot.”

Harper rolled her eyes. “Yeah, at least three months’ worth.” Persephone had told Harper about Abel and their relationship shortly after the girls reunited.

Abel’s face went stoic, trying not to get riled up especially with TJ in his arms. “Right. And as Percy’s supposed best friend, where were you in the asylum? ��Because I don’t remember seeing you.”

An irritated huff came from the hybrid’s mouth. “I looked for her. For a long time. And when I wasn’t able to find her, I just assumed that she didn’t want to be around me anymore. And had I been in that asylum with her, I would have done a better job at being there for her unlike other people she loves.”

A groan interrupted the two. “Just because she’s my sister doesn’t mean I have to interfere in her affairs. I didn’t even know about her till a year ago.”

Harper let out a growl at the vampire. “I wasn’t talking about you, dipshit.”

Jeremy put his hand over his heart, feigning a hurt look. “Ouch, sister-in-law. That hurt.”

An amused look appeared on Abel’s face. “Had she not sent me away, I would have protected her in there. I love her, but I also understood that she needed space.”

The hybrid turned back to Abel and took a menacing step towards him. “And after the asylum? When she needed someone? Where were you?”

“Being poisoned and having someone heal me so I didn’t die,” the vampire deadpanned. His look turned towards TJ when he started to babble. “That’s right, buddy.”

Harper crossed her arms. “That’s no excuse.” She gave the child a small smile before looking back to the vampire in front of her. “I have been there for her every time she has needed me. When she needed to just cry or when she felt scared or hopeless. I was there when she needed someone beside her so she could sleep. I’m her person.”

“And I very much appreciate that, but I’m here now, so all that isn’t needed,” he told her.

They both felt a hand on their shoulders. Both Harper and Abel peered down to see Annie between them. The angel was giving them a stern look. “Let’s calm down, okay? We’re all here for Persephone and the children.” She turned to give Jeremy a look when he muttered, “Speak for yourself,” under his breath. “How about we take a breather, alright?”

A clearing of someone’s throat broke the tension between all of them. A nurse had joined them. “Ms. Snow? Ms. Strickland is requesting your presence in her room.”

Harper went over to the nurse. “Is she alright? The twins?”

The nurse nodded. “Yes, Ms. Strickland is fine. I think it’s just nerves, but she wanted a family member to be with her.” A warm smile took over Harper’s face as the nurse escorted her back through the double doors to the room Persephone was in.

The hybrid was sedated enough to not feel anything. Except the nerves in her stomach going haywire. She wanted someone to be in the room with her, and the only person she wanted at the moment was Harper. When Harper came into the room, tears pooled in the blonde’s eyes. “Harper!”

The brunette walked over to her and kissed her cheek. “Hi, Seph. You doing okay?”

The blonde nodded as she sniffled. “I’m a lot better now that you’re here.” The blonde let out a deep breath. “Okay, I’m ready.” She lifted her hand up from the cover and grasped Harper’s hand.

The doctor explained everything she was doing as she moved the blade across the hybrid’s stomach. The nurse helping Dr. Byers stretched the skin near the incision out. Dr. Byers cut through layers of fat and tissue until she saw the amniotic sac. As the nurse held open the incision site, the doctor cut carefully and gently across the top of the sac. Dr. Byers smiled when she saw the first baby. “Alright, Ms. Strickland. First baby.” The two hybrids shared a smile before the doctor proceeded. The nurse put the protractor in, and the doctor carefully got the first baby out.

Persephone frowned when she didn’t hear her child cry. “What’s wrong? Why isn’t she crying?” Her head turned to the side with a panicked look on her face as another doctor took the baby and placed her in a ventilator.

“It’s alright, Persephone. Your little girl wasn’t breathing, but Doctor Lewis is helping her right now. We’re onto baby number two,” the doctor replied. Harper glanced down at Persephone and gave her hand a reassuring squeeze. Dr. Byers worked quickly and carefully took the second baby out. The little girl gave a mighty cry which was followed by her sister as the ventilator helped her breath.

Persephone choked back sob as a smile took over her face. “My two girls. They’re okay.”

Harper leaned down and placed a kiss on the blonde’s forehead. “Yeah, they’re here.

The blonde couldn’t keep her eyes off her two new babies as the doctor delivered her placenta and stitched her back up. Once she was wheeled back to her room, all she wanted was to be with her two girls.

As Persephone and Harper talked about names, the others waiting in the lobby came strolling into her room. Abel quickly came over to the hybrid and kissed her cheek then Annie went over and gave her a hug.

“Alright, where are they?” Jeremy asked.

Seph rolled her eyes as a chuckle escaped her. “The girls are in the NICU. Their lungs needed a little extra help, but I’ll be able to take them home in a few days.”

The angel beamed with glee. “So, what did you decide to name them?”

The blonde glanced up to Harper with a smile. “Thalia Annabelle and Roxanne Jessa Strickland.”

#thecrossingroleplay #solos

0 notes

samanthasroberts · 6 years ago

Text

GOP delays House vote on ‘compromise’ immigration bill

Video

GOP delays House vote on ‘compromise’ immigration bill

Republicans regroup after first immigration bill is voted down in the House; reaction and analysis on ‘The Five.’

This is a rush transcript from “The Five,” June 21, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I’m Dana Perino along with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Juan Williams, Jesse Watters, and Greg Gutfeld. It’s 5 o’clock in New York City, and this is “The Five.”

Several big developments on immigration, house lawmakers rejecting a conservative bill introduced by house judiciary committee chairman Bob Goodlatte. As for what’s being called the compromise bill drafted by the Republican leadership, the vote on that is being delayed until tomorrow to try to shore up more support. Over at the White House, President Trump is continuing to going after Democrats after ending the controversial practice of separating migrant families.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: My administration is also acting swiftly to address the illegal immigration crisis on the southern border, loopholes in our immigration laws all supported by extremist open border Democrats. People are suffering because of the Democrats. So, we’ve created and they’ve created and they’ve let it happen, a massive child smuggling industry. The worse everything looks, they think the better they’re going to do with respect to the blue wave, which is turning out frankly to be a red wave if you look at the poll. The Democrats are causing tremendous damage and destruction and lives by not doing something about this. And they know that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: The president reiterating that he doesn’t want to separate children from their parents but is still sticking by his zero tolerance policy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If we took zero tolerance away, you would be overrun. You’d have millions of people pouring through our border. If you took zero tolerance away, everybody would come right now. They’d be getting their little belongings, unfortunately, and they would be heading up. You would be — you would have a run on this country the likes of which nobody has ever seen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: And First Lady Melania Trump making a surprise visit to a detention center housing migrant children along the border in Texas. But her fashion choice appears to be overshadowing a trip. The first lady wearing a jacket bearing the words, I really don’t care, do you? A spokesperson responding to media speculation saying it’s a jacket. There was no hidden message. Having lived through mission accomplished for many years, I am sympathetic with the White House. Obviously, was not intended to show any sort of message. But back to the important thing at hand. Kimberly, the Republicans said we don’t have enough support for either of these bills. We have to stop and try to figure out a way to do that. There’s going to be a conference. I think they’re meeting right now behind closed doors. This is the third behind closed doors meeting they have had on this week. What do you think will happen and will that vote get enough — that vote get enough support tomorrow?

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: I think, look, obviously, I’m for behind closed doors meeting. Hopefully they’re working on it and they’re building some, you know, coalition there. Getting some consensus to move. Obviously, they can tell that the American people want some resolution of this. The president would like something to come forward. However, I think it might be a little bit of a struggle because there is some pretty, you know, differing opinions and viewpoints and he also has his base he’s thinking about. He has, obviously, this issue which is on a tremendous amount of political attention. You’ve got midterm elections coming up. You know he campaigned on getting things done and making sure that he was going to make positive changes. He’s somebody who is very good at getting deals done. So, you know, I’m optimistic and that he’s going to get involved in this and try very hard to push on it. He’s got to get the votes. Right now they don’t have them, but it doesn’t mean that they won’t get them. And as for the fashion statement, I mean, it’s a jacket. Let’s relax.

PERINO: Jesse, the fact that the conservative bill passed today. The president said he supported both bills. But now that that one has failed, if it’s possible if the president said I am for this bill, I will give you cover on this bill, you should vote for it, that it could pass?

JESSE WATTERS, CO-HOST: The president can only do so much with the house. I mean, the dirty little secret is the open borders, cheap labors, big business lobby has a lot of power over Republicans. And we’re not going to get any help from the Democrats at all. So, there’s just no consensus and there’s nothing that’s ever going to be done on immigration. I don’t even think after the midterms it’s ever going to get done. And the Democrats when they had a super majority under Barack Obama they did nothing on immigration. The Democrats just want to blame Republicans for the issue and score political point. But I don’t think this whole separating families thing is a big winner for the Democrats. I think they’ve overplayed their hands. They’ve exposed themselves as complete open borders advocates. The president completely shut the deal down. He’s keeping families together. Now they’re complaining that they’re abusing children. Melania goes down and now they’re complaining about the jacket. You’re never going to get a win on this issue. I think like a normal issue like gas prices, healthcare, jobs, those are the things that actually affect the lives of everyday Americans. Yes, migrant families will tug at your heart strings and makes you feel sad and you want to find a solution, but it’s not going to be a driving issue for regular voters in the midterm elections.

PERINO: And, Greg, I had Congressman Burgess on the 2 o’clock show today.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Good for you.

PERINO: I’m getting to a good point. He’s part of the — he’s a Texas congressman.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

PERINO: . a doctor, a conservative guy, he wanted both bills to pass. He decided to vote for them. And he’s on something called the immigration reform caucus. And I said, in the caucus do you actually have Democrats that are willing to come to the table on this? And he said no. That he has tried talking to them and that he can’t get anywhere. And he does think that they just want to be obstructionist.

Gregg: Yeah, I don’t think it’s about the kids. It’s always going to be about Trump. This is about 2016, and it’s about 2018 and 2020. It’s about elections. We know that what Trump does will never be enough. It will be seen as even less humane than what was before. So, the liberal opinion is this. If you split up families you’re a Nazi, whether the family is pretend or not you’re a Nazi. But if you keep them together you’re worse than a Nazi. So they actually have no solution. Liberals become paralyzed when faced with having to solve a problem. And the media puts some notion before facts so they just contribute to it.

So now you’re having critics of Trump actually arguing against their own wishes. So, now, OK, we’re going to keep the families together, or the pseudo families together, or whatever, you should be happy that they’re now detained. Now that’s awful. I have to give credit to CNN because I always bash CNN. But I said yesterday that a lot of these problems existed under Obama and they were really, really bad problems, but the media never talks about it. Finally, I think it was senator — I can’t remember the name of the senator — Baldwin? But, Brook Baldwin asked a very simple question. Can we throw that?

PERINO: Yes, sure, absolutely.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNINDENTIFIED FEMALE: Here’s a question for Democrats. So many people in this country are certainly outraged by the K-do’s, and the thermal blankets, and the facilities housing these kids, you know. They were all there in 2014 under President Obama. And my question to you, Senator Baldwin, is did you speak up against them then?

SEN. TAMMY BALDWIN (D), WISONSIN: You know, on this issue that we get into a moment where we’re making progress and then when it stalls, we turn around. I think we all need to continue to be focused on it and press it through.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: So she just exposed how political this is.

WATTERS: Was that English? I didn’t understand a word she said.

GUTFELD: Yeah, yeah. They didn’t care before.

PERINO: And, actually — and before, Juan, Chuck Schumer has voted for wall funding before. And a lot of the money that is being talked about right now in the current bill that’s under consideration is $25 billion, so not necessary for all new wall. A lot of it is to shore up and to approve parts of the wall that we already have. But he says now that he can’t support it.

