President Trump’s Mount Rushmore Speech Claims ‘Their Goal Is the End of America’

In a major speech at Mount Rushmore, President Trump said that the goal of nationwide protests is not, quote, “a better America.” Their goal, he said, is the end of America.

Advertisements

The month of June was pretty calamitous for President Trump politically and in terms of his legacy. It began with the federal government having protesters forcibly cleared using chemical irritants from Lafayette Park across from the White House, so that the president could then take a photo op. To mass protests across the country. To a huge spike in coronavirus cases in areas of the country where it really had not been that prevalent, and where the governors in those states were looking toward reopening.

So the president tried for a reboot of his campaign with a rally in Tulsa on June 20. That rally was sparsely attended compared to what they had advertised as their likely attendance. And so Mount Rushmore and this event was supposed to be the reboot of the failed reboot. This was going to be an effort by the president to show he was in charge and trying to look toward the general election.

So the president needs an enemy to fight against. In 2018 during the midterms, you saw the president try to galvanize support against a looming threat, as he put it, of a caravan that was headed across the southern border with Mexico. And this was basically a threat of a foreign invasion. And he talked about this a lot and he tweeted about it a lot. And the main enemy that the U.S. is dealing with right now is the coronavirus, which is spreading rapidly. That’s an issue on which his polling is pretty bad. And his advisers know it. And another force that the country is dealing with right now is police brutality. Neither of those are issues that Donald Trump is seen as particularly strong on, or areas where he has shown he wants to lead.

President Trump aimed his speech at left-wing culture

So instead, looking for this enemy, aides described in his speech he was going to go after a left-wing culture coming after people who don’t agree with it. Now the threat is other Americans. The threat is people who don’t think like you.

I would start just understanding what it looked like. He was standing at this podium, surrounded by flags, in front of this historic monument. And that was supposed to underscore this current conversation about monuments and statues around the country.

Much of the conversation has been around Confederate totems, Confederate statues, the Confederate flag. The president has resisted those conversations. But even members of his own party have said that it is time to remove some of those monuments. Where he is drawing the line is when the conversation moves to George Washington or Thomas Jefferson. Those are two of the faces on Mount Rushmore. And that’s part of why he’s choosing to have this conversation there.

Advertisements

What he is suggesting is that the political left is trying to rewrite history by calling into question those men, by suggesting that their legacies need to be thought about again. And the reason that people are saying that their legacies need to be reconsidered is because they were slaveholders, and that you can’t have an honest conversation about race if you do not acknowledge that.

What he’s really trying to do is convince Republicans who are feeling shaky about him — and he hopes some independent voters — that the protests around the country have gone too far. He is trying to get them to see it the way he sees it, which is, this isn’t just a movement about the Confederacy. They’re coming for our whole history — “our.” They are coming for the history of white America.

President Trump continues to attempt to appeal to older white voters

It is in keeping with what President Trump has done for many, many years now, which is an ‘us versus them’ approach to his base of older, white voters. So the president very quickly went on to talk about how a, quote unquote, political weapon of the Americans he is talking about in this speech is so-called “cancel culture.” He is describing it as anyone who disagrees with certain folks are going to get chased out of polite society. And that’s not really what this.

Advertisements

So in part, this is appealing to a longstanding sense among conservatives that they are being attacked by the left for their beliefs. Also notice his emphasis on our values and our culture. He has used the words culture and values repeatedly to appeal to his base since 2017. This is the thing that he shares with his voters. It certainly is not geography — in many cases they’re in the Deep South. And he is a man from Queens. But this sense of our way of life is being taken over is what he has used time and again to appeal to people.

So keeping up with these themes, the president went on and said —“This left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution.” And then he went on a little bit later to say their goal is not a better America. Their goal is the end of America. You would think that he was talking about the British the way that he’s describing this as opposed to talking about primarily Black people in this country, but not only, who have been trying to right historic wrongs. He is making it sound, once again, as if something is being taken from him and his supporters.

