Connect with us

COMMENTARY

Chris Christie Went on Nicolle Wallace’s MSNBC Show. It Didn’t Go Well for Him.

Published

on

Chris Christie is on what some are calling a rehabilitation tour. The combative Republican former governor of New Jersey is hawking his new book, “Republican Rescue” on all the major news networks, trying to position himself as an alternative to Donald Trump as he anoints himself the savior of the Republican Party.

Christie, who left office with a dismal 14 percent approval rating despite (or because of) having others in his way to distance himself from Bridgegate, somehow having escaped any legal ramifications over his management of Hurricane Sandy funds, and after trying to slough off Beachgate, for a short time tried to be less “Christie”-like. But that softer persona disappeared this week, especially late Tuesday afternoon when he stepped on the set of MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House” and sat down with host Nicolle Wallace.

It did not go well for him.

Here’s basically how it ended, with Wallace – a former Republican – stringing him up using his own words, saying: “You may or may not support Donald Trump in 2024. You may or may not run for president. And [your] book about liars and conspiracy theorists doesn’t have anything to say about Fox News.”

Here’s what led up to that dénouement:

“You know the book is called – it’s about conspiracies and lies and you really don’t take on Fox News, why not?” Wallace asks.

She pounds him further on Fox News host Tucker Carlson. Christie says he doesn’t watch the right wing cable giant’s top show and “I don’t pay a lot of attention” to him.

Moments later, Wallace again pound Christie, telling him, “I don’t think it’s an intellectually honest case to make against conspiracy theories without taking on Fox News.”

In typical Christie fashion he claps back, “Well, I, listen, then you can write that in your book.”

Not having it, Wallace retorts, “Well, I’m not trying to rescue the Republican Party.”

Seconds later, she presses him again on Fox News.

“I guess my question is you want to run for president, what’s your relationship with Fox News going to be?”

“Well first of all, I didn’t say I want to run for president. You said that. So let’s be clear about that,” Christie said, challenging Wallace.

“Well a lot of people have said that in the last few days – you haven’t corrected any of them,” she noted.

Wallace again goes back to Fox News.

“Do you think that Fox News in primetime is good for the country or bad?”

Christie basically refused to give a straight answer, knowing that if he wants to run for president he will need their support.

“Listen there are shows that I like in Fox News and shows that I don’t like.”

“You’re afraid to question the purveyors of conspiracy theories and lies?”

“But that’s your opinion,” Christie insisted, despite the fact that Fox News is a purveyor of conspiracy theories and lies. “You’re welcome to your opinion like everybody else in this country is welcome to your opinion. I don’t consider people like Sean Hannity, or Laura Ingram, purveyors.”

Heather Digby Parton, the highly-admired Salon writer who goes by the name Digby, shared her thoughts after the interview:

Daily Beast columnist Wajahat Ali focused on Christie writhing away from Wallace’s questioning on domestic violent extremism (which does not appear in that clip.)

Wallace had repeatedly asked Christie if he agreed with FBI Director Christopher Wray that domestic violent extremism is a top national security concern for America.

Christie’s response? “I don’t know” if Wray still thinks that.

“He testified about it in September,” Wallace replied.

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

COMMENTARY

‘The Generals Stay Silent’: Experts Alarmed as Trump Politicizes Army at Fort Bragg Rally

Published

1 week ago

on

June 11, 2025

By

Military and political experts, veterans, and journalists are condemning President Donald Trump’s political rally at Fort Bragg on Tuesday, warning he crossed a critical line by delivering overtly political and authoritarian-themed remarks before U.S. Army troops. They also expressed alarm that uniformed soldiers appeared at ease booing his political opponents—another troubling breach of military norms. Some now say the time has come for generals to publicly speak out.

The commander in chief entered the event to “Hail to the Chief,” and as he took to the stage, his “MAGA anthem,” “Proud to Be an American,” played. For nearly one hour, in about 9,000 words, Trump delivered a political stump speech. He attacked his political opposition, Democrats, including President Joe Biden and his administration, California Governor Gavin Newsom (“Newscum”) and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass. He attacked transgender Americans. He attacked the Democratic U.S. Senators who opposed the nomination of Pete Hegseth for Defense Secretary, calling them “a very hostile group of people that I think really don’t want to see America be great again.”

He got the soldiers to boo “the fake news” media, and President Joe Biden. He told them the 2020 election was “rigged and stolen.”

READ MORE: ‘Show. Us. The. Plan.’: Pentagon Chief Ripped for Dodging Budget Details in Heated Hearing

He attacked the people in Los Angeles protesting his deportation policies, describing it as “anarchy,” while telling the soldiers that defending their  civil rights was not the reason Americans fought overseas:

“Generations of army heroes did not shed their blood on distant shores only to watch our country be destroyed by invasion and third world lawlessness here at home like is happening in California. As Commander in chief, I will not let that happen. It’s never going to happen. What you’re witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order and on national sovereignty carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion of our country.”

