Ann Coulter Visits the Harvard Lunch Club

 

CoulterThis week my partner Todd Feinburg and I welcome the inimitable Ann Coulter to the Harvard Lunch Club Political Podcast for the, what else, Ann Coulter Is Here edition. Ann talks – teasingly – about her new book (to be released Aug. 23) In Trump We Trust, E Pluribus Awesome, about stifling cries of joy over Brexit while landing at LAX in first-class, about the end of the world if Hillary is elected President, and about New Year’s Eve with Matt Drudge (and what they came up with together)!

Here are a few excerpts:

About the #NeverTrump movement and those in the donor class who hire illegal aliens:

I think it’s probably helping Trump. I mean Hillary is the candidate of Wall Street, of big donors, of the globalists, and Trump is the Party of Americans. We’ll see how it shakes out. Any donors who care more about their own pocketbooks and not the culture and the country – fine, good riddance to them.

The #NeverTrump crowd who are the political ones, [in] Washington DC, you can’t go anyplace near that city right now because [they’re] not even political consultants or lobbyists for the Chamber of Commerce, it’s something in the water there. I think their entire reason for being is irrelevant now.

As for what if Hillary is elected President?

I do think that Trump has a better than even chance to be the next President. I will say at least that much. But that leaves a 49 percent chance for the end of the world. And it is the end of the world if it’s Hillary. I gotta tell you, I thought it was [the end of the world] the day Romney lost.

This shows you how Donald Trump has shaken up my world and I don’t care what he retweets and I don’t care that he was a reality TV star and I don’t care about the gold fixtures. The best we ever had on immigration until Donald Trump was Mitt Romney because he at least said he would enforce E-Verify and illegals would go home the same way they came. He was the first one – the best we had. I mean before that it was McCain, it was Bush.

Maybe we’re already past the tipping point. We’ll find out: have they wired the system? Is it too late? And if Hillary wins, you build a bunker and hire the cheap labor because America is over.

How about Trump’s choice for VP? (Your humble correspondent suggests Sen. Jeff Sessions.):

Well, the only reason I don’t want it to be Sessions is I want to keep him where he is. He’s going to [need to] be as much help as he can be to Trump. I think the two things Trump has to think about the most are: he can’t pick a nominee who, sometime during the fall, when the media goes crazy over the next Mexican judge comment or something says: “I cannot run with this man. I’m withdrawing my name from nomination.”

Do not tell me that is not a strong possibility, your career would be made for life. You’ll get more Vanity Fair covers than Megyn Kelly. You’ll get two Vanity Fair covers, and Vogue and you’ll be Time Magazine Man of the Year, you’ll sit on boards, your life will be made.

And the other thing is once he’s President, if he doesn’t have someone who’s absolutely dedicated to the same things we are, i.e., immigration, they’ll impeach him. Both the Democrats and Republicans would impeach Trump in order to get a President Corker … or a President Huckleberry.

But who does Ann think will make a great choice for VP? Listen here for the answer.

And there is so much more: thoughts on Charles Murray, whom she takes on in her new book, why Trump is not really like a 16-year-old that you have to bail out of jail occasionally, and (you’ll need to listen to the podcast for this one) what Ann and Matt Drudge were doing that New Year’s Eve a year and a half ago. (Hint: you are already familiar with the result.)

The place to find the whole interview (did I mention it already?) is right here.

Enjoy!

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 63 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Michael Stopa:

    Cato Rand:

    Michael Stopa:The question was not what was your evaluation of what is possible, but rather what do you think is right.

    The “isn’t going to happen” is a lovelyfig leaf. Prevents people from answering why they don’t want it to happen. Or would you send them all home if it were proved practical?

    I would. If there were a magic wand that would make it happen quickly and without violence or cruelty, I’d be fine seeing every illegal sent home in a poof, to get in line. Illegal adults with anchor babies would have the babies go with them if there are no legal family members or the like to care for them here. And we’d have the asylum system available for those who qualify. But we have laws, and they should be obeyed. That doesn’t always answer the question of what steps we should take when they’re not though. When lawbreaking has been so widespread that the de facto law has deviated from the de jure, sometimes reality must be accommodated as a matter of prudence.

    This is how you do it. There are many other variants. The keys are (1) political will and (2) a transition period.

    That was interesting, but it seems to rely on an enormous amount of voluntary cooperation from millions of people who have reasons not to cooperate.  I’ll give you this though — it’s an improvement on packing them into boxcars.

    • #61
  2. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Cato Rand: it’s an improvement on packing them into boxcars.

    That was always an idea that was floated by the left not by any conservative nor any Republican.

    • #62
  3. Michael Stopa Member
    Michael Stopa
    @MichaelStopa

    Cato Rand:

    Michael Stopa:

    Cato Rand:

    Michael Stopa:The question was not what was your evaluation of what is possible, but rather what do you think is right.

    The “isn’t going to happen” is a lovelyfig leaf. Prevents people from answering why they don’t want it to happen. Or would you send them all home if it were proved practical?

    I would. If there were a magic wand that would make it happen quickly and without violence or cruelty, I’d be fine seeing every illegal sent home in a poof, to get in line. Illegal adults with anchor babies would have the babies go with them if there are no legal family members or the like to care for them here. And we’d have the asylum system available for those who qualify. But we have laws, and they should be obeyed. That doesn’t always answer the question of what steps we should take when they’re not though. When lawbreaking has been so widespread that the de facto law has deviated from the de jure, sometimes reality must be accommodated as a matter of prudence.

    This is how you do it. There are many other variants. The keys are (1) political will and (2) a transition period.

    That was interesting, but it seems to rely on an enormous amount of voluntary cooperation from millions of people who have reasons not to cooperate. I’ll give you this though — it’s an improvement on packing them into boxcars.

    The whole point of any large-scale social policy is to structure incentives so that people act in the way you want them to. Voluntary is only a relative term. If your choice as an illegal alien is between (a) applying for a temporary work permit that lets you stay where you are for six months to a year in exchange for information on who is employing you and how many dependents are living with you (and a promise to return home at the end of that time), and (b) the real possibility of walking out your door and never returning to your house again, you might choose the former.

    Same idea on the employer side.

    • #63
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.