I think it more than feels that way. I would argue it is race baiting. Look, I don’t think that Donald Trump is suddenly a different person. I think this is who he has been for a very, very long time, going back decades. But I do think he is getting explicit in what he is saying, both as protests are growing in the country and as his own poll numbers are sinking.

Trump comparing one America from another America

He is not explicitly using the words black and white. But he is explicitly describing one version of America versus another. And that, I think, is different, along with the fact that we have really not seen a president before use an Independence Day speech to be so divisive and to pit Americans in two, the way he is here.

What most surprises me about this speech, and the fact that it is supposed to be a reset of a presidential campaign, is that the message seems to fly in the face of polling that shows Americans don’t agree with this version of how to deal with race.

Advertisements

I read the polls. They all make clear that the president is wildly out of step with where the majority of voters are right now, where conservative voters are, where independent voters are, where a broad spectrum of voters are. This is a president who likes to do things his own way. He has ideas that he wants to put out there, regardless of how much it upsets his advisers, regardless of how scared senators are about losing their seats because his rhetoric is making things very hard for them. But he is not where the majority of Americans are in those polls.

Many of the people in the president’s campaign believe the direction that the polls are taking, even if they argue with some of the margins. Some of the people around the president share with him a belief or theory, or whatever you want to call it, that people are not being honest with the pollsters when they talk about how much support they have for these protests, and that the numbers will come around in President Trump’s favor when we get to the fall.

Trump campaign blowing off poll numbers

They think that people are inclined to lie to pollsters on matters of race. Now there have been campaigns where that has happened. The margins that we’re talking about are so large that it would be really hard to fathom that. But that is the bet that some of his advisers are making. Now are they making that on science? Not necessarily. Are they making that on political research? Only on the margins. For the most part, this is wishcasting that the president is not doing himself the damage he seems to be doing.

Because there’s the way the president wants to campaign. And they try to shape it around that. This is what Donald J. Trump thinks his campaign message should be. Now, there are areas where his advisers have gotten him to stick to that script that was written out and say things that they consider to be less potentially divisive. So for instance, he spoke broadly about culture and history. But he did not explicitly give a defense of Confederate statues, which really turns off suburban voters, in particular suburban women. And his advisers were very pleased with that, that he stuck to the script and didn’t say Confederate.

Advertisements

But then on Monday morning, he tweets support of the Confederate flag being aired at NASCAR events. So it undoes a lot of what had taken place before. There is no evidence that this message is going to help the president win again. There is no evidence that this is a successful approach to the voters he needs in order to win. But advisers are pretty candid that he thinks this is how he won last time. And he is convinced he can do it again.

The president is of the opinion — and again, this is not his campaign. There are people in the campaign who understand this is not the same electorate. But the president has convinced himself that nothing has changed, that he can turn Joe Biden into Hillary Clinton. And so far there is no reason to believe that either of those things is true. The campaign itself, I think, would like to be delivering a less blunt instrument version of what the president is saying. But because the president is able to speak only the way he’s comfortable, he will not change. And so yes, I think this is what you will see for the next few months.

If you enjoy our writing, please consider leaving a small donation. Your support helps keep the lights on and allows us to hire more writers and pay our current writers.

Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice Blasts Trump for Claiming He Was Never Briefed on Russia Bounty Plot

Susan Rice knows that Trump must have been briefed on Russia bounty plot.

Trump continues to claim that the Russia bounty plot may be another “Russia hoax,” and alleges he was never briefed. However, former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice has heard enough and fired back at Trump for claiming he was never briefed.

Advertisements

Last week, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany also denied that the President was briefed on the matter during a press conference. Rice appeared on MSNBC sharing her thoughts on Trump’s claims of the Russia bounty plot to be another “hoax.” Rice says this shows Russian President Vladimir Putin that he can kill American servicemen without facing consequences.

“This is an extraordinary revelation. The President of the United States has demonstrated absolutely callous disregard for the safety and security of American forces in a war zone and there’s no explanation for this,” Rice said, before questioning why Trump has not offered reassurance to the public that he “will get to the bottom of this intelligence.”

