US President Donald Trump’s incredible, amazing, world-class Gettysburg Address


Donald Trump’s incredible, amazing, world-class Gettysburg Address

President Trump superimposed over a Fletcher C. Ransom painting of the scene during Lincoln’s speech at the dedication of the Gettysburg National Cemetery in 1863. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images, Library of Congress/Getty Images)

|Jerry Adler, Senior Editor, Yahoo News|AIWA! NO!|On the same day that a gunman shot up a service at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, President Trump gave a speech at a political rally in Illinois, attempting to balance a sober call to unity with raw partisan rhetoric. The results were what the nation has come to expect: a few minutes at the start of scripted, stilted boilerplate, followed by a stream-of-consciousness ramble through Trump’s various preoccupations, grievances and self-congratulatory boasting. Another president made a famous speech about a tragedy in Pennsylvania, dedicating a national cemetery at the site of the decisive Civil War Battle of Gettysburg. Comparisons of Trump to Abraham Lincoln are a staple among his fans —

Dinesh D’Souza


When Lincoln, an outsider and a Republican, won the election of 1860, all hell broke loose and Democrats went berserk. Sound familiar?

Catch my full @NRATV interview with @DLoesch: 

— and, of course, Trump’s biggest fan, himself.

Donald J. Trump


Very interesting!

Dinesh D’Souza


When Lincoln, an outsider and a Republican, won the election of 1860, all hell broke loose and Democrats went berserk. Sound familiar?

Catch my full @NRATV interview with @DLoesch: 

How would he have handled the occasion? Lincoln held the greatest speech in American history to 272 words, but nobody would expect Trump to restrain himself to that extent. Here’s how it might have gone:

[Band plays “Camptown Races.” Trump comes bounding onto podium, pumping fists, pointing to people in the crowd as if he recognizes them. Crowd quiets. Trump speaks.]

“Fourscore and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent an incredible, world-class new nation, conceived in liberty —

— liberty. Think about it, folks. Anyone here against liberty? I didn’t think so. If you don’t like liberty, you can vote for the Democrats. Stephen Douglas. There’s a real beauty. Stupid Steve, I call him.

[Crowd boos.]

Wasn’t that an incredible debate? Everyone thought I was going to lose. But even the Failing New York Times said I won.

Should we lock him up?

[Chants of “suspend habeas corpus!”]

Ahh, why bother?

— And dedicated to the proposition that all men — I should probably say all men and women, but the hell with it. Who has time for political correctness? Those people over there [gestures at newspaper reporters], they’ll say, ‘Oooh, Trump, he said all men, it means he hates women.’ The failing New York Times. Did you see what they wrote about our great Union victory at Fredericksburg? I didn’t, because I never read it. But it was all lies. Our amazing general Ambrose Burnside won an incredible victory in that battle, but you’d never read that in the fake news newspapers, that called it a big defeat. General Sideburn. Is he here? OK, he’s doing something else. Combing his face. [Mimes running a comb around his face, crowd laughs.] I don’t have sideburns, but at least my hair [raises top hat, ruffles hair] is all real. I only used to be a Whig, I didn’t wear one. [Crowd chuckles.] But then I became a Republican. Did you know I was a Republican? A lot of people didn’t. I just found out myself. Think about it.

But then they’re going to say, Trump doesn’t believe in the First Amendment. Nobody believes more in the First Amendment than Trump. But the failing New York Times. Do you think they’ll be around in 100 years? I don’t think so. The only thing that keeps their ratings up is one thing, and it’s thanks to me: We’ve got a war going on.

So in some ways a war is bad, if you get killed, but for some people it’s good. We have the lowest unemployment rate ever since the War of 1812. And it’s good for business, that I can tell you. Not so much for real estate, if you own a farm or something where there’s a battle going on. But then you can buy them cheap and after the war you’ll make a lot of money. You can turn it into a world-class golf resort, and when the war is over, I’m going to put one right here in Gettysburg. Right here, and you’re all invited to the opening. [Scattered cheers.] I’ve done very well from the war, personally, to be honest. Am I allowed to say that?