JUAN WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Right. And remember, there was a deal between Democrats and the president. The president was one who backed out of that deal a long time ago. So, I think, to the contrary, what Greg was saying, I think you have a situation where you have evidence here, Republicans have the majority in the house, Republicans have the majority in the senate, and what you have is fights among Republicans that are continuing to paralyze their ability to pass any legislation. I think that’s what we’re seeing writ large today. Republicans can’t get it together and they have people literally fighting on the house floor. Congressman Mark Meadow of the freedom caucus going face-to-face, pointing, moving away, coming back to continue to fight with speaker.

PERINO: He said he was just being passionate.

WILLIAMS: Yeah, right. So, what you have here is a situation where the president, I think, contrary to what I’m hearing here is, the president likes the idea of saying it’s the Democrats’ fault. Remember, the president said this is the law. I can’t do anything about it. It’s up to the congress. Then he turns tail and signs executive order and, guess what, undoes it.

PERINO: But then.

(CROSSTALK)

WATTERS: Because you know how soft executive orders are because everything Obama did was executive orders, and then Trump just got rid of them. That’s why you have congress take care of immigration law.

WILLIAMS: If you don’t let me talk I guess you won’t have a show. But I’m just saying you have the president as the one who’ve said, oh, I can’t do anything about it. It’s up to them. And he’s the one who literally changes course and has to do it. He’s back as we’ve saw last night in Minnesota to try to demonize not only the Democrats but the immigrants again. He said I’m strong. I’m going to enforce these borders. These people will run over the border. What is he talking about? Does anybody say, hey, Mr. President, stop lying?

PERINO: Well, here’s the thing, Kimberly, that regardless of what happens on this particular bill tomorrow it still has to pass the senate.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

PERINO: And this issue is not going away. It fuels a lot of passion and people feel really strongly about it on all sides. What do you think is the strategy to try to actually solve the problem and not deal with the politics of this? Both sides are playing it.

GUILFOYLE: Of course they are, right? That’s an honest statement and a reflection of what’s going on. But, nevertheless, I do believe that the president does want to do something about this. He likes to see things and say there’s a problem here, I’m going to be the guy who’s going to fix it. So, would he like congress to be able to act? Yes. So it’s long lasting change from a legislative perspective versus an executive order like Jesse points out that can be undone? Yes. He’s at a rally. He’s not demonizing anybody. I mean, let’s not sugar coat the issue. You’re not supposed to break the law and come into the country illegally. Nevertheless, we have to deal with this issue and with children coming over in a compassionate way but still enforce the law. This nation, this country has a right to have its laws upheld and have them observed, and there’s policies and procedures in place. We welcome immigrants. All of us have background as immigrants, and family members that have come over here, great. God bless, OK? We embrace people. This is a country that is very humanitarian. This is a president who cares deeply about families and about children. He’s proved that over and over again. Give him the opportunity to fix it.

PERINO: The President of the United States, commander-in-chief, solemn responsibility is protection of the country.

WILLIAMS: Yeah. But he’s not supposed to go around calling people an infestation, animals, criminals, rapists.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Peter Fonda, yesterday, did you, Juan. You thought Peter Fonda just misused some words.

WILLIAMS: No, no. You’re the one that likes to say we should — don’t take Trump’s word so seriously. Look at his actions here, Greg. His actions are just horrific. And that’s why Americans are saying.

GUILFOYLE: He just fixed the issue. He just fixed the issue.

GUTFELD: Well, now they’re putting together. They’re being detained together, but yet that’s horrific. You know what’s interesting, the irony here, is that it took Donald Trump for these hypocrites to finally act or pretend to act. If they had another four years of a liberal president, or a Democrat, the scandals of unaccompanied minors would have continued. Just the way it did under Obama. But now they care. Why? Because there’s a Republican. And it wouldn’t matter if it’s Trump. If it was Marco Rubio, if it was Jeb Bush, they’d still be demonizing and it’s not the same. Both sides are not politicizing it. It’s on the same level. It is so out of proportion on the left’s side because they have ignored the suffering of children for so long until now. But they don’t care about Chicago. They care about 2,000 kids. We care about 2,000 kids. We care about all the kids. Pro-lifers care about all the kids, Juan, can you shake your head.

WILLIAMS: No, because it’s so — so absurd. You know what you have here.

GUTFELD: Donate to Planned Parenthood.

WILLIAMS: You have a situation here where the president is the one who put in place the policy. First, it was the dreamers. Remember he undid the dreamers. Then he changed the policy with regard to separating children from parents. And you act like, oh, it’s the Democrats. These are actions taken by President Trump.

GUTFELD: Read the Washington Post piece from 2016.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Read the Washington Post from 2016 about the children that were abused that were let in under Obama.

(CROSSTALK)

WATTERS: You know what the policy is that started? It’s catch and release, Juan. That’s what attracts all of this migration. And when you get rid of catch and release, you have a zero tolerance policy.

WILLIAMS: This is like Trump saying everybody is going to rush over the border.

WATTERS: If you build a wall and you don’t do the catch and release, then that’s why have you border security.

GUTFELD: Senator Rob Portman exposed this in 2016.

WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Juan, if the Democrats take over Congress, are they going to be able to solve this issue?

WILLIAMS: I hope so. Because one of the realities here.

GUILFOYLE: Well, they didn’t do it before when they had control of both. They didn’t do anything after Obama.

WILLIAMS: What are you talking about? It was under President Bush in ’06 that Republicans defeated an attempt at comprehensive immigration reform.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, no.

(CROSSTALK)

WATTERS: Bottom line, you don’t want border security. Bottom line.

GUTFELD: It doesn’t matter.

WATTERS: You want open borders, Juan, just admit it.

WILLIAMS: You know what? I can say horrible things about you.

WATTERS: That’s not horrible, that’s a policy difference.

WILLIAMS: That’s not true.

WATTERS: We believe in border security.

WILLIAMS: . that’s why I say it’s horrible.

WATTERS: . you don’t.

WILLIAMS: Here’s the reality. Most people who come.

WATTERS: That’s the reality.

WILLIAMS: . illegally are not crossing any border by foot. They’re flying.

WATTERS: Juan, if you want border security, you have the TSA at the airport, but you want open border on the south makes no sense.

WILLIAMS: I don’t want any open border. I’m just telling you this is all about political.

GUTFELD: This is great TV. Keep it going. People love this stuff.

PERINO: Wait. All right. President Trump slams Democratic elitism, his fiery remarks, a little but even more than that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Was that a man or a woman because he needs a haircut more than I do. I couldn’t tell. He needs a haircut.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: That’s our Donald. Last night’s rally was nothing new, the crowd loved him. The people who already hate him will just hate him more. And the media pats itself on the head for not covering it while secretly watching Fox News. Too bad, they totally missed an opportunity to call him Hitler.

So, for the bias-impaired here’s news: Trump just reduced the risk of nuclear war. He also got remains of 200 U.S. soldiers back from North Korea just a week after the issue was raised. He’s bringing in record-low unemployment, helping women and minorities most. He’s addressed trade imbalances as our GDP climbs higher.

So, if he’s monster, he might be the worst monster ever — meaning, not a monster at all. That’s why optimism is high: 95 percent of manufacturers have a positive company outlook. It’s good news. Even if the elites deny it. And about those elites:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Do you ever notice they always call the other side, and they do this — the elite. The elite. Why are they elite? I have a much better apartment than they do.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: I’m smarter than they are. I’m richer than they are. I became president and they didn’t.

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: And I’m representing the greatest, smartest, most loyal, best people on earth: the deplorables. Remember that?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: That’s key. Now bragging is never appealing, but he’s not wrong that by wealth he’s an elitist, yet, he’s still embraced by working classes. No wonder the De Niro’s, the Madonna’s, the Depp’s, the Fonda’s all unravel. Trump is richer than them all, but closer to the street than they are. How can that be? The answer is he makes promises and fights to keep them. And besides, for you deplorables at the rally the outrage celebrity class will always deem you to be the uncool kids. Trump defends you against the jerks.

So, it’s not about wealth or apartments. It’s about speaking up for people that the media celebrity complex snickers at. And it’s why when everything seems to be working out those snickers seem truly from Mars.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Did you like that, Dana?

PERINO: Yeah, in the milky way.

GUTFELD: Are you like those silly little puns. Is Donald Trump a bit like your rich uncle always telling your — why can’t your buddy get a haircut?

PERINO: I grew up in Wyoming where it’s like tight short haircut. My Aunt Donna.

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: . is the one who does the haircuts in the kitchen every couple weeks there. You know what I was thinking about today who might — I’m trying to go one other person who had this ability. Someone who’s successful, wealthy, a celebrity, but who is still considered blue collar.

GUTFELD: Me.

PERINO: I came up with Clint Eastwood.

GUTFELD: Oh, yeah.

PERINO: And I think it’s partly because of the art that he chose. The way that he chose to — the movies he directed. The how he acted. The things that he did. There’s not many others.

GUTFELD: Yeah, he speaks the language, Jesse. And it’s like — but I want to go back to the haircut thing.

WATTERS: Sure.

GUTFELD: Because I believe the haircut thing is about being presentable for a job. That’s how a salesman — it’s like get a haircut, Jesse.

WATTERS: Clean it up, Watters. Yeah. But he’s also a man’s man. And, you know, you speak about these man buns and you can mock a man bun now in 2018.

GUILFOYLE: Greg does.

WATTERS: We still can do that. And the rest of the people are afraid to talk about other people’s appearance because they may be being accused of being insensitive. Donald Trump has never been afraid of being called insensitive, right. So, he’s like the common man for a few reasons. One, he’s dealt with contractors all his life. Remember, he’s like, I can smell a contractor. But it’s true. You know, as a real estate developer you deal with the pipe fitters, the masons, the electrical engineers, and he’s great at that. And he also eats fast food not for a photo op because he actually likes it.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: Like us.

WATTERS: He speaks in a blunt, brash style that connects with the average American. And, to be honest, he has that aspirational celebrity. For many generations, people and the rest of the country looked up to Donald Trump. They like the women he was around. They liked the planes. They liked the style. They liked the jets. And if you want to become rich in America, you wanted to be like Donald Trump. And let’s not forget before he ran for president, athletes wanted to live in Trump Tower. All the real estate guys they wanted some, you know, tee times at his golf clubs.

GUTFELD: Most cited celebrity in rap music.

WATTERS: Exactly. And all the advertising executive they wanted a piece of the action. This guy was it. And the minute he runs for president he’s Hitler.

GUTFELD: You know Trump deals with masons not free mason. All right, Juan, I know.

GUILFOYLE: Look at Juan

GUTFELD: . those are like the elitist establishment versus the everyday man.

PERINO: My grandfather was a free mason, though.

GUTFELD: That’s explain it, Dana.

PERINO: But on my mom’s side.

GUTFELD: Are you part of the trilateral.

PERINO: Rawlings, Wyoming.

GUTFELD: Juan, I know you loved that rally. You recorded it and played it five times.

WILLIAMS: Well, I’m just amazed. You didn’t think about — the question is the apartment.

GUTFELD: Yes.

WILLIAMS: His apartment is better than their apartment.

GUTFELD: I know.

WILLIAMS: My gosh. Not only that he’s smarter, richer, he has a better apartment.

PERINO: But he also lives in the west wing.

WILLIAMS: Oh, my God. You talk about a petty person who makes everything about him.

GUTFELD: That was funny. He’s being funny.

WILLIAMS: I don’t think he’s being funny. I think that’s him. That’s what the way he feels. I got a better apartment, so how come I’m not elite?

GUILFOYLE: That’s just his personality. You take everything so literally.

GUTFELD: Let me just try to explain it. What he was trying to say that he — he could be in that group but you love me and I love you. That’s what I got out of it.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. I’ll tell you what it was.

GUTFELD: It wasn’t insulting to anybody.

