Donald Trump: Actually, Now That I Think About It, Let's Leave the Abortion Laws As They Are [CBS]

Source: Ace Of Spades
Published: Apr 1, 2016
Author: Ace
Post Date: 2016-04-02 09:46:31 by Tooconservative
Views: 65105

Donald Trump: Actually, Now That I Think About It, Let's Leave the Abortion Laws As They Are

I'm changing, I'm changing. I'm softening that position.

However, he then added that abortion is murder.

Asked how he'd like to change the law to further restrict access to abortions, Trump replied, "The laws are set now on abortion and that's the way they're going to remain until they're changed."

"I would've preferred states' rights," he added. "I think it would've been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set....At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way."

"Do you think abortion is murder?" Dickerson asked.

"I have my opinions on it, but I'd rather not comment on it," Trump replied.

"You said you were very pro-life," Dickerson followed up. "Pro-life means that...abortion is murder."

"I mean, I do have my opinions on it. I just don't think it's an appropriate forum," said Trump.

"But you don't disagree with that proposition, that it's murder?" Dickerson asked.

"No, I don't disagree with it," Trump eventually replied.

Okay. As long as you're giving the proper amount of thought to these issues.

There was once a very intelligent man who said, "The moment Trump gets into trouble, he's going to start pandering like crazy to liberals, because he just doesn't know any better."

Here we see Trump finally realizing the damage he caused to himself with Michelle Fields and Heidi Cruz, plus his own goal on abortion, so his response, to get back those women he cherishes so much, is to say "Hey, let's leave the abortion laws as they are. But privately, I think abortion is murder. FYI."

I seriously can't think of a worse political position: On one hand, he's telling the pro-life people I'm not changing any abortion laws. Fine, okay, most presidents won't try, but few are as upfront in telling a key part of the conservative movement they're getting the goose-egg.

Simultaneously, on the other hand, he pisses off the pro-choice people, by telling them that, while he won't be changing the abortion laws, that abortion is murder.

It's lose-lose. With a bonus lose for it being dreadfully obvious that he simply hasn't given the issue a lick of thought and is now just basically button-mashing (as Allah puts it) in hopes that some combination of inputs gets him past the boss on this level. Posted by Ace at 07:27 PM Comments



Donald Trump: About That Thing I Just Said A Few Hours Ago-- Nevermind

—Ace

The woman will, or rather will not be punished, and the laws will not, or rather will, be changed.

.@realDonaldTrump spox Hope Hicks walks back Trump abortion comments to CBS. Says Trump WILL change law on abortion pic.twitter.com/1oedertZbC— Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) April 2, 2016
Hey, by ten o'clock we might have another Trump position on abortion, so stay tuned.

Posted by Ace at 09:03 PM Comments

Poster Comment:

The carnival barker executes another double-backflip on abortion. It takes real courage to confuse yourself with all these "hypotheticals" four times in less than four days. But it's only murder. Well, unless it isn't. Who really knows anyway?

You keep thinking the rats will realize they're following the Pied Piper but ...

Let the Trumpsplaining commence!

Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: Tooconservative    To: All, A K A Stone, misterwhite, Roscoe, SOSO, ConservingFreedom, sneakypete, tomder55, redleghunter, GarySpFc, Fred Mertz, buckeroo, et al (#0)

ping

Tooconservative posted on 2016-04-02 09:48:55   Reply   Private Reply

#2: Roscoe    To: TooConservative (#1)

If the law hypothetically punished abortion, all parties to the crime should be punished. The President has no control over state abortion laws.

You're so easily confused.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 09:53:52   Reply   Private Reply

#3: Tooconservative    To: Roscoe (#2)

I'm just waiting for Trump to tell us that abortion should be made mandatory.

Then Hope Hicks can come out again to Trumpsplain it all away.

Comedy gold.

Tooconservative posted on 2016-04-02 10:01:48   Reply   Private Reply

#4: misterwhite    To: TooConservative (#0)

"You said you were very pro-life," Dickerson followed up. "Pro-life means that...abortion is murder."

"Pro-life" is a convenient description given to those who want to make most, or all, abortions illegal. It says nothing about whether or not the individual considers it murder.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 10:02:15   Reply   Private Reply

#5: misterwhite    To: TooConservative (#0)

"I would've preferred states' rights," he added. "I think it would've been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set....At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way."

Of course we have to leave the laws that way. At least until the U.S. Supreme Court shifts their position.