But some people die in a war, and it’s a terrible, terrible thing that happens. They had a battle right here, probably the biggest battle ever in history, and a lot of people died. I don’t even like to think about it. So disgusting. I even thought about not coming here, but I didn’t want to disappoint all of you incredible, amazing people who came to hear me. But you know, on the way over here, I was thinking to myself, this is Pennsylvania, right? And I asked somebody, which side is Pennsylvania on? It’s our side, right? So I said, why are we having battles in our states? We should be having them over there, in the South. And so I asked one of my generals, shouldn’t we be fighting in, like, Virginia? And he said [stiffens posture, puts on serious face] “Sir, the South invaded us, sir!” So I said OK, we have to stop that. We have to keep them out. And you know what we’re going to do about it? We’re going to — [crowd chants: “Build that wall!”] That’s right! We’re going to build a wall, an incredible, amazing wall, and it will be made of stone, and it will be 12 feet high, and you know who will pay for it? [crowd: “The South!”]

So that’s why it’s so important, so important you get out there and vote Republican, so we can win the war and build the wall. And we will take care of our veterans like you never saw, our amazing, incredible veterans, and there will be a lot of them, that I can tell you. A lot of veterans. And we will have a big parade down Pennsylvania Avenue for all our incredible, amazing soldiers, like they have in France. And that amazing, incredible government that I am the president of, of the people, for the people, of the people, whatever, nothing bad is going to happen to it. That I can guarantee.


The media today: Midterm coverage beyond Trump

The media today; Midterm coverage beyond Trump|Pete Vernon, CJR |AIWA! NO!|After the 2016 contest for the presidency, when many media outlets missed the rise of Donald Trump, they were left grasping for explanations.

There had been too much focus on the horse race, not enough coverage of people on the ground, a fundamental misunderstanding of what polls actually say. All were seen as missteps. Now, less than three weeks out from the midterm elections, it’s hard to quantify whether there has been any meaningful shift from empty prognosticating, though news outlets are talking a good game about having learned from the past.

For CJR, David Uberti notes that some newsrooms that got Trump’s election spectacularly wrong have done away with their numerical projections entirely. Others have taken steps to tell their audience understand what the numbers mean. “As news organizations rev up their coverage for midterm elections, the credibility of polling analysis is back on the line,” Uberti writes. “And the question of how to predict what might happen looms ever larger given the political stakes, leaving prognosticators to reconsider how they frame predictions for laypeople—if they produce them at all.”

The midterms have been cast as a referendum on President Trump, but competitions for Senate and House seats are inherently local competitions. Ahead of November 6, CJR invited writers from around the country to spotlight stories that deserve closer scrutiny in their states. The subjects that the writers chose varied from coal to racial divides to voter suppression, and several dispatches lamented the dwindling resources of local news outlets.

From Montana, Anne Helen Petersen writes that the local press “simply lacks the resources or wherewithal to pursue the larger issues, institutions, and money-flows in depth.” The state’s lone congressional seat is held by Republican Greg Gianforte, who assaulted a reporter on the eve of his special election in the spring of 2017. “How do you cover a candidate whose antagonism towards the press includes physical abuse?” Petersen wonders.

Kris Kobach, the secretary of state of Kansas, is running for governor there. Kobach, a Republican who led President Trump’s voting fraud panel (since disbanded), has turned Kansas into the “epicenter of a national voter-suppression crisis,” Sarah Smarsh reports. “Readers, viewers and listeners deserve to understand the forces that might compromise the power of their ballots, from gerrymandering to unlawful purging of voter rolls,” she writes. “With pivotal midterm races across the country, no election coverage—in Kansas, and beyond—is complete without deep investigations into the voting process.”

And in Virginia, journalists are dealing with how to report on the racial demagoguery spouted by Corey Stewart, a Republican candidate for senate who has been abandoned by leading officials in his own party. “The press and public,” Elizabeth Catte writes, are “putting lessons learned covering Trump, about being less reactionary in news production and consumption, in practice.”

Trump’s dominance of national news storylines and his desire to inject his role into hundreds of local races mean that midterm voters may be thinking more nationally than in years past. But as CJR’s dispatches from around the country show, there are plenty of local and regional concerns that deserve coverage, too.

Below, more on the subjects that are driving some of the races around the country.

