Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America celebrate the booming economy that hit second quarter growth of 4.1 percent. They also notice the Democrats want to institute five years of jail time for spreading false information about elections dates and locations. And they see that Michael Avenatti was invited to speak to Iowa Democrats and they hope the party won’t take him seriously simply because he hates President Donald Trump.

Subscribe to Three Martini Lunch in iTunes (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in iTunes or by RSS feed.

Please Support Our Sponsor!

There are 6 comments.

  1. Member

    On the Trump is a, um, less than moral character, yes, it was always baked into the cake. These revelations are no news. What answer does anyone expect? A shrug of the shoulders and “Yep, that’s Trump.”

    • #1
    • July 27, 2018 at 11:53 am
    • Like
  2. Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    On the Trump is a, um, less than moral character, yes, it was always baked into the cake. These revelations are no news. What answer does anyone expect? A shrug of the shoulders and “Yep, that’s Trump.”

    I just have to ask, because this appears to be ubiquitous with the Trump supporters:

    Are you proposing that we ignore his actions, Charlie, because they are “…baked into the cake.” Yes, we know that. But the implication of what you are saying is that because it is old news that we just go on with our business. I understand that you, and all of Trump supporters are tired of people like me always speaking of it. My aim is to try and tell people that this is unacceptable, and that we should never let people like this near the white house again. I am not sure I want them even to take a tour (I am being hyperbolic, with I’ve been told by the new right is acceptable). I just think your way is accepting of the notion of Defining Deviancy Down. And I can’t accept that.

    • #2
    • July 27, 2018 at 7:27 pm
    • Like
  3. Member

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    Are you proposing that we ignore his actions…

    No. I am saying we knew he had been a billionaire playboy before he was elected, and the results we have gotten have been much better than expected. Not just better than Hillary would have been, which has been the measuring stick for many of us once the candidates of the two major parties were chosen, but better than the average Republican PotUS has gotten us since 1989.

    As for infidelity, I would prefer he didn’t, but how many women were Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton bedding while in office? (Papa Bush also had a reputation as the fastest zipper in Washington. W., not so much. The only rumors I heard about Obama did not involve women.) Does previous PotUSes who were dogs make it alright? No. But if it does not affect his performance in office, I don’t much care. And, I have not heard that he has been doing it while in office, so that’s a step above right there.

    As for other complaints, such as the trade wars? They are in process, not finished, and it’s about time somebody tried to accomplish real free trade instead of the one-sided sort we have had.

    Beyond that, I see a PotUS who has tried to act Constitutionally and support the Rule of Law. It may not seem much to you, but I’ll take it.

    Trump is not a man of good character, but he won the nomination and he won the office and he is serving well. If a better candidate challenges him in the primary in 2020, I am open to consider it. He will be 74 then. He might not even run. I’ll let the future take care of itself.

    But circling back, I’ll also let the past alone. We knew who he was when he was elected, and that man of low character was still better than the woman he defeated.

    • #3
    • July 27, 2018 at 7:48 pm
    • 1 like
  4. Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    Are you proposing that we ignore his actions…

    No. I am saying we knew he had been a billionaire playboy before he was elected, and the results we have gotten have been much better than expected. Not just better than Hillary would have been, which has been the measuring stick for many of us once the candidates of the two major parties were chosen, but better than the average Republican PotUS has gotten us since 1989.

    As for infidelity, I would prefer he didn’t, but how many women were Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton bedding while in office? (Papa Bush also had a reputation as the fastest zipper in Washington. W., not so much. The only rumors I heard about Obama did not involve women.) Does previous PotUSes who were dogs make it alright? No. But if it does not affect his performance in office, I don’t much care. And, I have not heard that he has been doing it while in office, so that’s a step above right there.

    As for other complaints, such as the trade wars? They are in process, not finished, and it’s about time somebody tried to accomplish real free trade instead of the one-sided sort we have had.

    Beyond that, I see a PotUS who has tried to act Constitutionally and support the Rule of Law. It may not seem much to you, but I’ll take it.