WILLIAMS: No, I think it was worthy of mockery, I tell you that, because my apartment is bigger than yours, my button is bigger than yours — I mean, this is the way he talks. This is who he is. But I’m just saying, you ask about how he relates to people. You say, well, oh, these other celebrities they don’t have the support of the working man. Let me just tell you something, I’m not sure he has the support of the working man on separating children from parents. I don’t think he has the support of the working man — what he does is he pushes.

GUTFELD: He brought them together now.

WILLIAMS: . hot button issues and fear. And he says, you know what, you can hate Hillary Clinton. He had the crowd last night chanting lock her up, right? He can say things like, oh, go home to your mom to this guy. Why don’t you get a haircut? I don’t know if that’s a man or a woman.

GUTFELD: That’s a terrible impression, Juan.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. He hates on Clinton. He hates on everybody. And then he says, you know what, maybe those Hispanics, those immigrants, they’re terrible, too. And you say.

GUTFELD: What’s that about Hispanics? I missed that. I think he meant MS-13.

WILLIAMS: His appeal is based on hateful language and he appeals to the worse.

GUTFELD: So we’re all bad people. Kimberly?

GUILFOYLE: I don’t know. I think America is great. I think the president was saying that last night what an incredible country and supporters and trying to do something. He’s actually followed through and had tremendous accomplishments like we reiterated numerous times on this show. And I don’t know, for myself, in terms of as a Puerto Rican woman and looking at other minorities, are quite pleased. The numbers are going up in terms of — no. In terms of their favorability about the president, yes. And you see key numbers going down, unemployment. Why wouldn’t somebody be happy about that? Lower unemployment for women, for minorities, for Hispanics, for blacks, ISIS gone, we’ve got record job numbers.

WATTERS: And Kimberly’s apartment is nicer than yours.

WILLIAMS: I bet it is. I bet it is. How about John — remember last night, he not only was attacking Pelosi and Clinton. He then goes after John McCain.

WATTERS: You did watch the rally, Juan.

WILLIAMS: I can read.

GUTFELD: Will President Trump’s booming economy spell bad news for Nancy Pelosi and company come November? That’s straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC: THE O’JAYS, “FOR THE LOVE OF MONEY”)

GUILFOYLE: I like that.

While the left rages about immigration, President Trump is touting the booming economy. Jobs are up, unemployment numbers are at historic lows. And small business and manufacturing confidence is surging. On the heels of this momentum the president is urging voters to back GOP candidates in November or else.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need more Republicans. We’ve got to get out there in the midterm. We’ve got to get more Republicans. We’ve got to get more Republicans.

A vote for a Democrat for Congress is really a vote for Nancy Pelosi and her radical agenda.

They want to put on more regulations. They want to take back your tax cuts, which are massive. They want to take them back, and they want to raise the hell out of your taxes, and the whole thing will go boom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: Can’t call Greg. He’s nervous right now.

OK, Dana.

PERINO: Well, it’s certainly like even three months ago the Democrats looked to be in a much better position for the midterm elections. That has pretty much been erased. New poll today, I can’t remember which poll it was, but it was a legit one showing the congressional ballot now just 6 points, where it was 15 points for Democrats in March. So something is happening there.

But a couple other things I think that the Republicans should be concerned about. One is that I just watched an ad by M.J. Hegar. She’s a Democrat running against a congressman, an incumbent congressman in Texas. It’s one of the best ads I have ever seen. And she’s a — it’s not a progressive bunch of thing.

She’s a veteran. She took on the Defense Department for women in combat. She’s now running against a congressman, that was her congressman that said that they didn’t want to meet with her, because she was not a donor.

So, they’re not, like, running on really progressive issues in some of these competitive districts. So the Democrats have been really smart on that.

The other thing that I think that’s interesting is that a new Pew poll that also was today, Republicans trusted on the economy by plus 9 over Democrats. So that’s really good. Only plus 1 on trade. I think that’s what’s happening.

But what are people talking about today, this past week, and who knows what we’ll talk about next week? Immigration. And I was really surprised by this number, that Democrats have a 14-point advantage over Republicans on immigration. And I was really surprised about that.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, that’s — what do you think about that number, Jesse? Because, you know, that’s double digits, right? But it’s not something that can’t be turned around.

WATTERS: Well, maybe that’s depressed conservatives who are upset that the wall hasn’t been built fast enough. You could see that, obviously.

And on another note, the economy, if you have a good committee in a midterm election, it’s going to help you. And a lot of the rejections that you’ve seen, I think it was 2010 with Barack Obama. That was a huge rejection of Obamacare. Or in 2006, when the Democrats swept in under President Bush, that was a rejection of all those scandals, you know, Foley and all that stuff. And a little bit of the Iraq War.

I don’t see an issue right now in the country where the Republicans have overreached or blown it or done something so awful that the rest of the country has to say, “Smack you in the face, and we need the Democrats to come in and take over.”

With the roaring economy and record-breaking consumer confidence. And safety. I mean, ISIS has been defeated. People feel safe. And the Republicans are evaluated very highly on national security. Safety and prosperity, I think, are really going to help Republicans in November.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, all right. Greg, do you want to talk about this or what you thought the block was going to be about?

GUTFELD: No, but —

GUILFOYLE: I want to be there for you.

GUTFELD: Jesse’s point, for 18 months they’ve been trying to find that one issue, the one issue that — because when you — when you decided that Donald Trump was Satan on the very first day he was president, you run the risk of running Satan fatigue. So that’s why a lot of this stuff isn’t sticking anymore.

And it’s amazing to watch the left, you know, immerse in all this good news. They’re like gold panners in 1849 with a little pan. They’re trying to find that one nugget of bad news. It’s in here somewhere. That shows this country —

WATTERS: Prospectors.

GUTFELD: Yes, the prospectors. “I think I’ve got some bad news here,” and they’re not.

And the worst thing is their confirmation bias is running out of confirmation. So all they have is their bias, which is going to lead to this cognitive dissonance, which is now building up to the point where they’re calling everybody Nazis and going after Trump’s kids. You are witnessing full-grade hysteria.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Juan.

WILLIAMS: Well, I mean, it’s hard to know where to start, because the conversation has gone off the rails. But let me just say that it was the Republicans who thought that the economy was really going to be their key message for the midterms and have found so far in all this special elections and even gubernatorial elections, Senate elections, it hasn’t worked.

Why? Because like last night in Minnesota. Here he is talking about trade, but, guess what? A place like Duluth, they’re going to lose about 1,800 jobs, I should say, because of trade wars with, guess who? Canada, their neighbor to the north.

You look at the stock market, the stock market’s lost all of its gains, I think, on Tuesday.

GUILFOYLE: Not true.

WILLIAMS: For the years. So it went backwards.

You talk about the average tax cut for the person in Minnesota, 80 percent of Minnesotans, $700 tax cut.

GUTFELD: Crumbs.

WILLIAMS: So the tax cut has not had the kind of impact.

GUILFOYLE: OK.

WILLIAMS: And then finally, you have deficits. Deficits that Republicans used to say —

GUTFELD: A Democrat cares about deficits, everyone.

WILLIAMS: Now — Now, it —

GUTFELD: Here’s a nugget.

WILLIAMS: It doesn’t matter.

GUILFOYLE: OK. What can I say? Two hours.

Jimmy Fallon is still apologizing over a year and a half later for his funny 2016 interview with Donald Trump. What he’s saying now, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WILLIAMS: Welcome back. Remember this “Tonight Show” moment when then- candidate Trump paid a hair-raising visit to Jimmy Fallon?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Go ahead. Give my hair a stroke.

JIMMY FALLON, HOST, NBC’S “THE TONIGHT SHOW”: Yes!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: Well, apparently the late-night comedian isn’t laughing about the backlash from that famous interview. The funny man opening up about his personal pain from the fallout.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FALLON: I did not do it to normalize him or to say I believed in his political beliefs or any of that stuff.

It was definitely a down time, and it’s tough for morale. I made a mistake. I’m sorry if I made anyone mad. And looking back, I would do it differently.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: Wow. Well, you know, sometimes in the breaks we hear things. Dana, what do you think?

WATTERS: Keep it clean, Dana.

PERINO: It’s one of the most funny moments in television history. People love politics and entertainment. President Trump was letting himself be vulnerable and have fun and let somebody, like, invade his personal space.

Jimmy Fallon was really hilarious. And his apology reminds me of Jack Dorsey of Twitter having to apologize because he ate at Chick-Fil-A and said he liked it.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

PERINO: So where is the courage, guys? I mean, you remember Nils Crane? He used to say, “If it wasn’t for the starch in your shirt, there’d be nothing holding you up.”

WILLIAMS: Kimberly, part of the problem may be that Stephen Colbert now beats Fallon regularly. And Fallon identifies —

GUTFELD: In ratings.

WILLIAMS: Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. And Fallon identifies this moment as the one in which people just said, “You know, we don’t like it.” In fact, it looks like people who are strongly anti-Trump are the ones who’ve had the ratings gains.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, I mean, this is pathetic, right? It’s super snowflakey. I don’t know why. I mean, you know what? Why is he, like, getting — apologizing about this? I thought that was good TV, funny. He’s been telling everybody that’s his hair, that it’s real. So now people know.

PERINO: He got the scoop.

GUILFOYLE: I mean, he got the scoop. So, like, why not? It’s just — and the president was good-natured and fun about it. This is — the world is getting ridiculous or more ridiculous.

WILLIAMS: Well, wait a second, wait a second. Let’s get — let’s go to the —

GUILFOYLE: Or more ridiculous.

WILLIAMS: — exactly what Jimmy Fallon said. He people think he normalized Trump.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But he doesn’t share President Trump’s political beliefs, and he wasn’t trying to normalize him.

WATTERS: Well, I think it’s more important to hate Trump than be funny in Hollywood, and that’s sad. Because Jimmy, I believe, is probably the most talented late-night guy.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

WATTERS: I think he is probably the wittiest and the smartest, and I look forward to doing his show one day.

PERINO: I knew it. I knew it.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

PERINO: It’s book preservation.

WATTERS: But in all seriousness, I mean, there’s show business and then there’s politics. This is not “Meet the Press.” Trump went on there. He knew he wasn’t going to get grilled. Fallon knew he was going to have fun, and that’s fine. It’s OK to do that.

I could have Hillary on my show, and I could tousel her hair, and I could make jokes.

GUTFELD: No, you can’t.

GUILFOYLE: Please don’t. Going to normalize Hillary?

WATTERS: And people would do that. Or I could grill her about Benghazi, and then she’d give me boring canned answers. Sometimes there’s a time when you don’t listen to the audience. You just do what you feel is right.

WILLIAMS: So Greg, I remember, I think it was Bill Clinton on Arsenio Hall. And people were saying, “Oh, why are you doing — why is this playing the sax there?” Or you think about some of the interviews, Anthony Bourdain having beers in Vietnam with Obama. He’s “Oh, gosh,” you know, or going hunting with the guy the —

GUILFOYLE: Bear Grylls.

WILLIAMS: Yes. So — and people — people — the conservatives went nuts. “Oh, no. This guy is using media.” Remember that?

GUTFELD: Yes, I wasn’t part of that. So anyway, it’s kind of sad in Hollywood. Politics just isn’t personal. It’s also a survival mechanism, and that’s what he’s figuring out.

But what he — the phrase that is being overused these days is “normalized.” People say that a lot: “You can’t normalize ‘X’ or ‘Y’.” Normalizing Trump as though he’s polio —

PERINO: Right.

GUTFELD: — or, you know, he’s murder. And it’s — it was cowardly and sad. I really like Jimmy Fallon. But that was probably the lowest point that his life has been in.

GUILFOYLE: I think so.

GUTFELD: And he’s pretty wild.