No President ... no Congress ... no State ... can change our abortion laws.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 10:07:15   Reply   Private Reply

#6: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite (#4)

"Pro-life" is a convenient description given to those who want to make most, or all, abortions illegal. It says nothing about whether or not the individual considers it murder.

Oh, obviously that changes everything! LOL

You can enjoy this gem of an interview on CBS on their Face The Nation show. And it will be fresh in the minds of WI voters for Tuesday's primary.

Tooconservative posted on 2016-04-02 10:08:31   Reply   Private Reply

#7: misterwhite    To: TooConservative (#6)

"And it will be fresh in the minds of WI voters for Tuesday's primary."

Could work in Trump's favor. It'd really be funny if exit interviews showed Democrats voting for Trump en masse because they thought he was pro-choice.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 10:21:33   Reply   Private Reply

#8: misterwhite    To: Roscoe (#2)

"The President has no control over state abortion laws."

The interviewers sure do act as though he does.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 10:25:52   Reply   Private Reply

#9: misterwhite    To: TooConservative (#0)

"On one hand, he's telling the pro-life people I'm not changing any abortion laws."

So you think he should lie and tell them he will? And how will he do that, pray tell? By Executive Order?

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 10:34:29   Reply   Private Reply

#10: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite (#7)

Could work in Trump's favor.

You should count on it. How can Trump lose WI after hitting this one out of the ballpark?

Tooconservative posted on 2016-04-02 10:35:17   Reply   Private Reply

#11: Pinguinite    To: TooConservative (#0)

Abortion is not a presidential issue, though everyone likes to pretend it is.

Pinguinite posted on 2016-04-02 11:06:00   Reply   Private Reply

#12: misterwhite    To: TooConservative (#10)

"How can Trump lose WI after hitting this one out of the ballpark?"

There you go! That's the attitude we like to see!

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 11:06:44   Reply   Private Reply

#13: tomder55    To: TooConservative (#0)

On one hand, he's telling the pro-life people I'm not changing any abortion laws. Fine, okay, most presidents won't try, but few are as upfront in telling a key part of the conservative movement they're getting the goose-egg.

Simultaneously, on the other hand, he pisses off the pro-choice people, by telling them that, while he won't be changing the abortion laws, that abortion is murder.

Trump the uniter .He has untied both sides of the abortion issue in opposition to him. Well done !

tomder55 posted on 2016-04-02 11:07:58   Reply   Private Reply

#14: A K A Stone    To: tomder55 (#13)

Punish cunts who murder their offspring. You,really not provide life. Your position is murder your kid no consequences. I don't see how you consider yourself christian. Repent.

A K A Stone posted on 2016-04-02 11:12:26   Reply   Private Reply

#15: Fred Mertz    To: TooConservative (#10)

Fred Mertz posted on 2016-04-02 11:31:31   Reply   Private Reply

#16: SOSO    To: TooConservative, All, A K A Stone, misterwhite, Roscoe, ConservingFreedom, sneakypete, tomder55, redleghunter, GarySpFc, Fred Mertz, buckeroo, (#1)

"I would've preferred states' rights," he added. "I think it would've been better if it were up to the states............."

The most stupid, illogical, immoral position to have. Either an unborn fetus is or is not a human being, a person entitled to every protection and right under the U.S. Constitution as is any other person. To have 50 different determinations of the nature of the unborn fetus and the legal protections it is due is indefensible on any ground.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 11:32:27   Reply   Private Reply

#17: tomder55    To: A K A Stone (#14)

are we talking the law or scripture ? "But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins "(Matthew 6:15). If God chooses to punish the mother then it is God's will .“Vengeance is mine, I will repay” (Romans 12:19). As for the law ,I don't believe that the woman should be held responsible for the crime . If abortion is illegal ,it is the abortionist who has profited from it .The abortionist should pay the price.

tomder55 posted on 2016-04-02 11:37:42   Reply   Private Reply

#18: misterwhite    To: SOSO (#16)

"To have 50 different determinations of the nature of the unborn fetus and the legal protections it is due is indefensible on any ground."

That's the way it was for 200 years until an activist court looked into a penumbra of an emanation and found the right to murder an unborn child in the U.S. Constitution.

Returning the issue to the states allows each state to make that determination. If you don't like the decision reached by your state, at least you can move.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 11:52:05   Reply   Private Reply

#19: Roscoe    To: TooConservative (#3)

I'm just waiting for Trump to tell us that abortion should be made mandatory.

Odd. I was waiting for you to say the same thing, TooProAbort.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 12:12:10   Reply   Private Reply

#20: Roscoe    To: SOSO (#16)

The most stupid, illogical, immoral position to have.

