Pelosi Trolls Trump For State of the Union LiesOn February 9, 2020 by Raul Dinwiddie
>>Donald Trump went after Nancy Pelosi during
his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. And in response, Pelosi gave a speech of her
own but in her speech, she made sure to do a little bit of a rebuttal on some of the
claims that Trump made during his State of the Union address. Let’s take a look.
>>It was quite appalling to hear the president say the 150 at least million families in America
that are faced with pre-existing medical conditions about a benefit that is afforded to them in
the Affordable Care Act that he was protecting that benefit. When in fact he has done everything
to dismantle it, and that we are fighting him in the courts right now, to preserve that
benefit, that misrepresentation was appalling, and so clearly untrue. President goes on and saying, we took many
more, because of all my growth, many more people are not on food stamps. No, you kicked
them off. People are not taking advantage of this. No, you kicked them off and that
just isn’t a fair thing to do in our economy. So it was, in my view of manifesto of Miss
truth of falsehoods blatantly, really dangerous to the well being of the American people if
they believed what he said.>>So I thought that it was important to have
a response to Donald Trump’s lies that actually provided a counter to those lies. And when governor Whitmer from Michigan gave
her response to Trump’s State of the Union, I was irritated by it mostly because it wasn’t
much of a response to what he said. And she was smiling the whole time, which I didn’t
understand. Here’s a president who is lying about what he has done in this economy. As we know, the economy is not doing well
for the vast majority of Americans right now. Using the stock market as a measure of how
well the economy is doing isn’t appropriate->>Yeah.
>>Especially when you consider the majority of Americans aren’t even invested in the stock
market. So these are things that frustrated me, and
so I wonder if Pelosi giving a response is at least internally an acknowledgement that
witness response didn’t go far enough. I don’t know maybe not but.
>>Maybe I think partially she’s also been under a lot of pressure from the republicans
since it because of the paper stuff and that sort of thing. So it’s more on her plate, I guess. I thought
what she said I don’t necessarily disagree with anything she said. I think with Whitmer,
it’s not an effective response. I think even if I agree with you on the substance it’s
not being delivered in a way that is particularly rousing or anything like that.>>But who knows, maybe if she does more of
this she’ll get better at it, because I agree with you. I think that the delivery wasn’t
as strong as it could have been. But there was an improvement from previous speeches.
Previously when she responds to Donald Trump she comes out with papers and she’s looking
down, doesn’t seem like she’s really engaged or interested in making her case. At least in this case it appeared she was
speaking off the cuff. And throughout you should watch the full speech obviously we
can’t do that here right now, we’re just giving you highlights. But there were moments where
she was pretty aggressive and I think that she needs to do more of that. Look, my argument about the Democrats has
always been that they don’t know how to fight back. And so do more of these press conferences
and do them with gusto, do them with enthusiasm and point to the truth and point to the facts.
Otherwise you have one side with Donald Trump spouting his lies incessantly, and there’s
no effective response to it.>>Yeah.
>>Now, there was one part that I didn’t think was, first of all factual, but more importantly,
effective leading into this election. And it has to do with who should take credit for
the economy? And so there was a pretty lengthy portion where she wanted to defend Obama,
here it is.>>He was trying to discredit the triumph
of the Obama administration on the economy, and I’ve given you out a paper on this. When
President Obama came into office, the unemployment rate was 10%. When he left, it was 5%. So
President Trump did not inherit a mess, he inherited a momentum of job creation. When President Obama came into office, the
stock market was at 6000, when he left it was at 18,000. Again, momentum that administration
was able to build on, not in this. The, during the eight years of the President Obama’s presidency
he reduced the deficit by a $1 trillion. Instead, this administration is increasing a $1 trillion. And of course, with their tax cut, their tax
scam for 83% of the benefits going to the top 1%, they increased the national debt about
$2 trillion. And therefore they tried, to supposed to pay for itself, but instead they
went to Medicare and Medicaid to try to pay for that.>>Listen, no one cares, I’m just I’m keeping
it real. Spending a portion of this, speech defending Obama, I get it. She’s right, I
mean, the numbers are right and I get the instinct to defend Obama. But it’s not a good
look when people are still really struggling in this economy. Yes, he improved it. The unemployment rate
was cut in half. But remember there are so many Americans right now who want full time
jobs that pay them a living wage and they can’t find it. So they have to work multiple
jobs simultaneously to make ends meet. I mean, the federal minimum wage hasn’t gone up in
ten years like so. I think what you want to do is make the case
for why we need to improve, not go back and say, the Americans are still really struggling,
but you know what, you know who improved things a little bit? Obama.