He thanked the generals, and mentioned some by name. He talked about “the real generals,” as opposed to the ones Americans see on television.

Critics are warning of grave consequences.

“This is the most unacceptable and egregious politicization of our troops we’ve ever seen,” wrote veterans’ activist Paul Rieckhoff, an Army combat veteran, responding to video of Trump getting the soldiers to boo the press, President Joe Biden, and the mayor of Los Angeles.

“And it’s not a one off. It’s a strategy,” added Rieckhoff, who is also the founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA). “And one we’ll see in full and dangerous display this weekend at his military birthday parade for himself. Trump wants the world to think our great military is HIS military. And wants to coerce and manipulate troops into making them think it is too. And driving down their public trust and approval by the minute. Trump has created America’s greatest civil-military relations crisis since the Civil War. And it’s just getting started.”

Retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel Alexander Vindman, a former Director of European Affairs for the National Security Council (NSC), warned: “America’s Generals and Admirals are terrified. They are cowed. They seem unlikely to hold the line and live up to their oaths to serve the U.S. Constitution.”

Lamenting that “the Generals stay silent,” he added: “Our democracy is in great danger. This morning I wonder if we crossed a line and there’s no going back.”

Army combat veteran Fred Wellman, a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School who is now the host of the podcast “On Democracy.” responded to Vindman by saying, “The silence is deafening.”

READ MORE: Trump Mixes Up World Wars, Days, Civil Rights in Latest Remarks

Retired U.S Army lieutenant general Russel L. Honoré, who served as the commander of Joint Task Force Katrina, blasted Trump’s speech: “Damn @POTUS Speech At #FortBragg  was inappropriate, criticizing previous administration, and Generals while speaking to troops , I never witnessed that S..t like this in 37 years in Uniform.”

Author and former Under Secretary of State Richard Stengel observed, “Unlike other militaries, American soldiers do not swear an oath to the state, or a person, or a monarch, but to the Constitution. Trump calls them ‘his’ military—but they are ours, and they swear to ‘support and defend the Constitution,’ not one man.”

Tom Nichols, a retired U.S. Naval War College professor and Russia expert, at The Atlantic targeted the generals for staying silent.

He wrote, “senior officers of the United States military have an obligation to speak up and be leaders. Where is the Army chief of staff, General Randy George? Will he speak truth to the commander in chief and put a stop to the assault on the integrity of his troops? Where is the commander of the airborne troops, Lieutenant General Gregory Anderson, or even Colonel Chad Mixon, the base commander?”

“Where is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dan Caine? He was personally selected by Trump to be America’s most senior military officer. Will he tell the man who promoted him that what he did today was obscene?”

Retired U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey, often seen on cable news, called Trump’s speech “a disgraceful politicization of the active Armed Forces. He is the Commander in Chief. The only loyalty of the Armed Forces is to the Constitution. Their focus is on protecting America from foreign enemies. Grave danger.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

RELATED: ‘Doesn’t Even Know Who He’s Talking to’: Newsom Scorches Trump Over Military Deployment

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

Trump Mixes Up World Wars, Days, Civil Rights in Latest Remarks

Published

1 week ago

on

June 10, 2025

By

President Donald Trump made a series of inaccurate claims in his remarks on Tuesday, conflating World War I and World War II, incorrectly suggesting he spoke with the governor of California on Monday when it was just after midnight Saturday morning, and asserting—contrary to the First Amendment—that protests, even peaceful ones, can be shut down with “heavy force.”

During remarks to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump was asked when he last spoke with California Governor Gavin Newsom. “A day ago,” he said Tuesday afternoon, which was three and a half days after the governor confirmed his phone call. Trump also confirmed the call by sending a screenshot to a Fox News reporter. The screenshot read June 7, 1:23 AM.

“Recently, other countries celebrated the victory of World War I, France was celebrating, really,” Trump told troops at Fort Bragg on Tuesday afternoon. “They were all celebrating. The only one that doesn’t celebrate is the USA and we’re the ones that won the war. Without us, you’d all be speaking German right now. Maybe a little Japanese thrown in. But we won the war.”

RELATED: ‘Doesn’t Even Know Who He’s Talking to’: Newsom Scorches Trump Over Military Deployment

The United States was part of a coalition during both WWI and WWII. Trump was speaking about WWI, but then claimed, “Without us, you’d all be speaking German right now. Maybe a little Japanese.”

That’s a reference to World War II—Japan was on the side of the Allies, with the U.S., in WWI.

Also on Tuesday, Trump declared that anyone caught protesting his controversial military parade on Saturday will be met with “very heavy force,” despite the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution clearly protecting political protests.

