Quantcast
Connect with us

Trump chose Pence over Gingrich for VP because Newt’s background check was terrifying: report

Published

on

Newt Gingrich appears on Fox News (screen grab)

President Donald Trump nearly chose Newt Gingrich as his 2016 running mate, but he was concerned about the former House speaker’s background check.

The president, of course, ended up tapping former Indiana governor Mike Pence to run alongside him, after the religious conservative impressed him during a private meeting just ahead of the Republican National Convention, but the days ahead of that decision were full of intrigue and wrangling, reported Politico Magazine.

ADVERTISEMENT

Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump preferred Gingrich because he meshed well with Trump, and they liked his TV performances and the big ideas he could bring to the campaign.

But Trump had told an adviser that Gingrich’s vetting packet contained some terrifying details, and the former reality TV star said the background check “makes mine look tame” in comparison.

Trump juggled Pence, Gingrich and former New Jersey governor Chris Christie until the last minute, although Politico Magazine reported that Christie was his third choice.

The Republican candidate ultimately chose Pence because he was impressed by his nonchalance during a final meeting that served as a job interview, but not until he met a final time with Gingrich.

Fox News host Sean Hannity had flown Gingrich, his preferred candidate, to Indianapolis at the last minute to meet with Trump after sensing the GOP candidate was leaning in another direction.

ADVERTISEMENT

But he never stood a chance after Pence won over Trump by acting like he didn’t need to be vice president, and promised to campaign vigorously for Trump and whatever running mate he chose.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

2020 Election

‘So, so cruel’: Rights advocates sound alarm about immigration agenda Stephen Miller is crafting for Trump’s 2nd term

Published

on

Immigrant rights advocates along with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his supporters responded with alarm to reporting this week that Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, is plotting how to "rev up Trump's restrictive immigration agenda" and is ready to "unleash executive orders deemed too extreme for a president seeking reelection" in the event of a Biden loss next week.

NBC News reported Friday that Miller, speaking as an adviser to the president's campaign, laid out four top priorities in a 30-minute call Thursday: "limiting asylum grants, punishing and outlawing 'sanctuary cities,' expanding the so-called travel ban with tougher screening for visa applicants, and slapping new limits on work visas." Implementing these policies would require a mix of legislation and executive action.

Continue Reading

2020 Election

REVEALED: Far-right extremists are circulating plans to lock down Arizona streets if Trump is re-elected

Published

on

On Saturday, The Arizona Republic reported that far-right paramilitary groups are circulating plans to lock down neighborhoods in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area in the event that President Donald Trump is re-elected, supposedly to police left-wing protesters.

"In Arizona, the head of the Prescott-area chapter of the Oath Keepers group, which recruits military and law enforcement officers, has warned residents to be prepared to protect their neighborhoods from feared extreme left-wing protesters who would be upset should President Donald Trump be re-elected," reported Richard Ruelas. "Part of that the pro-Trump group'splan involved closing streets and assigning monitors to control access, according to a planning document shared with The Republic."

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

America’s crimes against humanity aren’t on the ballot this year — but they should be

Published

on

The 2020 presidential election is a life-and-death decision for thousands of people vulnerable to COVID-19, for a globe under the assault from the climate crisis, and for the future of American democracy. And yet for all the urgency, the political campaign still suffers under the weight and stench of bullshit.

This article first appeared in Salon.

Philosopher Harry Frankfurt warns in his bestselling pamphlet "On Bullshit" that "bullshit" is more injurious than the blatant lie. One reason among many is that bullshit blurs the line between reality and fiction, offering a manipulative incorporation of truth to strengthen its own capacity to persuade. Absolute falsity, in contrast, is obvious to anyone with minimal awareness of the facts. When the Trump administration recently declared that one of its grand achievements was "ending the pandemic," most people laughed in disbelief. This is a lie fit for consumption only from inhabitants of a collective similar to the Rev. Jim Jones' notorious People's Temple settlement in Guyana.

Continue Reading