Posted on 02/19/2016 12:16:11 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Donald Trump, who has made his opposition to the Iraq invasion one of the bedrocks of his campaign, was left scrambling during a CNN town hall when confronted with a newly uncovered interview in which he supported the conflict.
The interview, reported by Buzzfeed, was from 2002 when the real estate mogul sat down with radio shock jock Howard Stern and was directly asked whether he advocated invading Saddam Hussein's country.
Trump replied: "Yeah I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly."
Asked by CNN moderator Anderson Cooper about the statement, the Republican frontrunner simply responded:"I could have said that."
Trump then insisted that his past support for the war did not matter because "by the time the war started I was against it".
His comments came during the second of a two-part town hall in Columbia featuring the remaining candidates in the Republican field. Ohio governor John Kasich and former Florida governor Jeb Bush preceded Trump in Thursday night's instalment, whereas Ben Carson and Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz participated the prior evening.
Trump stumbled when asked if he thought George W Bush had deliberately lied to the country about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction. Both a voter and Cooper repeatedly asked him if he stood by his comments in the last Republican presidential debate when he insisted that was the case.
"They said there were weapons of mass destruction, there were none. And they knew there were none," Trump said in the debate, held in Charleston on Saturday.
During Thursday's town hall, just five days later, he backtracked, saying:"There are a lot of people that think that. Bottom line is there were no weapons of mass destruction."
Pressed further, Trump said of Bush, "I don't know what he did". Trump added that he would have to "look at some documents."
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
...Consider Iraq. After each pounding from U.S . warplanes, Iraq has dusted itself off and gone right back to work developing a nuclear arsenal. Six years of tough talk and U.S. fireworks in Baghdad have done little to slow Iraq's crash program to become a nuclear power. They've got missiles capable of flying nine hundred kilometers-more than enough to reach Tel Aviv. They've got enriched uranium. All they need is the material for nuclear fission to complete the job, and, according to the Rumsfeld report, we don't even know for sure if they've laid their hands on that yet. That's what our last aerial assault on Iraq in 1999 was about. Saddam Hussein wouldn't let UN weapons inspectors examine certain sites where that material might be stored. The result when our bombing was over? We still don't know what Iraq is up to or whether it has the material to build nuclear weapons. I'm no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don't, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us.
I was for the war before I was against it.
Your tagline link is dead btw.
What propaganda?
You’re a busy fellow, having taken on the job of posting distracting graphics on everything that shows Trump in the flesh.
Quoting from Donald Trump’s own book is left wing propaganda?
You know what? You are right. Trump is a far left liberal, and his book is left wing propaganda.
And he’s beating your flunkie two to one.
Dang that’s gotta hurt.
If you are an Australian, what business do you even have pimping a candidate?
You've posted a Guardian story, Cincy.
You feel right at home there but it makes us conservatives uncomfortable. So as you libs say, this is a 'trigger warning.' I salute your diversity but FR is a 'safe space' from your hate speech. Hoping that's helpful, Byron
I'll try to explain it in your lefty speak, Catty.
FR is a safe space from prejudice trolls. Your hate speech is triggering distress and on behalf of the forum I ask you to cease and desist.
Final warning.
There is nothing hateful in posting an article about the Trumps backtracking when questioned about his having called President Bush a liar. Your comment seems like a unusually harsh response to a very reasonable thread.
I've see things posted from MSNBC, CNN, Mother Jones, Salon, etc, etc supporting Trump (while conservative sites are smeared for criticizing Trump), so why get so fussy now?
*******************************************************************
Trump is a make believe person - a salesman with manufactured, targeted "principles."
Trump: ["Art of the Deal"]: The final key to the way I promote is bravado. I play to people's fantasies. People may not always think big themselves, but they can still get very excited by those who do. That's why a little hyperbole never hurts. People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular.
I call it truthful hyperbole. It's an innocent form of exaggeration - and a very effective form of promotion. - Source
It's wrong that posters like Cincy and Catty culturally appropriate the mantle of the conservative minority - here at Free Republic, which should be a place of refuge for our kind. Why not flaunt your privilege where you belong - Huffpo and Salon?
Trumps positions on present day issues is what attracts me to him. Is there a candidate for president that did not support the Iraq war? Rand Paul is out so he does not count.
You still didn’t answer the question. Why should an Australian influence our political forum? We don’t meddle in your politics there.
The question is, what is wrong with backtracking on an issue? Please favor me with a reply. Thanks.
Lol...”hate speech?” And you have the nerve to post a graphic warning of fascist-lib content. Oh, did that hurt you widdle feelings, boy? Have I invaded your “safe space.” What a pathetic wuss you are.
No one is being hateful to you. Catfish1957 was simply wondering why you are wanting to get involved with our Presidential election fights if you are from Australia. I don’t usually pay much attention to elections in other countries.
This is a real dilemma for Trump supporters. Since they believe in the leader principle (the idea that the leader is always right), they must now decide if he was right when he agreed with Bush, or is he right now that he’s assumed the Michael Moore/Cod Pink position. I know they’re a resilient bunch. I’ve seen them overcome major Trump-induced cognitive dissonance before. What they can do is begin by attacking Cincinatus’ Wife, then THE GUARDIAN, the RINOS, GOPe, Google for maintaining previous Trump statements, and anyone else with a living memory of Trump positions that contradict his now infallible positions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.