GUILFOYLE: He should have gone back — he used to have some conservatives talk to him. He was so funny and talented.

GUTFELD: Oh, my God. How sad. Normal — oh.

GUILFOYLE: But now — look what happens. Now he’s —

GUTFELD: Get him a therapy llama.

GUILFOYLE: Very sad.

WILLIAMS: All right. Is a “latte liberal” just a clever jab, or is there finally evidence to back it up? The answer ahead on “The Five.”

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WATTERS: It turns out the phrase “latte liberal” is based in reality. A new study from the University of Pennsylvania finds liberals do, in fact, drink more lattes than conservatives.

It’s apparently all because of the drink’s Italian heritage. Researchers say liberals are more open to foreign products and globalization, while conservatives embrace products perceived to be made in America.

GUILFOYLE: Like the Big Mac.

WATTERS: Like the Big — Le Big Mac.

Kimberly, also interesting, they say for fast food, liberals prefer Chipotle and Panera. Conservatives prefer Sonic and Hardee’s. What do you make of that?

GUILFOYLE: Wow, that’s kind of funny. Maybe there’s some, you know, science to it, so to speak, and like, they take random surveys or whatever. I know that Greg used to eat Chipotle until he became deadly ill due to his lack of intestinal fortitude.

GUTFELD: I don’t think I was the only one who became deathly ill at Chipotle.

But I agree with this. Conservatives don’t take risks. And at my age mixing milk with coffee is, indeed, a risk.

GUILFOYLE: For everyone around.

GUTFELD: But I should also add coffee should only be taken black. It’s not coffee if you put milk or sugar in it. Then that’s a kid’s drink.

WATTERS: You are such a manly man.

GUTFELD: No, it’s — coffee is —

WATTERS: That is the only manly thing do you.

GUTFELD: It’s beautiful. Black — there’s nothing better than black coffee.

WATTERS: All right. Well, now I feel very effeminate —

GUTFELD: In a tin cup.

WATTERS: — because I drink it with milk and sugar, Dana. Beer —

PERINO: Yes, that’s pretty pathetic.

WATTERS: All right.

GUILFOYLE: You’re getting a little soft these days.

WATTERS: I am getting a little soft. I know. Beers, liberals prefer Heineken and Guinness, imports. Conservatives, Budweiser and Miller.

PERINO: I mean, I’m more of a Coors girl, myself.

WATTERS: The Rocky Mountain.

PERINO: Colorado, yes. And we also have Keystone Light. I don’t know if they still make that, but we sure like that.

WATTERS: That’s some cheap beer, Dana.

And in terms of activities, Juan, liberals do yoga and martial arts, whereas conservatives, archery and woodworking. I do neither of those. But go ahead.

WILLIAMS: No, I think, you know, great. Drink — everybody seems to like coffee, period.

WATTERS: Yes.

WILLIAMS: Both sides. So, what struck me was the commonality, you know, that hey, there’s something everybody likes.

PERINO: We could have a coffee summit.

WILLIAMS: Yes, I think we should have a coffee —

GUTFELD: At Starbucks.

WILLIAMS: And the other point of it was that someone pointed out that, even with lattes, it’s better for the American economy, because it benefits the dairy industry.

And I didn’t realize this. They said coffee beans are grown in several American states. It’s not a foreign product. So if you go to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, California, coffee beans.

PERINO: That’s —

WATTERS: Well, I’m still reeling from being called a weakling by drinking coffee with milk and sugar.

WILLIAMS: That’s OK. It’s OK.

WATTERS: It’s OK. I feel better about it.

GUILFOYLE: You do other stuff.

PERINO: Can somebody Photoshop that, please?

WATTERS: Also, smart phones, liberals prefer the iPhone. Conservatives, Samsung. Now, I just don’t know what the deal is with that.

GUILFOYLE: I’m going to say that’s —

GUTFELD: I’m beginning to call bologna on this whole thing.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, this is not good.

WATTERS: Is this study —

PERINO: I actually think this is true. I mean, I do have an iPhone. But I think that a lot of — it’s almost like conservatives don’t like the herd mentality so much. I’m going to get hate mail on that, right? But Apple became such an icon of liberalness. Right? So then they went with the Samsung, and they think it’s better. And the wars between people who have iPhones or Samsungs, they’re real.

GUTFELD: I don’t — the reason why I call bologna on this, I don’t think politics has anything to do with these choices. It’s just something that they do.

PERINO: Just happens?

GUTFELD: Yes. It just happens. I don’t think about it.

WILLIAMS: The other part of it is age. I think if you had a cohort of liberals, you’re going to find they’re much younger. A cohort of conservatives, they’re much older.

GUTFELD: True.

WILLIAMS: And you’re going to find the conservatives, the older end of that cohort has more disposable income than the younger.

GUTFELD: Yes.

WILLIAMS: So —

PERINO: How did that surprise you?

WATTERS: I always think conservatives have more disposable income, because we’re smarter with money.

“One More Thing” is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: It’s time now for “One More Thing.” I’ll go first.

Last week Iran’s World Cup team won their first game since 1998. And this week, Tehran’s Provisional Council made a last-minute decision allowing women to attend the screening of the game in Tehran’s largest stadium. It’s the first time they’ve been allowed to do that since 1979.

Iran lost to Spain 0-1, so not a high scoring game. But women still celebrated. Many hope this will lead to permanently reversing their ban. So glad to see them get to go.

GUTFELD: Did Trump have something to do with that?

PERINO: I’m sure he did. I’m sure he did.

All right. Juan.

WILLIAMS: So big news from New Zealand. The Kiwi prime minister had a baby today. That’s right. Jacinda Ardern had a baby girl. She becomes only the second world leader to give birth while in office. The first, Pakistan’s Benazir Bhutto in 1990. And in an interesting twist of fate, today is also Bhutto’s birthday.

Ardern is not married. Her partner, a TV news presenter, plans to be a stay-at-home dad. One Kiwi commentator said it was a historic moment, because the birth shows that pregnant women can do their jobs. Ardern is taking a six-week maternity leave. Congratulations to all.

PERINO: All right. Jesse.

WATTERS: I would like to wish Steven Watters, my father, a very happy 70th birthday.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday.

PERINO: Happy birthday, dad.

WATTERS: There is dear old dad. Look how dapper he was. Now everybody knows where I get it from. That’s him playing lacrosse. All-American lacrosse player. It was very cold there in his shadow growing up.

And there he is with my mom taking a selfie. Probably the first selfie ever, back in the 60’s.

GUTFELD: Funniest thing I’ve ever heard.

WATTERS: And now he has a huge beard. I’ve never seen him without a beard. I have no idea what he looks like. And there he is with Ann Watters, “Mom Texts,” as we know her.

So Dad, happy birthday, I love you very much.

PERINO: Happy birthday.

WATTERS: Congratulations.

WILLIAMS: Happy birthday.

PERINO: How sweet.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday.

PERINO: Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: — to you. Yes.

OK, so this is super cute. I love the little nostalgic things, parents and sons. So this is a father and son cop duo, and there’s a photo we can show you, so adorable. So this is a 20-year-old photo. And what happened is the 1998 photo shows Officer Andy Golden and his son Michael inside the police cruiser.

And you fast forward to the photo taken this past Father’s Day, shows him seated in the same position but at 6’7″. Can you imagine? So the father and son police officers.

GUTFELD: Don’t try that at home.

GUILFOYLE: Said to make the photo redo was a hard squeeze.

While they’re not partners, his son followed in his footsteps into law enforcement, which is incredible, at the Auburn Police Department. And it’s cute, because the original caption said, “When I get bigger, I’m going to be my dad’s partner and catch bad guys and burglars.”

WATTERS: Nice.

GUILFOYLE: Isn’t that cute?

WATTERS: Very cool.

PERINO: And at that height, he’ll probably have an advantage.

GUILFOYLE: I think it’s adorable.

PERINO: Greg, do you feel jealous about that height?

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

GUTFELD: I wish I had a “One More Thing” about a world leader having a baby. Instead, I have gifts from the legendary band, The Misfits, who are big fans of “The Five.”

GUILFOYLE: Oh, wow.

GUTFELD: So everybody gets a Misfits shirt.

WATTERS: Thank you.

GUTFELD: Even Juan. Juan, I know you love The Misfits.

WATTERS: I don’t even know them.

WATTERS: Wait, is this —

GUTFELD: They’re from New Jersey. They’re amazing. Legendary Jerry Only gave them. His mom is a dedicated watcher.

PERINO: I’ve never worn anything like this.

GUTFELD: I can’t wait to see Dana in a Misfits T-shirt.

WATTERS: This will scare people.

GUTFELD: I have a second “One More Thing.”

PERINO: OK.

GUTFELD: Let’s go to it.

GUILFOYLE: Of course do you, diva.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAPHIC: Greg’s Breaking Wind News

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: “Greg’s Breaking Wind News.”

GUILFOYLE: What?

GUTFELD: Not breaking news, breaking wind news. This is the greatest video of all time. A giant gust of wind in Commerce, Colorado — Commerce City, Colorado, sent a porta potty into the sky. Look at that. It’s like a time machine.

PERINO: Was it empty?

GUTFELD: It’s like — it’s like, I don’t know. Was it Dr. No? No, Dr. Who. It just flies in the air.

And anyway, no one was hurt. We always have to say that. No one was hurt.

PERINO: You know, I grew up not far from there, and in the summertime in the afternoons, the winds really does pick up. You have a lot of tornado warnings, things like that.

WILLIAMS: Yes. It’s like Dorothy. It’s like “The Wizard of Oz.”

WATTERS: Exactly.

WILLIAMS: Except you’re in a port-a-potty.

GUTFELD: It was a cheap version of “Wizard of Oz.” A really cheap version.

PERINO: Wonder where that outhouse landed on.

Oh, my gosh. All right. Well, that was a great show, everybody. Thank you so much.

GUTFELD: Everybody, wear their shirts.

PERINO: Yes. I will wear my shirt in private.

Set your DVRs and never miss an episode of “The Five.” “Special Report” is up next.

Hey, John.

JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS: We are definitely not in Kansas anymore. Thanks, Dana.

WILLIAMS: Clearly.

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

Trending in U.S.

Wife of freed NYC cop killer committed suicide just weeks after his release, coroner reveals

Source: http://allofbeer.com/gop-delays-house-vote-on-compromise-immigration-bill/

from All of Beer https://allofbeer.wordpress.com/2019/03/12/gop-delays-house-vote-on-compromise-immigration-bill/

0 notes

adambstingus · 6 years ago

Text

GOP delays House vote on ‘compromise’ immigration bill

Video

GOP delays House vote on ‘compromise’ immigration bill

Republicans regroup after first immigration bill is voted down in the House; reaction and analysis on ‘The Five.’

This is a rush transcript from “The Five,” June 21, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: The president reiterating that he doesn’t want to separate children from their parents but is still sticking by his zero tolerance policy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: And, Greg, I had Congressman Burgess on the 2 o’clock show today.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Good for you.

PERINO: I’m getting to a good point. He’s part of the — he’s a Texas congressman.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

PERINO: Yes, sure, absolutely.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: So she just exposed how political this is.

WATTERS: Was that English? I didn’t understand a word she said.

GUTFELD: Yeah, yeah. They didn’t care before.

PERINO: He said he was just being passionate.

PERINO: But then.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: Well, here’s the thing, Kimberly, that regardless of what happens on this particular bill tomorrow it still has to pass the senate.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

PERINO: The President of the United States, commander-in-chief, solemn responsibility is protection of the country.

WILLIAMS: Yeah. But he’s not supposed to go around calling people an infestation, animals, criminals, rapists.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Peter Fonda, yesterday, did you, Juan. You thought Peter Fonda just misused some words.

GUILFOYLE: He just fixed the issue. He just fixed the issue.