Other notable stories:

  • The Washington Post’s Paul Farhi tries to figure out why the murder of Jamal Khashoggi captured the outrage and media attention that previous atrocities by the Saudi government did not. “The answer may be a combination of the time and place of Khashoggi’s disappearance, and the gruesome circumstances of his apparent death, which may have made his story more ‘relatable’ to American viewers and readers,” Farhi writes. “The accumulation of details has created the kind of sustained news coverage that the faceless victims of war and violence rarely receive.”
  • This one has caught the imagination of the world, unfortunately,” Trump told The New York Times in a brief Oval Office interview on Thursday. The president acknowledged that he believes Khashoggi is dead, and that high-level Saudi government officials were likely involved, but “stopped short of saying the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, was responsible for Mr. Khashoggi’s death.”
  • CJR columnist Trevor Timm addresses the Trump administration’s crackdown on journalists’ sources, focusing on the recent arrest of senior Treasury official Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards. “Leak investigations strike at the heart of the press’s job,” Timm writes. “We should all consider this growing crackdown on leaks a danger to investigative journalism and stick up for the alleged sources involved.”

Michael Cohen’s Lawyer Says Trump Should Be Worried Because Of Audio Tape


Trump waiting for his slot to deliver speech at UN General Assembly

In the interview, Trump said he was “totally uninvolved” with Cohen’s dealings, and added his former attorney had other clients.

“Michael Cohen, if you take a look at what he did, this had to do with loans, and I guess the taxi industry is something that I have nothing to do with, he did this on his own time,” he said.

Cohen’s attorney, Lanny Davis, told USA Today his client had two words as reply to the president’s statements: “Audio and tape.” Davis also stated the president should be worried.

Davis took to Twitter on Tuesday to reply to Trump’s statement. “Under oath @MichaelCohen212 [Michael Cohen] acknowledged and took responsibility for @realdonaldtrump @potus [Donald Trump] bad behavior. Trump calling anyone a #liar is a compliment!” he said.

In another tweet, he said Trump would never testify under oath as he could not afford to tell the truth.

Lanny Davis@LannyDavis

2-@MichaelCohen212 who testified under oath doesn’t fear the . @realdonaldtrump @potus will NEVER testify under oath because he can not afford to tell the .

In an Associated Press interview, transcripts of which were released Tuesday, Trump talked about Cohen, Jamal Khashoggi, Brett Kavanaugh, and the upcoming elections, among other things.

“Michael Cohen was your personal attorney for many years. He testified under oath in federal court that you directed him to commit a crime. Did you, sir?” the interviewer asked Trump, to which the president said, “Totally false. It’s totally false.”

Following Trump’s reply, the interviewer asked whether Cohen was lying under oath, and the president replied, “Oh, absolutely he’s lying. And Michael Cohen was a PR person who did small legal work, very small legal work. And what he did was very sad, when you look. By the way, he was in trouble not for what he did for me; he was in trouble for what he did for himself. You do know that? Having to do with loans, mortgages, taxicabs, and various other things, if you read the paper. He wasn’t in trouble for what he did for me; he was in trouble for what he did for other people.”


President Donald Trump in an interview Tuesday said Michael Cohen lied under oath, an allegation the latter’s lawyer dismissed. In this image, Cohen exits federal court, New York City, Aug. 21, 2018. Photo: Getty Images/Drew Angerer


In August, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal counts which included violating federal campaign finance laws. Some of the violations were linked to the attorney’s hush payment to two women who alleged they had an affair with Trump. Cohen said the president also directed him to pay $130,000 to porn star Stormy Daniels.

Earlier this year, Cohen released a tape of the conversation he had with the president in 2016. In the three-minute recording, the two can be heard talking about how to purchase the rights to the story of former Playboy model Karen McDougal who alleged she had a yearlong affair with Trump. Though the audio was not clear at the time, Trump can be heard saying “pay with cash.”

Last week, Davis announced his client, Cohen, changed his registration back to Democrat from Republican. The conversion happened Friday, which was the deadline for New Yorkers to register to vote in the upcoming midterm elections.

Cohen had initially converted to Republican in 2017. “It took a great man to get me to the make the switch,” he said at the time referring to Trump. He described his current move as an effort to distance “himself from the values of the current” administration.

Two Republican senators, two divergent paths on Kavanaugh; How All This Let Down Sex Abuse Survivors


Republican senators, divergent viewpoints on Kavanaugh temperament as U.S. Supreme Court interlocutor; no clarity on way forward for GOP redemption – and return to  #MeToo 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski turned against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh quietly, uttering a single word: “No.”

|AIWA! NO!|Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, her longtime friend and fellow moderate Republican, spoke on the Senate floor for 45 minutes, explaining her support for Kavanaugh in detail.