Rice does not buy Trump’s claims that he was never briefed, because she knows that John Bolton would have walked straight into the Oval Office and informed President Trump of this intelligence. The AP reports that Trump first briefed on the intel by Bolton in March 2019. Intelligence on the Russia bounty plot was also reportedly in the President’s written daily briefing in late February this year.

Advertisements

Rice continued by saying that as national security adviser, you don’t wait until you have 100% certainty, instead you walk into the Oval Office and tell the president what he needs to know and when he needs to know it.

“And so now they’re claiming, well he wasn’t told. Well, if that’s the case, then maybe these advisers in 2020 when the information came back again failed to tell him,” Rice said. “But the point is our servicemen and women are in a war zone vulnerable,” Rice said. “We have credible information that suggests that the Russians and maybe Putin himself are trying to kill American service members and the President calls it a hoax.”

If you enjoy our writing, please consider leaving a small donation. Your support helps keep the lights on and allows us to hire more writers and pay our current writers.

Trump Again Blames Tests for Showing Rise In COVID Cases

President Donald Trump on Saturday bemoaned the rising number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in the United States — and falsely blamed the mammoth uptick on testing itself.

“If we didn’t test so much and so successfully, we would have very few cases,” Trump said, adding that the United States’ “success” in testing “gives the Fake News Media all they want, CASES.”

Advertisements

This is hardly the first time Trump has blamed COVID-19 testing itself for the increasing numbers of confirmed infections. But it’s a junk talking point.

In addition to the case count increasing to record daily highs, the percentage of positive test results has also increased since mid-June.

When Trump attempted on Thursday to make the same point about test capacity being responsible for the swelling case numbers, reporters pointed to his own “testing czar,” Brett Giroir.

Advertisements

Giroir testified Thursday that while more testing leads generally to more discovered cases, “we do believe this is a real increase in cases, because the percent positives are going up.”

Also on Thursday, Trump said “the crisis is being handled.”

But for three days in a row, starting on July 1, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has counted at least 50,000 new confirmed COVID-19 cases daily, a grim record in the United States.

The President did not mention the pandemic in a speech Friday night in front of Mount Rushmore. Instead, he bashed what he called “far-left fascism” and made an appeal to aggrieved white people.

Trump is set for another massive Independence Day event in Washington, D.C. on Saturday — the city’s mayor, Muriel Bowser, has encouraged city residents not to attend due to the risk of spreading COVID-19. But she can’t cancel Trump’s expansive plans: The party will be held on the National Mall, which is federal property.

If you enjoy the articles that The Washington Ledger provides you, please consider leaving a small donation. Your support helps keep the lights on and allows us to hire more writers and pay our current writers.

Trump Campaign Attempting to Block Omarosa From Talking About White House Experience

The Trump campaign has recently filed hundreds of arbitration counts against Omarosa Manigault-Newman over a confidentiality agreement she signed, the former White House employee and “Apprentice” star said Wednesday.

Advertisements

But the alleged violations we know about don’t concern Newman’s campaign work — even though the Trump campaign is the entity challenging them. Rather, the campaign is going after her for records and descriptions of her work as a Trump administration official.

According to a copy of the arbitration complaint that Newman filed in court Wednesday, that includes her trashing Trump to the television personality Ross Matthews, during an episode of TV show “Celebrity Big Brother” that aired in February 2018, two months after she was fired from the White House.

The alleged violations stumped media law experts.

“She was a federal government employee in the White House. I don’t see how a [non-disclosure agreement] signed with the Trump campaign, on the side, could trump the First Amendment,” David Heller, deputy director of the Media Law Resource Center, told TPM Thursday. “Nothing is normal here.”

Trump “cannot constitutionally block her from exercising her First Amendment rights other than with respect to classified information,” the national security attorney Mark Zaid told TPM.

Zaid criticized the arrangement in 2018 as well, writing that NDAs for government workers “are unconstitutional on their face.”

The news trickled out in a court filing Wednesday for a separate case: The Justice Department alleged in 2019 that Newman knowingly failed to file a required financial disclosure form after being fired.