WILLIAMS: No, because it’s so — so absurd. You know what you have here.

GUTFELD: Donate to Planned Parenthood.

GUTFELD: Read the Washington Post piece from 2016.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Read the Washington Post from 2016 about the children that were abused that were let in under Obama.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: This is like Trump saying everybody is going to rush over the border.

WATTERS: If you build a wall and you don’t do the catch and release, then that’s why have you border security.

GUTFELD: Senator Rob Portman exposed this in 2016.

WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Juan, if the Democrats take over Congress, are they going to be able to solve this issue?

WILLIAMS: I hope so. Because one of the realities here.

GUILFOYLE: Well, they didn’t do it before when they had control of both. They didn’t do anything after Obama.

WILLIAMS: What are you talking about? It was under President Bush in ’06 that Republicans defeated an attempt at comprehensive immigration reform.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, no.

(CROSSTALK)

WATTERS: Bottom line, you don’t want border security. Bottom line.

GUTFELD: It doesn’t matter.

WATTERS: You want open borders, Juan, just admit it.

WILLIAMS: You know what? I can say horrible things about you.

WATTERS: That’s not horrible, that’s a policy difference.

WILLIAMS: That’s not true.

WATTERS: We believe in border security.

WILLIAMS: . that’s why I say it’s horrible.

WATTERS: . you don’t.

WILLIAMS: Here’s the reality. Most people who come.

WATTERS: That’s the reality.

WILLIAMS: . illegally are not crossing any border by foot. They’re flying.

WATTERS: Juan, if you want border security, you have the TSA at the airport, but you want open border on the south makes no sense.

WILLIAMS: I don’t want any open border. I’m just telling you this is all about political.

GUTFELD: This is great TV. Keep it going. People love this stuff.

PERINO: Wait. All right. President Trump slams Democratic elitism, his fiery remarks, a little but even more than that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Was that a man or a woman because he needs a haircut more than I do. I couldn’t tell. He needs a haircut.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Do you ever notice they always call the other side, and they do this — the elite. The elite. Why are they elite? I have a much better apartment than they do.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: I’m smarter than they are. I’m richer than they are. I became president and they didn’t.

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: And I’m representing the greatest, smartest, most loyal, best people on earth: the deplorables. Remember that?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Did you like that, Dana?

PERINO: Yeah, in the milky way.

GUTFELD: Are you like those silly little puns. Is Donald Trump a bit like your rich uncle always telling your — why can’t your buddy get a haircut?

PERINO: I grew up in Wyoming where it’s like tight short haircut. My Aunt Donna.

GUTFELD: Yes.

GUTFELD: Me.

PERINO: I came up with Clint Eastwood.

GUTFELD: Oh, yeah.

PERINO: And I think it’s partly because of the art that he chose. The way that he chose to — the movies he directed. The how he acted. The things that he did. There’s not many others.

GUTFELD: Yeah, he speaks the language, Jesse. And it’s like — but I want to go back to the haircut thing.

WATTERS: Sure.

GUTFELD: Because I believe the haircut thing is about being presentable for a job. That’s how a salesman — it’s like get a haircut, Jesse.

WATTERS: Clean it up, Watters. Yeah. But he’s also a man’s man. And, you know, you speak about these man buns and you can mock a man bun now in 2018.

GUILFOYLE: Greg does.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: Like us.

GUTFELD: Most cited celebrity in rap music.

WATTERS: Exactly. And all the advertising executive they wanted a piece of the action. This guy was it. And the minute he runs for president he’s Hitler.

GUTFELD: You know Trump deals with masons not free mason. All right, Juan, I know.

GUILFOYLE: Look at Juan

GUTFELD: . those are like the elitist establishment versus the everyday man.

PERINO: My grandfather was a free mason, though.

GUTFELD: That’s explain it, Dana.

PERINO: But on my mom’s side.

GUTFELD: Are you part of the trilateral.

PERINO: Rawlings, Wyoming.

GUTFELD: Juan, I know you loved that rally. You recorded it and played it five times.

WILLIAMS: Well, I’m just amazed. You didn’t think about — the question is the apartment.

GUTFELD: Yes.

WILLIAMS: His apartment is better than their apartment.

GUTFELD: I know.

WILLIAMS: My gosh. Not only that he’s smarter, richer, he has a better apartment.

PERINO: But he also lives in the west wing.

WILLIAMS: Oh, my God. You talk about a petty person who makes everything about him.

GUTFELD: That was funny. He’s being funny.

WILLIAMS: I don’t think he’s being funny. I think that’s him. That’s what the way he feels. I got a better apartment, so how come I’m not elite?

GUILFOYLE: That’s just his personality. You take everything so literally.

GUTFELD: Let me just try to explain it. What he was trying to say that he — he could be in that group but you love me and I love you. That’s what I got out of it.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. I’ll tell you what it was.

GUTFELD: It wasn’t insulting to anybody.

GUTFELD: He brought them together now.

GUTFELD: That’s a terrible impression, Juan.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. He hates on Clinton. He hates on everybody. And then he says, you know what, maybe those Hispanics, those immigrants, they’re terrible, too. And you say.

GUTFELD: What’s that about Hispanics? I missed that. I think he meant MS-13.

WILLIAMS: His appeal is based on hateful language and he appeals to the worse.

GUTFELD: So we’re all bad people. Kimberly?

WATTERS: And Kimberly’s apartment is nicer than yours.

WILLIAMS: I bet it is. I bet it is. How about John — remember last night, he not only was attacking Pelosi and Clinton. He then goes after John McCain.

WATTERS: You did watch the rally, Juan.

WILLIAMS: I can read.

GUTFELD: Will President Trump’s booming economy spell bad news for Nancy Pelosi and company come November? That’s straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC: THE O’JAYS, “FOR THE LOVE OF MONEY”)

GUILFOYLE: I like that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP ®, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need more Republicans. We’ve got to get out there in the midterm. We’ve got to get more Republicans. We’ve got to get more Republicans.

A vote for a Democrat for Congress is really a vote for Nancy Pelosi and her radical agenda.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: Can’t call Greg. He’s nervous right now.

OK, Dana.

So, they’re not, like, running on really progressive issues in some of these competitive districts. So the Democrats have been really smart on that.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, that’s — what do you think about that number, Jesse? Because, you know, that’s double digits, right? But it’s not something that can’t be turned around.

WATTERS: Well, maybe that’s depressed conservatives who are upset that the wall hasn’t been built fast enough. You could see that, obviously.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, all right. Greg, do you want to talk about this or what you thought the block was going to be about?

GUTFELD: No, but —

GUILFOYLE: I want to be there for you.

WATTERS: Prospectors.

GUTFELD: Yes, the prospectors. “I think I’ve got some bad news here,” and they’re not.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Juan.

You look at the stock market, the stock market’s lost all of its gains, I think, on Tuesday.

GUILFOYLE: Not true.

WILLIAMS: For the years. So it went backwards.

You talk about the average tax cut for the person in Minnesota, 80 percent of Minnesotans, $700 tax cut.

GUTFELD: Crumbs.

WILLIAMS: So the tax cut has not had the kind of impact.

GUILFOYLE: OK.

WILLIAMS: And then finally, you have deficits. Deficits that Republicans used to say —

GUTFELD: A Democrat cares about deficits, everyone.

WILLIAMS: Now — Now, it —

GUTFELD: Here’s a nugget.

WILLIAMS: It doesn’t matter.

GUILFOYLE: OK. What can I say? Two hours.

Jimmy Fallon is still apologizing over a year and a half later for his funny 2016 interview with Donald Trump. What he’s saying now, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WILLIAMS: Welcome back. Remember this “Tonight Show” moment when then- candidate Trump paid a hair-raising visit to Jimmy Fallon?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP ®, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Go ahead. Give my hair a stroke.

JIMMY FALLON, HOST, NBC’S “THE TONIGHT SHOW”: Yes!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: Well, apparently the late-night comedian isn’t laughing about the backlash from that famous interview. The funny man opening up about his personal pain from the fallout.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FALLON: I did not do it to normalize him or to say I believed in his political beliefs or any of that stuff.

It was definitely a down time, and it’s tough for morale. I made a mistake. I’m sorry if I made anyone mad. And looking back, I would do it differently.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: Wow. Well, you know, sometimes in the breaks we hear things. Dana, what do you think?

WATTERS: Keep it clean, Dana.

Jimmy Fallon was really hilarious. And his apology reminds me of Jack Dorsey of Twitter having to apologize because he ate at Chick-Fil-A and said he liked it.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

PERINO: So where is the courage, guys? I mean, you remember Nils Crane? He used to say, “If it wasn’t for the starch in your shirt, there’d be nothing holding you up.”

WILLIAMS: Kimberly, part of the problem may be that Stephen Colbert now beats Fallon regularly. And Fallon identifies —

GUTFELD: In ratings.

PERINO: He got the scoop.

GUILFOYLE: I mean, he got the scoop. So, like, why not? It’s just — and the president was good-natured and fun about it. This is — the world is getting ridiculous or more ridiculous.

WILLIAMS: Well, wait a second, wait a second. Let’s get — let’s go to the —

GUILFOYLE: Or more ridiculous.

WILLIAMS: — exactly what Jimmy Fallon said. He people think he normalized Trump.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But he doesn’t share President Trump’s political beliefs, and he wasn’t trying to normalize him.

WATTERS: Well, I think it’s more important to hate Trump than be funny in Hollywood, and that’s sad. Because Jimmy, I believe, is probably the most talented late-night guy.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

WATTERS: I think he is probably the wittiest and the smartest, and I look forward to doing his show one day.

PERINO: I knew it. I knew it.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

PERINO: It’s book preservation.

I could have Hillary on my show, and I could tousel her hair, and I could make jokes.

GUTFELD: No, you can’t.

GUILFOYLE: Please don’t. Going to normalize Hillary?

GUILFOYLE: Bear Grylls.

WILLIAMS: Yes. So — and people — people — the conservatives went nuts. “Oh, no. This guy is using media.” Remember that?

GUTFELD: Yes, I wasn’t part of that. So anyway, it’s kind of sad in Hollywood. Politics just isn’t personal. It’s also a survival mechanism, and that’s what he’s figuring out.

But what he — the phrase that is being overused these days is “normalized.” People say that a lot: “You can’t normalize ‘X’ or ‘Y’.” Normalizing Trump as though he’s polio —

PERINO: Right.

GUTFELD: — or, you know, he’s murder. And it’s — it was cowardly and sad. I really like Jimmy Fallon. But that was probably the lowest point that his life has been in.

GUILFOYLE: I think so.

GUTFELD: And he’s pretty wild.

GUILFOYLE: He should have gone back — he used to have some conservatives talk to him. He was so funny and talented.

GUTFELD: Oh, my God. How sad. Normal — oh.

GUILFOYLE: But now — look what happens. Now he’s —

GUTFELD: Get him a therapy llama.

GUILFOYLE: Very sad.

WILLIAMS: All right. Is a “latte liberal” just a clever jab, or is there finally evidence to back it up? The answer ahead on “The Five.”

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WATTERS: It turns out the phrase “latte liberal” is based in reality. A new study from the University of Pennsylvania finds liberals do, in fact, drink more lattes than conservatives.

GUILFOYLE: Like the Big Mac.

WATTERS: Like the Big — Le Big Mac.

Kimberly, also interesting, they say for fast food, liberals prefer Chipotle and Panera. Conservatives prefer Sonic and Hardee’s. What do you make of that?

GUTFELD: I don’t think I was the only one who became deathly ill at Chipotle.

But I agree with this. Conservatives don’t take risks. And at my age mixing milk with coffee is, indeed, a risk.

GUILFOYLE: For everyone around.