READ MORE: ‘Show. Us. The. Plan.’: Pentagon Chief Ripped for Dodging Budget Details in Heated Hearing

“We won the war, and we’re the only country that didn’t celebrate it, and we’re going to be celebrating big on Saturday,” Trump claimed. Veterans Day was initially created as Armistice Day to honor those who died in World War I.

“And if there’s any protestor that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force. By the way, for those people that want to protest, they’re gonna be met with very big force. And I haven’t even heard about a protest, but, you know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force.”

The First Amendment protects both political speech and the right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Trump did not state “violent protestors,” or “rioters.” He said “any protestor.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Subterfuge’: Noem Push a ‘Prelude’ to Invoking Insurrection Act, Experts Warn

 

Image via Reuters

 

 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

‘Don’t Fall for This’: Vance’s ‘Normal Gay Guy Vote’ Claim Mocked, Criticized as ‘Gross’

Published

8 months ago

on

November 1, 2024

By

Republican vice-presidential nominee JD Vance’s claim that he and his running mate, Donald Trump, will likely win the votes of the “normal gay guy” is being mocked, with some pointing to his stated opposition to same-sex marriage protection legislation. But in full context, it’s being called out as divisive against the LGBTQ+ community, and “gross.”

“And I think that frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if me and Trump won just the normal gay guy vote, because, again, they just wanted to be left the hell alone, and now you have all this crazy stuff on top of it,” Vance says in a short clip from his interview Thursday with podcaster Joe Rogan.

Democratic strategist Matt McDermott weighed in, writing, “Not sure what a ‘normal’ gay guy is, but speaking as a fairly typical gay guy I can confirm that myself, my husband, and literally every gay guy I know will proudly be voting for Kamala Harris and rejecting your grotesque bigotry.”

READ MORE: ‘How Dictators Destroy Free Nations’: Trump Slammed for Suggesting Firing Squad for Cheney

Author and activist Chasten Buttigieg, who is married to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, appeared to mock Vance’s remarks:

“Sorry wasn’t on here to see JD Vance’s latest gaffe. My husband and I were taking our kids trick-or-treating. In our minivan. With costumes from Target. Anyway, have you made a plan to knock doors for Kamala Harris this weekend?”

CNN’s Anderson Cooper led a panel Thursday night and mocked Vance’s remarks, saying, “I guess gay people are now accepted,” and called it “sort of progress.”

Mark McDevitt, Chief of Staff to U.S. Rep. Lori Trahan (D-MA) wrote: “It’s rich to hear JD Vance try to talk about ‘normal gay guys’ as if he hasn’t spent years pushing the idea that being gay alone is abnormal and immoral. Now he wants to move the goal post to create divisions within our community. It’s gross.”

“A good reminder that solidarity is so important,” McDevitt added. “They will not spare the so called ‘normal gay guys’ when they come to dismantle the rights of the LGBTQ community. Don’t fall for this crap.”

READ MORE: ‘Embarrassing’: JD Vance’s Story About How He Responded to Trump Shooting Sparks Concerns

Author Lucas Schaefer noted, “What Vance is actually saying by ‘normal gay guy,’ from what I can tell, is ‘not trans’ but as anyone with a sense of history knows, after they destroy trans lives they’re coming for the rest of us. The acronym is fitting; we rise or fall together.”

Indeed, in context, according to a transcript, Vance’s remarks are exceptionally divisive and destructive.

He goes from talking about “the Nashville shooter,” who “went in and murdered a bunch of children at a Christian school because he or she, like whatever, was motivated by some very radical trans ideology. And that is something we should talk more about as a country,” to “these signs that are in super woke neighborhoods, I’m sure there’s plenty of them in Austin, like, ‘in this house, we believe science is real,'” to someone who is a “pro-gay rights guy,” who “sort of made the observation that when you get into the really radical trans stuff, you actually start to notice the similarities between a practiced religious faith and what these guys are doing.”

As the conversation continues, Vance says, “I’ll never forget,” a gay friend of his, “sent me something like six or so years ago. And it was Elizabeth Warren when she was running for president and she was like, ‘we stand for all non-binary two-spirit’ and all of the like, the LGBTI plus. She was talking about all the plus and she was codifying it. And he sent me this text message with this Elizabeth Warren tweet. And he’s like, I don’t know what the hell two-spirit is. We just wanted to be left the hell alone. And I think that, frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if me and Trump won just the normal gay guy vote, because again, they just wanted to be left the hell alone, and now you have all this crazy stuff on top of it that they’re like, we didn’t wanna give pharmaceutical products to nine-year-olds who are transitioning their genders.”

The Harris campaign took a swipe at Vance by posting the Rogan clip and Vance’s remarks at a debate where he says he’s “come out against” a marriage equality bill.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Nauseous’: Trump’s Refusal to Grasp ‘Consent’ Revives ‘Access Hollywood’ Scandal

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.