Only absolute centralized power is moral. /sarcasm

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 12:26:40   Reply   Private Reply

#21: Roscoe    To: misterwhite (#8)

The interviewers sure do act as though he does.

The interviewers want a dictator.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 12:28:06   Reply   Private Reply

#22: misterwhite    To: Roscoe (#21)

"The interviewers want a dictator."

The interviewers want their dictator.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 12:37:58   Reply   Private Reply

#23: redleghunter    To: TooConservative (#0)

The meme of "I'm personally against abortion but believe it should be legal " has been the liberal talking point for at least 20 years.

Amounts to: I'm personally against murder but think we need to keep it lawful for others.

Trump has just embraced the NARAL platform.

redleghunter posted on 2016-04-02 12:51:33   Reply   Private Reply

#24: Fred Mertz    To: redleghunter (#23)

Are you one of those hard shell Baptists?

You probably want booze outlawed - it is in most Kentucky counties, including Bourbon County.

I think some religions think dancing is sinful too.

While you're at it, ban bacon too!

Fred Mertz posted on 2016-04-02 12:55:32   Reply   Private Reply

#25: SOSO    To: misterwhite (#18)

"To have 50 different determinations of the nature of the unborn fetus and the legal protections it is due is indefensible on any ground."

That's the way it was for 200 years until an activist court looked into a penumbra of an emanation and found the right to murder an unborn child in the U.S. Constitution.

There was no 14th Amendment 200 years ago. And abortion was illegal in the U.S. through the mid-1880s. If you are going to debate the issue at least bone up on the facts.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 12:57:23   Reply   Private Reply

#26: SOSO    To: misterwhite (#25)

Here, I will help you out.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 12:59:29   Reply   Private Reply

#27: SOSO    To: Roscoe (#20)

The most stupid, illogical, immoral position to have.

Only absolute centralized power is moral. /sarcasm

Did I say that moron? But perhaps you are against the centralized power that did away with slavery or gave women the right to vote or establishes reasonable restrictions preventing the abuse of public natural resources or fights our wars. It hard to imagine that you can be any bigger of a dolt.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:02:49   Reply   Private Reply

#28: SOSO    To: Fred Mertz (#24)

Are you one of those hard shell Baptists?

You probably want booze outlawed - it is in most Kentucky counties, including Bourbon County.

I think some religions think dancing is sinful too.

While you're at it, ban bacon too!

You've lost it Fred. Better get back on those meds.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:04:08   Reply   Private Reply

#29: Fred Mertz    To: SOSO (#28)

Fred Mertz posted on 2016-04-02 13:09:59   Reply   Private Reply

#30: SOSO    To: TooConservative, A K A Stone, misterwhite, Roscoe, vicomte13, ConservingFreedom, sneakypete, tomder55, redleghunter, GarySpFc, Fred Mertz, buckeroo, All (#1)

Donald Trump: Actually, Now That I Think About It...............

Gee, I wonder how much he thought about it when he decided to be pro-choice. And again how much he thought about it when he decided to be pro-life. His own words "now that I think about it" strongly suggest that he hadn't thought about either position before. But to his credit he is changing.

But.......but........I wonder what other positions that he has espoused will change after he really thinks about them?

There really is no hope for a Trump dupe.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:11:54   Reply   Private Reply

#31: Roscoe    To: SOSO (#27)

Did I say that moron?

Yep. In the most stupid, illogical, immoral way possible.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 13:12:05   Reply   Private Reply

#32: SOSO    To: Fred Mertz (#29)

Villanova will win it all too. I'm not sure where to make that bet.

I am certain that someone at the track can point you in the right direction.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:12:54   Reply   Private Reply

#33: misterwhite    To: SOSO (#25)

"There was no 14th Amendment 200 years ago."

The U.S. Supreme Court found a right to privacy in the U.S. Constitution. They then used the 14th amendment to apply that right to the states.

"And abortion was illegal in the U.S. through the mid-1880s. If you are going to debate the issue at least bone up on the facts."

It was illegal at the state level. I said it was a state-level decision for 200 years. So what's your problem?

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 13:13:33   Reply   Private Reply

#34: SOSO    To: Roscoe (#31)

Did I say that moron?

Yep. In the most stupid, illogical, immoral way possible.

Then please have the courage to post my statement. If you can't you lose big time. But you are used to that, aren't you?

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:14:22   Reply   Private Reply

#35: Roscoe    To: SOSO (#34)

post my statement.