Federal prosecutors are pursuing discovery in that case, but Newman responded Wednesday that she risked exposing herself to even more “bad faith litigation” from the Trump campaign if she complied with federal prosecutors’ requests for documents. She cited the campaign arbitration documents as proof.

The campaign first filed an arbitration action against Newman in mid-2018.

SEARCH NOW:
by title by author

Omarosa trying to release new tell-all book

At the time, they said her new tell-all book about her White House service, “Unhinged,” had broken a confidentiality agreement Newman had signed as a 2016 Trump campaign employee.

While promoting the book, Newman released conversations she’d secretly recorded with then-chief of staff John Kelly and President Trump — which the campaign said violated Newman’s campaign pledge not to disclose confidential or disparaging information about Trump.

The campaign also went after Newman for her remarks about Trump on the reality show “Big Brother,” after she left her White House job. The damage was worth “millions of dollars,” the campaign said.

“I was haunted by tweets every single day, like what is he going to tweet next?” Newman told Matthews on the show, part of a longer conversation in which she trashed Trump.

That quote and others were listed in the campaign’s complaint against Newman. In legalese, Newman “materially breached the Agreement by, among other things, disclosing Confidential Information and making disparaging statements about Trump Persons,” the campaign alleged.

On Wednesday, Newman’s lawyers said in a filing that the campaign “recently added nearly four hundred additional counts to the arbitration action and is keeping tabs on everything she says and does.”

Advertisements

“We are at a complete loss,” the attorneys pleaded.

This isn’t an arbitration case of a private employee disparaging a private employer, Heller told TPM.

Those types of legal actions, he said, are “what actors do all the time with nannies and their household staff — but you can’t do that with government employees.”

Descriptions and records of government work are “sort of an awkward and totally unusual thing to be asking an arbitrator to decide,” he added.

Federal prosecutors in Newman’s financial disclosure case said the records they’re seeking in discovery “do not relate” to the things laid out in the campaign’s confidentiality agreement. And Newman’s lawyers said that they agreed with that assessment.

But, they said, “that does not eliminate the weaponization of lawsuits filed against her or the attorneys fees she has incurred to defend even the most frivolous claims.”

Zaid said the situation was unprecedented — and exhausting.

“Watching anything relating to President Trump’s enforcement of non-disclosure agreements is like watching a tennis match and the ball going back and forth across the net,” he said. “It is incredibly tiresome on one’s neck.”

Intel Officials Warned White House About Russia-Taliban Plot

Intelligence officials claim to have warned Donald Trump about a Russia-Taliban bounty plot targeting American troops.

White House officials had knowledge of Russia secretly offering bounties to the Taliban in Afghanistan for the death of Americans. A whole year earlier than what was previously reported.

Advertisements

The report was filed in one of President Donald Trump’s daily intel briefings at the time. Former National Security Adviser John Bolton told officials he briefed Trump on the intelligence in March 2019.

The White House has been dodging questions about Trump or other officials’ awareness of Russia’s actions in 2019. The White House is claiming Trump has not been briefed on the intelligence because it has not been fully verified.

Bolton declined to comment Monday when asked by the AP if he’d briefed Trump about the matter in 2019. On Sunday, he suggested to NBC that Trump was claiming ignorance of Russia’s provocations to justify his administration’s lack of response.

“He can disown everything if nobody ever told him about it,” Bolton said.

The revelations cast new doubt on the White House’s efforts to distance Trump from the Russian intelligence assessments. The AP reported Sunday that concerns about Russian bounties also were in a second written presidential daily briefing this year and that current national security adviser Robert O’Brien had discussed the matter with Trump. O’Brien denies doing that.

On Monday, O’Brien said that while the intelligence assessments regarding Russian bounties “have not been verified,” the administration has “been preparing should the situation warrant action.”

The administration’s earlier awareness of the Russian efforts raises additional questions about why Trump didn’t take punitive action against Moscow for efforts that put the lives of American service members at risk. Trump has sought throughout his time in office to improve relations with Russia and President Vladimir Putin, moving this year to try to reinstate Russia as part of a group of world leaders it had been kicked out of.