Though they reached opposite conclusions, both women had faced similar political pressure heading into Friday’s key vote on Kavanaugh’s high court nomination. As moderates who support abortion rights, their joint opposition could have been enough to sink Kavanaugh, whose nomination was thrust into uncertainty following sexual assault allegations.

Ultimately, it was Collins who put Kavanaugh on the brink of a lifetime appointment. Minutes after she finished speaking, West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin said he, too, would back Kavanaugh, ensuring at least 51 “yes” votes in the Senate.

All three senators — along with Arizona Republican Jeff Flake — had been publicly undecided for weeks as they faced unrelenting pressure from both sides.

In the end, Collins and Murkowski diverged.

In a Senate speech that was disrupted by protesters before it began and met with applause from GOP senators when it ended, Collins declared, “I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.”

The final Senate vote is expected Saturday afternoon.

Collins told a rapt Senate that she does not believe that sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh rise to a level to “fairly prevent” him from serving on the high court. Kavanaugh deserves a presumption of innocence, Collins said, and allegations by Christine Blasey Ford and other women did not reach a threshold of certainty.

Murkowski chose the opposite path.

“I believe that Brett Kavanaugh is a good man. It just may be that in my view he’s not the right man for the court at this time,” Murkowski told reporters after voting to oppose Kavanaugh in a procedural vote Friday morning.

While she respects her colleagues’ support for Kavanaugh, Murkowski said, “I also that think we’re at a place where we need to think about the credibility and integrity of our institutions.”

Within minutes of their announcements, potential political challengers to both Collins and Murkowski emerged.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin insinuated she could run against Murkowski in a Republican primary, tweeting, “″Hey @lisamurkowski — I can see 2022 from my house.” The tweet was a reference to an infamous “Saturday Night Live” skit in which Tina Fey, portraying Palin, said she could see Russia from her house.

Susan Rice, the former national security adviser to President Barack Obama, volunteered herself on Twitter as a Democratic opponent to Collins in Maine. In a second tweet, she cautioned that she was “not making any announcements” but was “deeply disappointed” in Collins’ vote.

In the Capitol, however, both senators won praise from their colleagues.

“I think what Susan did today was rise to the occasion when the stakes were so high,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of Kavanaugh’s most ardent supporters.

Flake said he thinks “the world” of Murkowski and said she made her own decision despite intense pressure to vote yes. “I admire her a lot,” he said.

Murkowski said later that although she opposes Kavanaugh she will ask to be recorded as “present” during Saturday’s confirmation vote to accommodate Republican Sen. Steve Daines, who will be at his daughter’s wedding in Montana. Senators often partner like that to allow an absence without affecting the outcome.

Murkowski said her decision was “agonizing” and she was “truly leaning” toward confirming Kavanaugh. But after watching his testimony, she said, she could not in her conscience conclude “that he is the right person” for the court at this time.

Murkowski’s vote was the latest example of the independent streak she forged since overcoming a Republican primary challenge in 2010 to win re-election as a rare write-in candidate. She was re-elected in 2016.

Murkowski has expressed unease with the sexual assault allegations lodged against Kavanaugh, which he denies. She has faced pressure from home state Alaskans, including Native Alaskan women, who have described the scourge of sexual assault.

Collins took pains to say she believes Ford suffered a sexual assault that “has upended her life,” but said she was not convinced Kavanaugh was the culprit. None of the people at the high school gathering where Ford said the assault took place have corroborated her account, Collins said.

“Believe me I struggled with it for a long time,” Collins said after her speech. “I found Christine Ford’s testimony to be very heart-wrenching, painful and compelling. But there was a lack of corroborating evidence.”

Even so, Collins said she hopes the ugly fight over Kavanaugh’s confirmation will raise awareness of the pervasiveness of sexual assault. She supports the #MeToo movement, Collins said, calling it badly needed and long overdue.

Collins has never opposed a Supreme Court nominee, voting to confirm the past five justices from Republican and Democratic presidents.

Besides interviewing and talking to people who know Kavanaugh, Collins said she assembled a team of 19 attorneys to assist her in examining his judicial record. She called the appeals court judge eminently qualified, adding that his judicial philosophy is well within the mainstream.

In keeping with her deliberative style, Collins had kept mum for weeks about how she would vote.

Still, she sent signals that Kavanaugh had cleared a hurdle by reassuring her that he believed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision on abortion rights is settled law. Democrats argue that Trump picked Kavanaugh, in part, because he is likely to vote to overturn that ruling.

