Posted on 05/11/2016 7:13:09 AM PDT by winoneforthegipper
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump appeared on Fox News last night, where he fielded a question from a viewer who wanted him to “name one specific thing he would do to protect the sanctity of human life.” The GOP candidate quickly turned his focus to judicial nominees:
“I will protect [life] and the biggest way you can protect it is through the Supreme Court and putting people in the court. And actually the biggest way you can protect it, I guess, is by electing me president.”
Trump added that he expects to name “as many as five” high court justices in the coming years, adding, “I will appoint judges that will be pro-life, yes.”
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...
Pro-life bump.
Trump’s comment does not help his election chances.
It’s likely the dem crossovers and disenfranchised bernie supporters are gonna go Trump.
This statement does not help him get that vote.
So did Trump. And Trump still wants to expedite them back for a legalization.
The timing says its real. He is on track to win the GOP nomination easy. He has no real opposition. He said it to a Democrat contingent knowing it will be widely disseminated to the baby-killers crowd. And knowing it will hurt him in the general with non-conservative voters. That to me gives it credibility not just election posturing talk.
Thank-you Mr. Trump.....I KNOW you will keep your word!!!!!!
Bless you!
That must be why the Border Patrol Union endorsed Trump and not Cruz. /s
That is exactly right.
I’m voting for Trump because he might appoint pro-life judges, while I KNOW Mrs. Bill Clinton would appoint pro-abortion judges.
I could see why. What’s not to like about an expedited legalization amnesty.
Your statements are a perfect example of why Cruz has become so despised. There is almost no one on Free Republic who is not well acquainted with Trump's positions on illegal immigration and his solutions. Yet you persist in echoing Cruz one liners that are at the least misleading and in many cases outright lies. What are you hoping to accomplish? The game is over, Cruz lost! Do you still believe that he is going to be able to pull some type of coup at the convention? It is time to face reality and stop spreading bull manure.
Your response is BS.
And your statement is what gives Trump supporters a bad name. You're the one who brought up amnesty and Ted Cruz, as if out current nominee doesn't have such a problem. I simply responded, setting the full record straight.
And you respond by whining.
And by the way the "game" as you called it is never over. The nomination process is over. The goal is #NeverHillary. Our nominee when it's needed, needs to have his feet held to the conservative fire.
Or is that too much for you to handle?
It is time to unite behind the nominee and stop this counter-productive squabbling. Cruz lost. It is now time to direct your animosity toward Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. It is time to hold their feet to the fire. The strangest thing about Cruz, Beck, Romney, Lindsey Graham, Ryan, you and a few others is that they will fight tooth, claw and nail against someone on our side, but you and they will snivel in the corner when it comes to battling against the real enemies. Maybe you can explain why that is? I am not your enemy, and I can sincerely tell you that I really don’t get it at all
Geez. You're the one who started trashing Cruz on this thread. I simply responded to it. Do you "understand" that?
Looks like you're the one who identifies the wrong enemy and "snivels in the corner" against the real enemy. Do you "understand" that?
No, and if you actually believe that, you should go back through our “conversation”. It should all be in your posting history. I said that it was a good example as to why Cruz had become so unpopular here. Since that first post you have given us several more good examples. You should be saving your animosity for the Democrats but that is not who you hate right now, is it?
I would have preferred that Trump stated that he would appoint ‘Strict’ Constitutionalists.
My first post was a response to a nasty and sarcastic post that you made about Trump.
Wrong.
My post 23 was a response to your post 20.
My post 23:So did Trump. And Trump still wants to expedite them back for a legalization.
You should be saving your animosity for the Democrats but that is not who you hate right now, is it?
You're the one who first criticized Cruz. So when I responded and pointed out that Trump was worse you blame me and instead of yourself for misdirected animosity.
Do you understand now.
OK, you win. ; ) Where do we go from here? Would you rather have Hillary appointing several liberal Justices to the Supreme Court or Trump? Do you want to see an actual wall built on the southern border and our laws on illegal immigration enforced, or do you want wide open immigration and continued welfare for illegal immigrants as Hillary advocates for? I think that you have a decision to make. Are you going to keep being snarky about Trump? Or are you going to get behind someone who is as imperfect as the rest of us but seems to be on the correct side of 90% or more of the issues that are important most of us here?
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.