>>Mm.>>And Trump’s trying to take credit. No, and when I say no one cares, what I’m
trying to say is its not an effective way to get people to vote for Democrats. When
you’re looking backwards and you’re just trying to defend. You’re getting defensive about
>>You know.>>Yeah, a lot of them are gonna feel like
it’s ancient history at this point.>>Mm-hm.
>>That it seems like an esoteric argument to have. I don’t disagree with it necessarily.
I disagree with her as much as Trump in stressing the strength of the stock market as a proxy
for what the economy’s really doing.>>Definitely.
>>But we have a comparison that we can make, her thing right there with Bernie Sanders’
response. Bernie Sanders focused on waged and the lack
of growth there and the fact that inflation eats up more than 90% of the growth that we
have had over the past few years. That is forward looking, it’s identifying a continuing
problem under Trump. And he can tie it very easily and naturally to various parts of his
economic platform that should improve that situation and that is a way to respond to
Trump. It is a fact check, but it’s not a fact check
that looks back a decade ago.>>Yes.
>>It’s a fact check that looks at right now and the election that’s coming up. It’s far
more effective and it was delivered more effectively.>>I agree, absolutely. One more highlight
from her response to Donald Trump and this where, again she gets pretty salty toward
him. And that would be fine, that I have no problem
with that kind of behavior as long as you’re also fighting him when it comes to his policies,
and that has not been the case. She has helped him with legislative wins. She has handed
over $4.6 billion in taxpayer money for Donald trump’s disgusting practices at the border,
and then she went after progressive freshman Democrats for opposing that move. And so if you’re going to insult Trump, I
like it, because he deserves to be insulted. However, that’s minor compared to what you
can accomplish by fighting him legislatively. With that said, here’s the final video.
>>As you know, this week we had the State of the Union as required by the Constitution
of the United States. The President is to submit in writing or in
person, his statement of the State of the Union. What happened instead was the president
using the Congress of the United States as a backdrop for reality show presenting a state
of mind that had no contact with reality whatsoever. It was so inappropriate at a prayer breakfast. You wanna go to the prayer breakfast, prayer
in the school, vouchers, women’s right to choose, all those things that the right party
is for. God bless you, that’s it’s a prayer breakfast. And that’s something about faith,
may not be something I agree with, but it’s appropriate. But to go into the stock market
and raising up is a political thing and this characterizing other people’s motivation. He’s talking about things that he knows little
about faith and prayer. I extend the hand of friendship to him. To welcome him as the
president united states, to the people’s house. Was also an act of kindness, because he look
to me like he was a little sedated, be looked that way last year too. But he didn’t want to shake hands, that was
that meant nothing to me. And he has read it the truth in his speech. Is shredding the
constitution in his conduct. I’ve shredded his state of his mind address.
>>I don’t mind that, I don’t->>Interesting Freudian slip at the end that
the state of his->>I don’t think that was a Freudian slip.
>>No, you think it’s on purpose?>>Yeah, that was intentional.
>>Yeah, yeah, the thing is, we’ve said multiple times through the course of this our as we’ve
been talking about her, there’s the fun games and the clap bags, the literal claps and stuff
like that.>>And political theater.
>>And then there’s doing what actually matters. And yes, they’re passing some good bills that
won’t become law. It’s still better than nothing, yes. But when you’re helping him out on stuff,
including expanding the military budget and stuff like that, It makes this counterproductive,
at best bittersweet. I love that stuff, when people like AOC, who
also do the right substantive stuff, when they’re attacking people. But for her, it’s
like, I get that you’re in a feud with Trump, and you kinda enjoy it. And I’m sure it fires
up resistance types, but for me it’s like, every time I’m like. And then I remember what you’ve done when
it’s really counted. And it makes me mad at myself for being briefly distracted.
>>Don’t be mad at yourself because I I think that you need to do both things when it comes
to Donald Trump. I don’t think that you’re gonna win because AOC certainly does the clap
backs. And it’s effective because it’s coupled as
you said, with the policy fights that she brings to the table. So I don’t mind being
fair to Pelosi. I think it’s good that she fights back in some way, but it’s not enough.
That’s the point that I’m trying to make. I get that people want to give her 100% credit
for the political theater. The political theater is important, it is, but it’s nothing substantive
when you can’t back it up with policy, right, with actual legislative wins and legislative