GUTFELD: But I should also add coffee should only be taken black. It’s not coffee if you put milk or sugar in it. Then that’s a kid’s drink.

WATTERS: You are such a manly man.

GUTFELD: No, it’s — coffee is —

WATTERS: That is the only manly thing do you.

GUTFELD: It’s beautiful. Black — there’s nothing better than black coffee.

WATTERS: All right. Well, now I feel very effeminate —

GUTFELD: In a tin cup.

WATTERS: — because I drink it with milk and sugar, Dana. Beer —

PERINO: Yes, that’s pretty pathetic.

WATTERS: All right.

GUILFOYLE: You’re getting a little soft these days.

WATTERS: I am getting a little soft. I know. Beers, liberals prefer Heineken and Guinness, imports. Conservatives, Budweiser and Miller.

PERINO: I mean, I’m more of a Coors girl, myself.

WATTERS: The Rocky Mountain.

PERINO: Colorado, yes. And we also have Keystone Light. I don’t know if they still make that, but we sure like that.

WATTERS: That’s some cheap beer, Dana.

And in terms of activities, Juan, liberals do yoga and martial arts, whereas conservatives, archery and woodworking. I do neither of those. But go ahead.

WILLIAMS: No, I think, you know, great. Drink — everybody seems to like coffee, period.

WATTERS: Yes.

WILLIAMS: Both sides. So, what struck me was the commonality, you know, that hey, there’s something everybody likes.

PERINO: We could have a coffee summit.

WILLIAMS: Yes, I think we should have a coffee —

GUTFELD: At Starbucks.

WILLIAMS: And the other point of it was that someone pointed out that, even with lattes, it’s better for the American economy, because it benefits the dairy industry.

And I didn’t realize this. They said coffee beans are grown in several American states. It’s not a foreign product. So if you go to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, California, coffee beans.

PERINO: That’s —

WATTERS: Well, I’m still reeling from being called a weakling by drinking coffee with milk and sugar.

WILLIAMS: That’s OK. It’s OK.

WATTERS: It’s OK. I feel better about it.

GUILFOYLE: You do other stuff.

PERINO: Can somebody Photoshop that, please?

WATTERS: Also, smart phones, liberals prefer the iPhone. Conservatives, Samsung. Now, I just don’t know what the deal is with that.

GUILFOYLE: I’m going to say that’s —

GUTFELD: I’m beginning to call bologna on this whole thing.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, this is not good.

WATTERS: Is this study —

GUTFELD: I don’t — the reason why I call bologna on this, I don’t think politics has anything to do with these choices. It’s just something that they do.

PERINO: Just happens?

GUTFELD: Yes. It just happens. I don’t think about it.

WILLIAMS: The other part of it is age. I think if you had a cohort of liberals, you’re going to find they’re much younger. A cohort of conservatives, they’re much older.

GUTFELD: True.

WILLIAMS: And you’re going to find the conservatives, the older end of that cohort has more disposable income than the younger.

GUTFELD: Yes.

WILLIAMS: So —

PERINO: How did that surprise you?

WATTERS: I always think conservatives have more disposable income, because we’re smarter with money.

“One More Thing” is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: It’s time now for “One More Thing.” I’ll go first.

Iran lost to Spain 0-1, so not a high scoring game. But women still celebrated. Many hope this will lead to permanently reversing their ban. So glad to see them get to go.

GUTFELD: Did Trump have something to do with that?

PERINO: I’m sure he did. I’m sure he did.

All right. Juan.

PERINO: All right. Jesse.

WATTERS: I would like to wish Steven Watters, my father, a very happy 70th birthday.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday.

PERINO: Happy birthday, dad.

And there he is with my mom taking a selfie. Probably the first selfie ever, back in the 60’s.

GUTFELD: Funniest thing I’ve ever heard.

WATTERS: And now he has a huge beard. I’ve never seen him without a beard. I have no idea what he looks like. And there he is with Ann Watters, “Mom Texts,” as we know her.

So Dad, happy birthday, I love you very much.

PERINO: Happy birthday.

WATTERS: Congratulations.

WILLIAMS: Happy birthday.

PERINO: How sweet.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday.

PERINO: Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: — to you. Yes.

And you fast forward to the photo taken this past Father’s Day, shows him seated in the same position but at 6’7″. Can you imagine? So the father and son police officers.

GUTFELD: Don’t try that at home.

GUILFOYLE: Said to make the photo redo was a hard squeeze.

WATTERS: Nice.

GUILFOYLE: Isn’t that cute?

WATTERS: Very cool.

PERINO: And at that height, he’ll probably have an advantage.

GUILFOYLE: I think it’s adorable.

PERINO: Greg, do you feel jealous about that height?

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

GUTFELD: I wish I had a “One More Thing” about a world leader having a baby. Instead, I have gifts from the legendary band, The Misfits, who are big fans of “The Five.”

GUILFOYLE: Oh, wow.

GUTFELD: So everybody gets a Misfits shirt.

WATTERS: Thank you.

GUTFELD: Even Juan. Juan, I know you love The Misfits.

WATTERS: I don’t even know them.

WATTERS: Wait, is this —

GUTFELD: They’re from New Jersey. They’re amazing. Legendary Jerry Only gave them. His mom is a dedicated watcher.

PERINO: I’ve never worn anything like this.

GUTFELD: I can’t wait to see Dana in a Misfits T-shirt.

WATTERS: This will scare people.

GUTFELD: I have a second “One More Thing.”

PERINO: OK.

GUTFELD: Let’s go to it.

GUILFOYLE: Of course do you, diva.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAPHIC: Greg’s Breaking Wind News

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: “Greg’s Breaking Wind News.”

GUILFOYLE: What?

PERINO: Was it empty?

GUTFELD: It’s like — it’s like, I don’t know. Was it Dr. No? No, Dr. Who. It just flies in the air.

And anyway, no one was hurt. We always have to say that. No one was hurt.

PERINO: You know, I grew up not far from there, and in the summertime in the afternoons, the winds really does pick up. You have a lot of tornado warnings, things like that.

WILLIAMS: Yes. It’s like Dorothy. It’s like “The Wizard of Oz.”

WATTERS: Exactly.

WILLIAMS: Except you’re in a port-a-potty.

GUTFELD: It was a cheap version of “Wizard of Oz.” A really cheap version.

PERINO: Wonder where that outhouse landed on.

Oh, my gosh. All right. Well, that was a great show, everybody. Thank you so much.

GUTFELD: Everybody, wear their shirts.

PERINO: Yes. I will wear my shirt in private.

Set your DVRs and never miss an episode of “The Five.” “Special Report” is up next.

Hey, John.

JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS: We are definitely not in Kansas anymore. Thanks, Dana.

WILLIAMS: Clearly.

Trending in U.S.

Wife of freed NYC cop killer committed suicide just weeks after his release, coroner reveals

from All Of Beer http://allofbeer.com/gop-delays-house-vote-on-compromise-immigration-bill/ from All of Beer https://allofbeercom.tumblr.com/post/183400705607

0 notes

allofbeercom · 6 years ago

Text

GOP delays House vote on ‘compromise’ immigration bill

Video

GOP delays House vote on ‘compromise’ immigration bill

Republicans regroup after first immigration bill is voted down in the House; reaction and analysis on ‘The Five.’

This is a rush transcript from “The Five,” June 21, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: The president reiterating that he doesn’t want to separate children from their parents but is still sticking by his zero tolerance policy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: And, Greg, I had Congressman Burgess on the 2 o’clock show today.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Good for you.

PERINO: I’m getting to a good point. He’s part of the — he’s a Texas congressman.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

PERINO: Yes, sure, absolutely.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: So she just exposed how political this is.

WATTERS: Was that English? I didn’t understand a word she said.

GUTFELD: Yeah, yeah. They didn’t care before.

PERINO: He said he was just being passionate.

PERINO: But then.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: Well, here’s the thing, Kimberly, that regardless of what happens on this particular bill tomorrow it still has to pass the senate.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

PERINO: The President of the United States, commander-in-chief, solemn responsibility is protection of the country.

WILLIAMS: Yeah. But he’s not supposed to go around calling people an infestation, animals, criminals, rapists.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Peter Fonda, yesterday, did you, Juan. You thought Peter Fonda just misused some words.

GUILFOYLE: He just fixed the issue. He just fixed the issue.

WILLIAMS: No, because it’s so — so absurd. You know what you have here.

GUTFELD: Donate to Planned Parenthood.

GUTFELD: Read the Washington Post piece from 2016.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Read the Washington Post from 2016 about the children that were abused that were let in under Obama.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: This is like Trump saying everybody is going to rush over the border.

WATTERS: If you build a wall and you don’t do the catch and release, then that’s why have you border security.

GUTFELD: Senator Rob Portman exposed this in 2016.

WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Juan, if the Democrats take over Congress, are they going to be able to solve this issue?

WILLIAMS: I hope so. Because one of the realities here.

GUILFOYLE: Well, they didn’t do it before when they had control of both. They didn’t do anything after Obama.

WILLIAMS: What are you talking about? It was under President Bush in ’06 that Republicans defeated an attempt at comprehensive immigration reform.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, no.

(CROSSTALK)

WATTERS: Bottom line, you don’t want border security. Bottom line.

GUTFELD: It doesn’t matter.

WATTERS: You want open borders, Juan, just admit it.

WILLIAMS: You know what? I can say horrible things about you.

WATTERS: That’s not horrible, that’s a policy difference.

WILLIAMS: That’s not true.

WATTERS: We believe in border security.

WILLIAMS: . that’s why I say it’s horrible.

WATTERS: . you don’t.

WILLIAMS: Here’s the reality. Most people who come.

WATTERS: That’s the reality.

WILLIAMS: . illegally are not crossing any border by foot. They’re flying.

WATTERS: Juan, if you want border security, you have the TSA at the airport, but you want open border on the south makes no sense.

WILLIAMS: I don’t want any open border. I’m just telling you this is all about political.

GUTFELD: This is great TV. Keep it going. People love this stuff.

PERINO: Wait. All right. President Trump slams Democratic elitism, his fiery remarks, a little but even more than that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Was that a man or a woman because he needs a haircut more than I do. I couldn’t tell. He needs a haircut.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Do you ever notice they always call the other side, and they do this — the elite. The elite. Why are they elite? I have a much better apartment than they do.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: I’m smarter than they are. I’m richer than they are. I became president and they didn’t.

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: And I’m representing the greatest, smartest, most loyal, best people on earth: the deplorables. Remember that?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Did you like that, Dana?

PERINO: Yeah, in the milky way.

GUTFELD: Are you like those silly little puns. Is Donald Trump a bit like your rich uncle always telling your — why can’t your buddy get a haircut?

PERINO: I grew up in Wyoming where it’s like tight short haircut. My Aunt Donna.

GUTFELD: Yes.

GUTFELD: Me.

PERINO: I came up with Clint Eastwood.

GUTFELD: Oh, yeah.

PERINO: And I think it’s partly because of the art that he chose. The way that he chose to — the movies he directed. The how he acted. The things that he did. There’s not many others.

GUTFELD: Yeah, he speaks the language, Jesse. And it’s like — but I want to go back to the haircut thing.

WATTERS: Sure.

GUTFELD: Because I believe the haircut thing is about being presentable for a job. That’s how a salesman — it’s like get a haircut, Jesse.

WATTERS: Clean it up, Watters. Yeah. But he’s also a man’s man. And, you know, you speak about these man buns and you can mock a man bun now in 2018.

GUILFOYLE: Greg does.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: Like us.

GUTFELD: Most cited celebrity in rap music.

WATTERS: Exactly. And all the advertising executive they wanted a piece of the action. This guy was it. And the minute he runs for president he’s Hitler.

GUTFELD: You know Trump deals with masons not free mason. All right, Juan, I know.