    Trump is not a man of good character, but he won the nomination and he won the office and he is serving well. If a better candidate challenges him in the primary in 2020, I am open to consider it. He will be 74 then. He might not even run. I’ll let the future take care of itself.

    But circling back, I’ll also let the past alone. We knew who he was when he was elected, and that man of low character was still better than the woman he defeated.

    We disagree very dramatically, Charlie. I will not go on and on. But it am disappointed at this answer, not least because you choose to spread malicious gossip in order to justify your boy. Eisenhower is gossiped about too, that he had an affair with Kay Sommersby, his driver in the war. But they both denied it, she in her book. Deny it all want, but you are Defining Deviancy Down, and, as I say, I am disappointed.

    • #4
    • July 28, 2018 at 4:06 am
    • Like
  5. Member

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    but you are Defining Deviancy Down

    You obviously don’t understand the phrase, George. Defining deviancy down would be if I were saying, “Trump is a man of good character.” Or, “Well, he hasn’t done X, which would be bad character, so he’s good.” I have said he is a man of low character. I would not want him around my niece. I would not want him as a personal investment advisor. I would not want to be a sub-contractor under him.

    I did not want him as the nominee. I voted against him in the primary. Why? Because he’s a man of low character. He’s also not the first President who was a man of low character, nor will he be the first President of low character who turned out to be a decent President, if he manages to keep to the course.

    As for spreading malicious gossip, I am also not doing so. Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton all had liaisons while in the White House. That’s not gossip; it’s history; it’s established fact. My parenthetical statement said Papa Bush had a reputation. That is a fact. If I went into the salacious details of why he had that reputation, that would be gossip. As for Obama, the rumors, which I did not go into, exist and were published. None of them involved his being with women. That is not saying what the rumors are or spreading gossip. It is stating rumors exist, but none that he was sleeping around as Kennedy did or as Trump has done in the past.

    I’m very disappointed in you, George, for enabling the Democrats who are planning to try to impeach Trump and Pence if they can take Congress. (Yes, they have said Pence is a target for being associated with Trump.) I am disappointed in you for contributing to and enabling the madness, the rioting, the demonstrations. I am disappointed in you for giving cover to evil people who want to destroy this country as founded and our Constitution. I am disappointed with you for trying to stir up a situation that is likely to result in a shooting war, a true civil war, in our country.

    Finally, I have known many people who were imperfect human beings, but whom I could trust in most situations outside their areas of failure. I have known people who, like Trump, were off with girlfriends while their wives were at home tending to newborns, but whom I would trust with the Presidency. They wouldn’t be my first choices, but better than any living Democrat.

    • #5
    • July 28, 2018 at 5:20 am
    • Like
  6. Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    but you are Defining Deviancy Down

    You obviously don’t understand the phrase, George. Defining deviancy down would be if I were saying, “Trump is a man of good character.” Or, “Well, he hasn’t done X, which would be bad character, so he’s good.” I have said he is a man of low character. I would not want him around my niece. I would not want him as a personal investment advisor. I would not want to be a sub-contractor under him.

     

    This is silly. 

    First, about Obama. In some ways, he is a fine man. That may be a little going to far. Fine men don’t condone tearing down others with scandal. And fine men don’t keep wanting to schakel the economy or the people the way the Left does. What I meant is he is a good husband an father. I wasn’t referring to him.

    And I never questioned your thoughts about Clinton, Kennedy, and Johnson.

    And I do know what Defining Deviancy Down means. I was referring to your excusing Trump by referring other, thereby saying it is normal. I know you think this guy is a low-life, and I commend you for it. DDD means more than you are alleging.

    And your being disappointed in me is the silliest thing. I am trying to save conservatism, not enabling anybody. Trump now represent conservatism, in the minds of many. I reject the notion – which you embrace, guess – that conservatism is, first and foremost about policy. Buckley rejected that; Reagan rejected that; and I emphatically reject it. Edmund Burke didn’t believe it. We are a man of the lowest charter I think has been there, worse even than Johnson, I believe. 

    We will never agree, Charlie. But I deserve your respect, not condemnation.

    • #6
    • July 28, 2018 at 6:18 am
    • Like