"The most stupid, illogical, immoral position to have."

Did you forget already?

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 13:16:08   Reply   Private Reply

#36: Roscoe    To: misterwhite (#33)

I said it was a state-level decision for 200 years.

That's immoral! Only centralized government is good!

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 13:17:33   Reply   Private Reply

#37: SOSO    To: misterwhite (#33)

It was illegal at the state level. I said it was a state-level decision for 200 years. So what's your problem?

The problem is that it was not at all illegal at the state level 200 years ago. Do your homework. I even gave you a link which you obviously didn't read. Abortion was perfectly legal in ancient Rome and Greece and in England up to 1803 or so. It wasn't until the mid-;ate 1880s that it wasn't legal in the U.S.

As for SCOTUS, it claimed that a fetus was not a person as applied under Amendment 14th and that right of privacy of the women was superior to any right of the fetus thereunder.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:19:10   Reply   Private Reply

#38: SOSO    To: Roscoe (#35)

"The most stupid, illogical, immoral position to have."

Did you forget already?

LMAO. It appears that you did, loser. You must be a Trump dupe.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:20:03   Reply   Private Reply

#39: ConservingFreedom    To: misterwhite, SOSO (#18)

That's the way it was for 200 years until an activist court looked into a penumbra of an emanation and found the right to murder an unborn child in the U.S. Constitution.

Returning the issue to the states allows each state to make that determination. If you don't like the decision reached by your state, at least you can move.

Or work to change your state's law, or engage in civil disobedience against it.

Dare we ask where Trump stands (today) on a federal abortion-restricting amendment?

ConservingFreedom posted on 2016-04-02 13:20:08   Reply   Private Reply

#40: Roscoe    To: SOSO (#38)

It appears that you did

Only to you and the voices in your head.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 13:22:30   Reply   Private Reply

#41: SOSO    To: Roscoe (#40)

You fail again. Simply post my statement and perhaps this would be the first time you ever win.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:23:40   Reply   Private Reply

#42: SOSO    To: ConservingFreedom, misterwhite (#39)

Dare we ask where Trump stands (today) on a federal abortion-restricting amendment?

Who cares? He likely will not be relevant in a few months. But if he is he will likely change his mind.....again......and again......and again.

"Or work to change your state's law, or engage in civil disobedience against it."

I have no inherent problem with either. But effectiveness always comes down to enforcement.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:29:06   Reply   Private Reply

#43: Roscoe    To: SOSO (#41)

Simply post my statement

Again? It won't get any less stupid.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 13:29:24   Reply   Private Reply

#44: SOSO    To: Roscoe (#43)

Simply post my statement

Again? It won't get any less stupid.

Perhaps but it certainly would prove that you are not lying. Right now you act as a dickless wonder that doesn't have any balls either to defend himself. So if you do not post my statement proving you claim please just slink away and hope nobody else sh*ts on you. Over and out, eunuch.

SOSO posted on 2016-04-02 13:33:02   Reply   Private Reply

#45: Roscoe    To: SOSO (#44)

You sure think about dick a lot.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 13:33:44   Reply   Private Reply

#46: misterwhite    To: SOSO (#37)

"The problem is that it was not at all illegal at the state level 200 years ago."

I never said anything about the legality or illegality of abortions.

You said "To have 50 different determinations of the nature of the unborn fetus and the legal protections ..." and I responded that there WERE different determinations at the state level for 200 years.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 13:53:31   Reply   Private Reply

#47: ConservingFreedom    To: TooConservative (#0)

The carnival barker executes another double-backflip on abortion. It takes real courage to confuse yourself with all these "hypotheticals" four times in less than four days. But it's only murder. Well, unless it isn't. Who really knows anyway?

These latest several positions are consistent with the theory that The Donald never wanted to be the nominee. Just sayin' ...

ConservingFreedom posted on 2016-04-02 13:53:55   Reply   Private Reply

#48: misterwhite    To: ConservingFreedom (#39)

"Dare we ask where Trump stands (today) on a federal abortion-restricting amendment?"

Why would you? The President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process.

misterwhite posted on 2016-04-02 13:57:02   Reply   Private Reply

#49: ConservingFreedom    To: misterwhite (#48)

Why would you? The President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process.

The presidency is a bully pulpit. I'd like to know how it will be used.

ConservingFreedom posted on 2016-04-02 14:30:17   Reply   Private Reply

#50: Roscoe    To: misterwhite (#48)

Why would you? The President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process.

Roscoe posted on 2016-04-02 14:34:10   Reply   Private Reply