GUILFOYLE: Look at Juan

GUTFELD: . those are like the elitist establishment versus the everyday man.

PERINO: My grandfather was a free mason, though.

GUTFELD: That’s explain it, Dana.

PERINO: But on my mom’s side.

GUTFELD: Are you part of the trilateral.

PERINO: Rawlings, Wyoming.

GUTFELD: Juan, I know you loved that rally. You recorded it and played it five times.

WILLIAMS: Well, I’m just amazed. You didn’t think about — the question is the apartment.

GUTFELD: Yes.

WILLIAMS: His apartment is better than their apartment.

GUTFELD: I know.

WILLIAMS: My gosh. Not only that he’s smarter, richer, he has a better apartment.

PERINO: But he also lives in the west wing.

WILLIAMS: Oh, my God. You talk about a petty person who makes everything about him.

GUTFELD: That was funny. He’s being funny.

WILLIAMS: I don’t think he’s being funny. I think that’s him. That’s what the way he feels. I got a better apartment, so how come I’m not elite?

GUILFOYLE: That’s just his personality. You take everything so literally.

GUTFELD: Let me just try to explain it. What he was trying to say that he — he could be in that group but you love me and I love you. That’s what I got out of it.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. I’ll tell you what it was.

GUTFELD: It wasn’t insulting to anybody.

GUTFELD: He brought them together now.

GUTFELD: That’s a terrible impression, Juan.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. He hates on Clinton. He hates on everybody. And then he says, you know what, maybe those Hispanics, those immigrants, they’re terrible, too. And you say.

GUTFELD: What’s that about Hispanics? I missed that. I think he meant MS-13.

WILLIAMS: His appeal is based on hateful language and he appeals to the worse.

GUTFELD: So we’re all bad people. Kimberly?

WATTERS: And Kimberly’s apartment is nicer than yours.

WILLIAMS: I bet it is. I bet it is. How about John — remember last night, he not only was attacking Pelosi and Clinton. He then goes after John McCain.

WATTERS: You did watch the rally, Juan.

WILLIAMS: I can read.

GUTFELD: Will President Trump’s booming economy spell bad news for Nancy Pelosi and company come November? That’s straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC: THE O’JAYS, “FOR THE LOVE OF MONEY”)

GUILFOYLE: I like that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need more Republicans. We’ve got to get out there in the midterm. We’ve got to get more Republicans. We’ve got to get more Republicans.

A vote for a Democrat for Congress is really a vote for Nancy Pelosi and her radical agenda.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: Can’t call Greg. He’s nervous right now.

OK, Dana.

So, they’re not, like, running on really progressive issues in some of these competitive districts. So the Democrats have been really smart on that.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, that’s — what do you think about that number, Jesse? Because, you know, that’s double digits, right? But it’s not something that can’t be turned around.

WATTERS: Well, maybe that’s depressed conservatives who are upset that the wall hasn’t been built fast enough. You could see that, obviously.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, all right. Greg, do you want to talk about this or what you thought the block was going to be about?

GUTFELD: No, but —

GUILFOYLE: I want to be there for you.

WATTERS: Prospectors.

GUTFELD: Yes, the prospectors. “I think I’ve got some bad news here,” and they’re not.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Juan.

You look at the stock market, the stock market’s lost all of its gains, I think, on Tuesday.

GUILFOYLE: Not true.

WILLIAMS: For the years. So it went backwards.

You talk about the average tax cut for the person in Minnesota, 80 percent of Minnesotans, $700 tax cut.

GUTFELD: Crumbs.

WILLIAMS: So the tax cut has not had the kind of impact.

GUILFOYLE: OK.

WILLIAMS: And then finally, you have deficits. Deficits that Republicans used to say —

GUTFELD: A Democrat cares about deficits, everyone.

WILLIAMS: Now — Now, it —

GUTFELD: Here’s a nugget.

WILLIAMS: It doesn’t matter.

GUILFOYLE: OK. What can I say? Two hours.

Jimmy Fallon is still apologizing over a year and a half later for his funny 2016 interview with Donald Trump. What he’s saying now, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WILLIAMS: Welcome back. Remember this “Tonight Show” moment when then- candidate Trump paid a hair-raising visit to Jimmy Fallon?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Go ahead. Give my hair a stroke.

JIMMY FALLON, HOST, NBC’S “THE TONIGHT SHOW”: Yes!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: Well, apparently the late-night comedian isn’t laughing about the backlash from that famous interview. The funny man opening up about his personal pain from the fallout.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FALLON: I did not do it to normalize him or to say I believed in his political beliefs or any of that stuff.

It was definitely a down time, and it’s tough for morale. I made a mistake. I’m sorry if I made anyone mad. And looking back, I would do it differently.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: Wow. Well, you know, sometimes in the breaks we hear things. Dana, what do you think?

WATTERS: Keep it clean, Dana.

Jimmy Fallon was really hilarious. And his apology reminds me of Jack Dorsey of Twitter having to apologize because he ate at Chick-Fil-A and said he liked it.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

PERINO: So where is the courage, guys? I mean, you remember Nils Crane? He used to say, “If it wasn’t for the starch in your shirt, there’d be nothing holding you up.”

WILLIAMS: Kimberly, part of the problem may be that Stephen Colbert now beats Fallon regularly. And Fallon identifies —

GUTFELD: In ratings.

PERINO: He got the scoop.

GUILFOYLE: I mean, he got the scoop. So, like, why not? It’s just — and the president was good-natured and fun about it. This is — the world is getting ridiculous or more ridiculous.

WILLIAMS: Well, wait a second, wait a second. Let’s get — let’s go to the —

GUILFOYLE: Or more ridiculous.

WILLIAMS: — exactly what Jimmy Fallon said. He people think he normalized Trump.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But he doesn’t share President Trump’s political beliefs, and he wasn’t trying to normalize him.

WATTERS: Well, I think it’s more important to hate Trump than be funny in Hollywood, and that’s sad. Because Jimmy, I believe, is probably the most talented late-night guy.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

WATTERS: I think he is probably the wittiest and the smartest, and I look forward to doing his show one day.

PERINO: I knew it. I knew it.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

PERINO: It’s book preservation.

I could have Hillary on my show, and I could tousel her hair, and I could make jokes.

GUTFELD: No, you can’t.

GUILFOYLE: Please don’t. Going to normalize Hillary?

GUILFOYLE: Bear Grylls.

WILLIAMS: Yes. So — and people — people — the conservatives went nuts. “Oh, no. This guy is using media.” Remember that?

GUTFELD: Yes, I wasn’t part of that. So anyway, it’s kind of sad in Hollywood. Politics just isn’t personal. It’s also a survival mechanism, and that’s what he’s figuring out.

But what he — the phrase that is being overused these days is “normalized.” People say that a lot: “You can’t normalize ‘X’ or ‘Y’.” Normalizing Trump as though he’s polio —

PERINO: Right.

GUTFELD: — or, you know, he’s murder. And it’s — it was cowardly and sad. I really like Jimmy Fallon. But that was probably the lowest point that his life has been in.

GUILFOYLE: I think so.

GUTFELD: And he’s pretty wild.

GUILFOYLE: He should have gone back — he used to have some conservatives talk to him. He was so funny and talented.

GUTFELD: Oh, my God. How sad. Normal — oh.

GUILFOYLE: But now — look what happens. Now he’s —

GUTFELD: Get him a therapy llama.

GUILFOYLE: Very sad.

WILLIAMS: All right. Is a “latte liberal” just a clever jab, or is there finally evidence to back it up? The answer ahead on “The Five.”

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WATTERS: It turns out the phrase “latte liberal” is based in reality. A new study from the University of Pennsylvania finds liberals do, in fact, drink more lattes than conservatives.

GUILFOYLE: Like the Big Mac.

WATTERS: Like the Big — Le Big Mac.

Kimberly, also interesting, they say for fast food, liberals prefer Chipotle and Panera. Conservatives prefer Sonic and Hardee’s. What do you make of that?

GUTFELD: I don’t think I was the only one who became deathly ill at Chipotle.

But I agree with this. Conservatives don’t take risks. And at my age mixing milk with coffee is, indeed, a risk.

GUILFOYLE: For everyone around.

GUTFELD: But I should also add coffee should only be taken black. It’s not coffee if you put milk or sugar in it. Then that’s a kid’s drink.

WATTERS: You are such a manly man.

GUTFELD: No, it’s — coffee is —

WATTERS: That is the only manly thing do you.

GUTFELD: It’s beautiful. Black — there’s nothing better than black coffee.

WATTERS: All right. Well, now I feel very effeminate —

GUTFELD: In a tin cup.

WATTERS: — because I drink it with milk and sugar, Dana. Beer —

PERINO: Yes, that’s pretty pathetic.

WATTERS: All right.

GUILFOYLE: You’re getting a little soft these days.

WATTERS: I am getting a little soft. I know. Beers, liberals prefer Heineken and Guinness, imports. Conservatives, Budweiser and Miller.

PERINO: I mean, I’m more of a Coors girl, myself.

WATTERS: The Rocky Mountain.

PERINO: Colorado, yes. And we also have Keystone Light. I don’t know if they still make that, but we sure like that.

WATTERS: That’s some cheap beer, Dana.

And in terms of activities, Juan, liberals do yoga and martial arts, whereas conservatives, archery and woodworking. I do neither of those. But go ahead.

WILLIAMS: No, I think, you know, great. Drink — everybody seems to like coffee, period.

WATTERS: Yes.

WILLIAMS: Both sides. So, what struck me was the commonality, you know, that hey, there’s something everybody likes.

PERINO: We could have a coffee summit.

WILLIAMS: Yes, I think we should have a coffee —

GUTFELD: At Starbucks.

WILLIAMS: And the other point of it was that someone pointed out that, even with lattes, it’s better for the American economy, because it benefits the dairy industry.

And I didn’t realize this. They said coffee beans are grown in several American states. It’s not a foreign product. So if you go to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, California, coffee beans.

PERINO: That’s —

WATTERS: Well, I’m still reeling from being called a weakling by drinking coffee with milk and sugar.

WILLIAMS: That’s OK. It’s OK.

WATTERS: It’s OK. I feel better about it.

GUILFOYLE: You do other stuff.

PERINO: Can somebody Photoshop that, please?

WATTERS: Also, smart phones, liberals prefer the iPhone. Conservatives, Samsung. Now, I just don’t know what the deal is with that.

GUILFOYLE: I’m going to say that’s —

GUTFELD: I’m beginning to call bologna on this whole thing.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, this is not good.

WATTERS: Is this study —

GUTFELD: I don’t — the reason why I call bologna on this, I don’t think politics has anything to do with these choices. It’s just something that they do.

PERINO: Just happens?

GUTFELD: Yes. It just happens. I don’t think about it.

WILLIAMS: The other part of it is age. I think if you had a cohort of liberals, you’re going to find they’re much younger. A cohort of conservatives, they’re much older.

GUTFELD: True.

WILLIAMS: And you’re going to find the conservatives, the older end of that cohort has more disposable income than the younger.

GUTFELD: Yes.

WILLIAMS: So —

PERINO: How did that surprise you?

WATTERS: I always think conservatives have more disposable income, because we’re smarter with money.

“One More Thing” is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: It’s time now for “One More Thing.” I’ll go first.

Iran lost to Spain 0-1, so not a high scoring game. But women still celebrated. Many hope this will lead to permanently reversing their ban. So glad to see them get to go.

GUTFELD: Did Trump have something to do with that?

PERINO: I’m sure he did. I’m sure he did.

All right. Juan.

PERINO: All right. Jesse.

WATTERS: I would like to wish Steven Watters, my father, a very happy 70th birthday.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday.

PERINO: Happy birthday, dad.

And there he is with my mom taking a selfie. Probably the first selfie ever, back in the 60’s.