Intel community didn’t have enough details to form a response

Officials said they didn’t consider the intelligence assessments in 2019 to be particularly urgent, given Russian meddling in Afghanistan isn’t a new occurrence. The officials with knowledge of Bolton’s apparent briefing for Trump said it contained no “actionable intelligence,” meaning the intelligence community didn’t have enough information to form a strategic plan or response. However, the classified assessment of Russian bounties was the sole purpose of the meeting.

The officials insisted on anonymity because they weren’t authorized to disclose the highly sensitive information.

The intelligence that surfaced in early 2019 indicated Russian operatives had become more aggressive in their desire to contract with the Taliban and members of the Haqqani Network, a militant group aligned with the Taliban in Afghanistan and designated a foreign terrorist organization in 2012 during the Obama administration.

Advertisements

The National Security Council and the undersecretary of defense for intelligence held meetings regarding the intelligence. The NSC didn’t respond to questions about the meetings.

Late Monday, the Pentagon issued a statement saying it was evaluating the intelligence but so far had “no corroborating evidence to validate the recent allegations.”

“Regardless, we always take the safety and security of our forces in Afghanistan — and around the world — most seriously and therefore continuously adopt measures to prevent harm from potential threats,” said Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman.

Concerns about Russian bounties flared anew this year after members of the elite Naval Special Warfare Development Group, known to the public as SEAL Team Six, raided a Taliban outpost and recovered roughly $500,000 in U.S. currency. The funds bolstered the suspicions of the American intelligence community that Russians had offered money to Taliban militants and linked associations.

The White House contends the president was unaware of this development, too.
The officials told the AP that career government officials developed potential options for the White House to respond to the Russian aggression in Afghanistan, which was first reported by The New York Times. However, the Trump administration has yet to authorize any action.

Intelligence on the Russian bounties came from captured Taliban militants

The intelligence in 2019 and 2020 surrounding Russian bounties was derived in part from debriefings of captured Taliban militants. Officials with knowledge of the matter told the AP that Taliban operatives from opposite ends of the country and from separate tribes offered similar accounts.

Advertisements

Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied Russian intelligence officers had offered payments to the Taliban in exchange for targeting U.S. and coalition forces.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called the Taliban’s chief negotiator, a spokesman for the insurgents said Tuesday, but it was unknown whether there was any mention during their conversation of allegations about Russian bounties. Pompeo pressed the insurgents to reduce violence in Afghanistan and discussed ways of advancing a U.S.-Taliban peace deal signed in February, the Taliban spokesman tweeted.

The U.S. is investigating whether Americans died because of the Russian bounties. Officials are focused on an April 2019 attack on an American convoy. Three U.S. Marines were killed after a car rigged with explosives detonated near their armored vehicles as they returned to Bagram Airfield, the largest U.S. military installation in Afghanistan.

The Defense Department identified them as Marine Staff Sgt. Christopher Slutman, 43, of Newark, Delaware; Sgt. Benjamin Hines, 31, of York, Pennsylvania; and Cpl. Robert Hendriks, 25, of Locust Valley, New York. They were infantrymen assigned to 2nd Battalion, 25th Marines, a reserve infantry unit headquartered out of Garden City, New York.

Hendriks’ father told the AP that even a rumor of Russian bounties should have been immediately addressed.

“If this was kind of swept under the carpet as to not make it a bigger issue with Russia, and one ounce of blood was spilled when they knew this, I lost all respect for this administration and everything,” Erik Hendriks said.

Three other service members and an Afghan contractor were wounded in the attack. As of April 2019, the attack was under a separate investigation, unrelated to the Russian bounties.

The officials who spoke to the AP also said they were looking closely at insider attacks from 2019 to determine if they were linked to Russian bounties.

If you enjoy the articles that The Washington Ledger provides you, please consider leaving a small donation. Your support helps keep the lights on and allows us to hire more writers and pay our current writers.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ko-fi.pngThis image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is patreon1.jpgThis image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is paypal1.png