Just as Hickenlooper was about to take off (sarc.), his former chief of staff jumps in.
Former Denver schools superintendent, for editor of Yale law review, he jumped in with not much fanfare. As a generic Democrat, "pragmatic idealist", I would like to answer his (boring monotone) Meet the Press appearance yesterday point by point - just for practice. Someone should have interrupted him and called him out on Democrat nonsense.
By singling him out the unnoticed for criticism, I probably help him more than I hurt him. Here is Michael Bennet with one T.
https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-may-5-2018-n1002141"
I believe that the freest kind of government is self-government, and that we have an obligation to preserve the democratic institutions that 230 years of Americans have preserved for us, and that our children are going to need to resolve their differences, but we seem to be so cavalier about destroying. And you know, the idea that we're going to run down the rathole that the Freedom Caucus has taken us down over the last ten years, in their tyrannical way, I think would be a huge mistake[/b]."
- He ties "freedom caucus" to "tyranny"? By what stretch of logic? No one follows up this contradiction? Democrats always need to start their argument with a lie.
"
You know, I think, based on the polling that you just cited, where, where the majority of people say that the House should continue to investigate, and then we should make a decision, down the road, about whether to impeach or not and then, obviously, to convict or not in the Senate, I think that's exactly right. And that's what we should do." - Running for leader of the free world, he would follow the polling. Bold. Aren't lead and follow exact opposites. Investigate more where there is no evidence of a crime. Why? Democratic polls.
"
You know, Mueller should testify. We should have the full, unredacted report."
- Break Grand Jury rules? Disrupt ongoing investigations? Why not. Chuck Todd isn't going to call him out on this either. Surprise.
"
obvious -- I mean, to me, it seems fairly clear, from the evidence, that he has committed impeachable offenses."
- Name one? Conspira-bstruction?
"
Well, I agree, first of all, with the Democrats that you quoted earlier in the program, that Mueller ought to resign. It's disgraceful, what he's done, how he’s behaved --
CHUCK TODD:
You mean Mueller or Barr? You mean Barr, right?
SEN. MICHAEL BENNET:
"I'm sorry, Barr, Barr." - How come the Yale people aren't really any smarter than the rest of us. But if Trump mis-speaks, he's a moron. Still, what about his intended point. Barr should resign - for being honest? For following the rule of law? For not agreeing to be bullied, smeared?
[Summarizing Mueller's work] "he could not clear the president of committing the crime of - of conspir -- of, of obstruction."
- Oops, (1) mis-speak again. (2) Mueller's job wasn't to clear innocent people, and (3)obstruction of what? The crimes committed by the deep state? Again, Yale law school and shows no knowledge of the law or legal process. Worse understanding than a layman, or is he just dishonestly pandering to the sheep?
CHUCK TODD:
All right, let me move to,
if you run against Donald Trump. Because I want to show you these economic numbers: 3.6% unemployment, 263,000 jobs created in April, 3.2% wages, are, 3.2% wage increase. Consumer confidence is fairly high. Look, there are a lot of voters out there who say, "All right, I don't like Donald Trump's character. But the economy is humming. And I vote pocketbook." What do you talk -- How do you convince that voter not to vote their pocketbook, if they like this economy?
SEN. MICHAEL BENNET:
So I’d say -- No, people will, people will vote their pocketbook. [Trump wins.]
But Chuck, we're in the tenth year of a recovery that started in 2009, when Barack Obama was president. If you look at the job-creation numbers along that trajectory, over that ten years, [
There wasn't one trajectory; there was stagnation and there was growth. He is not a math guy I guess.]
it goes just like this. So Donald Trump is elected in the last two years. And I will confess, even he couldn't screw up the momentum that we had been going on for the eight years that he got elected. [So Trump didn't screw things up.]
The difficulty is that, when you're in a state like mine, Colorado, which has one of the most-dynamic economies in the world, not just in America, people still -- most people can't afford housing. They can't afford healthcare. They can't afford higher education. They can't afford early childhood education. [Democrat-run wasn't the solution and THEY CAN'T AFFORD THE EXACT MARKETS THAT GOVERNMENT ENTERED AND CONTROLS, MAKING ALL THEIR MAJOR IDEAS WRONG.]
They can't afford a middle-class lifestyle. And Donald Trump has done nothing to help with that [Grow wages finally- where Democrats couldn't, didn't.],
nothing to help with that. Second point I would make is, even if you feel like he's done the right thing by cutting taxes, which I don't, because he cut taxes on the wealthiest people in America, mostly, even if you feel like he's done the right thing in a regulatory way or taken on China in a way you like, the fact that he has built his entire political career on dividing Americans, not uniting Americans, on destroying our institutions, on going after the free press, on violating the rule of law and being proud of that, on playing patsy to dictators, like Putin and the North Korea dictator just this week. [Pivot off the question, admit losing.]
I mean, here, he's saying, "I'm with him." He says, "I'm with him. I know he wouldn't do anything to hurt his economy." North Koreans are starving, because of what he and his father have done to their economy. So we got to keep our eye -- There are many, many ways that Donald Trump's threadbare record is available to us to beat him in November 2020. It would be a disaster, if we lost to him again. - Did he really just say that rich Coloradans can't afford early childhood education because of Trump? Watch for his surge in the polls on that! I don't know where NK is heading, but it wasn't in the question and Trump is the one who has called them out and started to deal with the threat unlike predecessors in both parties.
I think he can't construct a complete sentence or a coherent thought, not because he's dumb or Yale Law School doesn't teach that, but because he knows Trump is doing a great job and deserves reelection. He has to dissemble to speak against obvious truth. It would be easier for him to switch sides and embrace truth. )
He agreed the Trump economy is great. He identified Russia and NK as threats, same as what Trump is addressing and he identified the Democrat attempts to control housing, healthcare and higher education sectors as failures while the free markets succeed.
All good arguments to vote Trump.