GUTFELD: Funniest thing I’ve ever heard.

WATTERS: And now he has a huge beard. I’ve never seen him without a beard. I have no idea what he looks like. And there he is with Ann Watters, “Mom Texts,” as we know her.

So Dad, happy birthday, I love you very much.

PERINO: Happy birthday.

WATTERS: Congratulations.

WILLIAMS: Happy birthday.

PERINO: How sweet.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday.

PERINO: Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: — to you. Yes.

And you fast forward to the photo taken this past Father’s Day, shows him seated in the same position but at 6’7″. Can you imagine? So the father and son police officers.

GUTFELD: Don’t try that at home.

GUILFOYLE: Said to make the photo redo was a hard squeeze.

WATTERS: Nice.

GUILFOYLE: Isn’t that cute?

WATTERS: Very cool.

PERINO: And at that height, he’ll probably have an advantage.

GUILFOYLE: I think it’s adorable.

PERINO: Greg, do you feel jealous about that height?

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

GUTFELD: I wish I had a “One More Thing” about a world leader having a baby. Instead, I have gifts from the legendary band, The Misfits, who are big fans of “The Five.”

GUILFOYLE: Oh, wow.

GUTFELD: So everybody gets a Misfits shirt.

WATTERS: Thank you.

GUTFELD: Even Juan. Juan, I know you love The Misfits.

WATTERS: I don’t even know them.

WATTERS: Wait, is this —

GUTFELD: They’re from New Jersey. They’re amazing. Legendary Jerry Only gave them. His mom is a dedicated watcher.

PERINO: I’ve never worn anything like this.

GUTFELD: I can’t wait to see Dana in a Misfits T-shirt.

WATTERS: This will scare people.

GUTFELD: I have a second “One More Thing.”

PERINO: OK.

GUTFELD: Let’s go to it.

GUILFOYLE: Of course do you, diva.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAPHIC: Greg’s Breaking Wind News

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: “Greg’s Breaking Wind News.”

GUILFOYLE: What?

PERINO: Was it empty?

GUTFELD: It’s like — it’s like, I don’t know. Was it Dr. No? No, Dr. Who. It just flies in the air.

And anyway, no one was hurt. We always have to say that. No one was hurt.

PERINO: You know, I grew up not far from there, and in the summertime in the afternoons, the winds really does pick up. You have a lot of tornado warnings, things like that.

WILLIAMS: Yes. It’s like Dorothy. It’s like “The Wizard of Oz.”

WATTERS: Exactly.

WILLIAMS: Except you’re in a port-a-potty.

GUTFELD: It was a cheap version of “Wizard of Oz.” A really cheap version.

PERINO: Wonder where that outhouse landed on.

Oh, my gosh. All right. Well, that was a great show, everybody. Thank you so much.

GUTFELD: Everybody, wear their shirts.

PERINO: Yes. I will wear my shirt in private.

Set your DVRs and never miss an episode of “The Five.” “Special Report” is up next.

Hey, John.

JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS: We are definitely not in Kansas anymore. Thanks, Dana.

WILLIAMS: Clearly.

Trending in U.S.

Wife of freed NYC cop killer committed suicide just weeks after his release, coroner reveals

from All Of Beer http://allofbeer.com/gop-delays-house-vote-on-compromise-immigration-bill/

0 notes

thearnoldtully · 7 years ago

Text

How the White House garden became a political football

First lady Melania Trump plants and harvests vegetables in the White House kitchen garden with children from the Boys & Girls Club of Greater Washington on Sept. 22. 2017 (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

Melania Trump finally made her first appearance in the garden on Sept. 22, 2017 (The Internet was quick to note that her ostensibly modest flannel shirt cost $1,380.)

By Anastasia Day Washington Post April 3, 2018 Anastasia Day is a Hagley scholar and doctoral candidate in history at the University of Delaware, writing about environment, capitalism and gardens in the twentieth century United States.

Excerpt:

In this environment of uncertainty and competing priorities, the White House garden takes on newfound political symbolism. If Melania Trump continues the planting and harvest activities of Michelle Obama, she will be signalling support for organic agriculture, local food and school nutrition, all causes that ultimately demand radical revisions to American farm policy. To come out with sprayers of Sevin at hand before planting Roundup-Ready GMO corn, by contrast, would thrill President Trump’s far-right voting base and entrenched Republican agricultural interests, but would infuriate champions of improved nutrition and organic agriculture. To abandon the garden altogether would be interpreted as wanton disregard for children’s health on the part of the first lady: political suicide.

Thus far, the Trump administration has erred on the side of silence regarding the vegetable garden, mirroring the silence in Congress around the impending farm bill deadline. In February 2017, a news release from the Office of the First Lady confirmed the White House vegetable garden would not be removed. Come April, however, there was no spring planting event such as Michelle Obama had held; instead, the secretary of agriculture announced that he would “Make School Lunches Great Again” by relaxing Obama-era HHFKA nutrition and sourcing regulations. Public tours of the garden continued last summer, but the White House occupants kept their distance both legislatively and physically from local food production and childhood nutrition efforts.

Link to article.

Full article seen below if link does not work:

On Oct. 5, 2016, when Michelle Obama hosted her final harvest in the White House kitchen garden, she unveiled a pointed horticultural statement: Stones lay where mulch pathways had been. A central path of cement and more stone led to a wood-and-steel arbor straddling a bluestone slab that read: “WHITE HOUSE KITCHEN GARDEN — established 2009 by First Lady Michelle Obama with the hope of growing a healthier nation for our children.” From a podium, she told a crowd of children, reporters and Sesame Street characters: “I am hopeful that future first families will cherish this garden like we have.”

Given the results of the presidential election one month later, the first lady’s steel and stone reinforcements seemed wise. Right-wing partisans gleefully anticipated President Trump erasing everything “Obama” from the White House. Two days after the election, Ann Coulter tweeted: “I respectfully suggest a new name for Michelle’s White House vegetable garden: ‘Putting green.’ ”

Although it may seem a garden-variety partisan spat, the fight for the future of these vegetables has deep roots in agricultural and public-health issues that are fiercely contested and raise charges of elitism on one side and protecting big business at the expense of children’s health on the other. That makes the garden a political football — one with symbolic meaning about the future of farming and nutrition policy in America.

Before the Obamas, the last time the presidential lawn nourished vegetables was World War II, when Eleanor Roosevelt planted a Victory Garden as part of the movement to increase the national food supply. With more mothers working and unable to provide lunch at home, many schools also grew victory gardens to supply midday meals, sometimes augmented with food from the Agriculture Department’s Surplus Marketing Administration. Schools without such help relied on gardens even more.

In Los Angeles in 1942, gardens provided 60 percent of the vegetables and 50 percent of the poultry products for school cafeterias across the city. This feat required the hard labor of more than 77,000 students, not just on school campuses but also on newly plowed vacant lots across the city. Such programs were widely praised but did not survive the war.

Come 1945, most Americans considered school lunches a necessity that the federal government should sponsor. At the same time, farmers feared postwar price collapses and didn’t want additional competition. So rather than encourage gardens and local provisioning, the 1946 National School Lunch Act authorized the USDA to provide school lunches, buying excess crops and offloading them onto lunch trays to help stabilize farm prices.

The bill inaugurated a politically savvy fusion between social welfare policy and agricultural policy in the realm of school lunches: Every child eating a school lunch meant more income and a stable living for commodity farmers.

Through the rest of the 20th century, farm bills relied on bipartisan support, generated by packaging together farming subsidies, which conservatives from rural places liked, and welfare measures such as school lunch programs and the food stamp program, which urban-based liberals favored. As a result, children ate not what they needed, but what the largest farmers grew the most of: lots of grains, beef, processed corn products and few vegetables.

This bipartisan recipe for successfully passing farm and social welfare legislation was also a recipe for expanding waistlines and chronic malnutrition in children. By 2009, the obesity epidemic was drawing fresh attention to childhood nutrition. Michelle Obama, although she had no experience gardening, wanted to use the garden to make a statement about this crisis. In her 2012 book about the garden, American Grown, she explained, “I hoped this garden would help begin a conversation […] about the food we eat, the lives we lead, and how all of that affects our children.”

But her seemingly reasonable effort to start a conversation about childhood nutrition sparked a political firestorm. Conservative media launched an immediate attack, focusing on well-trod partisan claims of elitism. The decision to keep the garden free of pesticides and other chemicals sparked particular outrage, perceived as a slight to American farmers, and therefore the entirety of middle America. The Mid America CropLife Association, a representative of companies such as DuPont Crop Protection, Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences, sent a letter of protest to the White House within a week of the garden’s opening.

After Michelle Obama’s garden-based vision helped drive the 2010 Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act (HHFKA), outrage from supporters of conventional food systems peaked again. The act mandated comprehensive nutrition standards for school meals and encouraged school gardens under farm-to-school initiatives. Initial bipartisan support for the bill’s passage evaporated as implementation loomed. Early opponents such as food processors and the American Farm Bureau were later joined by the far-right House Freedom Caucus, which ranked HHFKA first on a December 2016 list of legislation to revoke or reform.

Conservative critics derided how they said HHFKA increased government intervention in local affairs, burdened schools with red tape and demanded compliance with unworkable regulations. Pundits railed against it for expanding the sphere of the nanny state and usurping parental authority over children’s diets.

But this rhetoric often obscured the true issue: The bill threatened the financial well being of traditional agriculture. In 2009, the American Farm Bureau spent $5.1 million lobbying against the Food Safety Enhancement Act, an early forerunner of the HHFKA. Agribusinesses have fiercely lobbied against the HHFKA and employed food processors and elected officials as proxies. In 2011, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), backed by the potato lobby, successfully fought back against the Institute of Medicine’s proposed restrictions on potatoes in school meals, clearing the way for daily “vegetable” sides of french fries.

In tandem with growing opposition to the HHFKA, congressional consensus on farm policy faltered under public anxieties over corporate agriculture’s impact on public health and the environment. The 2008 Farm Bill had been expired for two years by the time Congress passed the Agricultural Act of 2014. The final budget allocated 79.1 percent of funds to nutrition programs, wherein school lunch funding is second only to SNAP (food stamps). That law expires in September 2018, with no replacement in sight.

In this environment of uncertainty and competing priorities, the White House garden takes on newfound political symbolism. If Melania Trump continues the planting and harvest activities of Michelle Obama, she will be signaling support for organic agriculture, local food and school nutrition, all causes that ultimately demand radical revisions to American farm policy. To come out with sprayers of Sevin at hand before planting Roundup-Ready GMO corn, by contrast, would thrill President Trump’s far-right voting base and entrenched Republican agricultural interests, but would infuriate champions of improved nutrition and organic agriculture. To abandon the garden altogether would be interpreted as wanton disregard for children’s health on the part of the first lady: political suicide.

Melania Trump finally made her first appearance in the garden on Sept. 22. (The Internet was quick to note that her ostensibly modest flannel shirt cost $1,380.) While the first lady harvested the turnips and kale she had declined to help plant, she encouraged children to “continue to eat a lot of vegetables and fruits, so you grow up healthy and take care of yourself,” while avoiding calls for structural change. Exactly a week later, however, the Trump administration pushed back deadlines for updating nutrition labels on packaged foods, which would have mandated disclosure of added sugars, the most common of which is high-fructose corn syrup, second only to ethanol and animal feed in importance to the U.S. corn industry.

This spring, planting dates have come and gone; visitors are invited to tour gardens again planted by Park Service staff. But it seems clear that by reducing their involvement, the Trumps are trying to erode the symbolism of the garden to placate their agribusiness allies. If those priorities carry over to a draft of a new farm bill, they will doom us to another round of partisan warfare.

from Gardening http://www.cityfarmer.info/2018/04/04/how-the-white-house-garden-became-a-political-football/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

0 notes