Collins and Murkowski are the only GOP senators who support abortion rights, a crucial issue in the Kavanaugh debate. If confirmed, Kavanaugh could tip the court’s balance toward conservatives for a generation.

Murkowski also rendered her decision Friday in dramatic fashion. As the clerk read names in alphabetical order on a procedural vote to move the nomination forward, all eyes were on Murkowski.

When it was her turn, Murkowski stood up, paused, and whispered “no,” her voice barely audible. Then she took her seat, looking down with a stone-faced expression.

Collins, who sits next to Murkowski, leaned over and put her hand on the arm of Murkowski’s chair. The two huddled in deep conversation.


Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Juliet Linderman contributed to this story.

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to vote Friday on Kavanaugh after turbulent hearing; Reports White House Counsel limits scope and range of FBI Kavanaugh sex assault probe


Senate Judiciary Committee schedules vote on Kavanaugh nomination the day after hearing on sexual assault allegation

  • The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh for Friday, according to a notice from the committee’s Republican chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.
  • That puts the contentious vote on President Donald Trump’s nominee just one day after a much-anticipated hearing in which a woman who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault is expected to testify to lawmakers.
  • Though Grassley said in a post on Twitter Tuesday evening that the Judiciary Committee vote would only take place “if we’re ready to vote. If we aren’t ready, we won’t.”
AIWA! NO! |Republican senators have now said the Senate judiciary committee plans to vote Friday morning on Kavanaugh’s nomination, the AP reports.

John Cornyn of Texas, the second ranking-Republican, had said Thursday that the GOP conference would meet and “see where we are”. After meeting, Republican senator Lindsey Graham said, “There will be a vote tomorrow morning.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh for Friday, according to a notice from the committee’s Republican chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.

Though Grassley said in a post on Twitter Tuesday evening that the Judiciary Committee vote would only take place “if we’re ready to vote. If we aren’t ready, we won’t.”

A Friday vote would force lawmakers to decide on President Donald Trump’s nominee just one day after a much-anticipated hearing in which a woman who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault is expected to testify to lawmakers. That woman, Christine Blasey Ford, has been locked in negotiations with the committee’s Republican staffers over the details of the hearing since shortly after coming forward with her accusation just over one week ago.



Judic Cmte noticed POTENTIAL exec mtg for Friday. Still taking this 1 step at a time. After hrg Dr Ford & Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony- if we‘re ready to vote, we will vote. If we aren’t ready, we won’t. Cmte rules normally require 3 days notice so we‘re following regular order

No hearing has been scheduled for a second woman, Deborah Ramirez, who also claims that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her, and it is unclear if there will be one. John Clune, a lawyer for Ramirez, wrote in a post on Twitter Tuesday that Ramirez “remains adamant” that an FBI investigation is the appropriate venue to discuss her accusation.

The top ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee said scheduling a vote for Friday made it clear that “Republicans don’t want this to be a fair process.”

“For Republicans to schedule a Friday vote on Brett Kavanaugh today, two days before Dr. Blasey Ford has had a chance to tell her story, is outrageous,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said in the statement issued Tuesday evening.

Following a vote in the committee, the nomination will be considered by the full Senate. Republicans hold a narrow majority in the chamber, though not all members of the Senate GOP have indicated how they plan to vote.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has been roiled by the dual allegations of sexual assault, which surfaced in recent weeks. Less than a month ago, the federal appeals court judge appeared set to be confirmed by the Senate in time to take a seat on the high court before the start of oral arguments next month.

That would have given a key victory to Trump, who has made appointing conservatives to the court a pillar in his political message to voters. And it would solidify a conservative majority on the nation’s highest court, possibly for a generation.

But the questions over Kavanaugh’s treatment of women — as well as his credibility — have thrust the confirmation process into deep uncertainty.

Amid the uproar, Kavanaugh has vowed not to withdraw, and Trump has committed to pursuing the matter to a vote. In a television appearance Monday night, Kavanaugh repeated his categorical denials of the two accusations, and, sitting beside his wife Ashley, told Fox News that he was “not going to let false accusations drive us out of this process.”

The Republican leadership has remained defiant.

“We’re going to be moving forward,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters Tuesday. “I’m confident we’re going to win, confident that he’ll be confirmed in the very near future.”