Post

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

@RonDeSantis

More from @CurtisHouck

Curtis Houck

@CurtisHouck

Aug 27

.@ScottJenningsKY face-palms after @JamalSimmons says Trump “may think that he won that debate, but...he actually lost the war...because after that debate, Joe Biden left and..he ended up with Kamala Harris, so he should be careful.”

.@ScottJenningsKY was all of us.

.@ScottJenningsKY after @JamalSimmons suggests some sort of 4D chess in Trump beating Biden at the debate, but then losing the election to Kamala: “Zero for one? Jamal, Jamal, my brother and colleague, zero for — he literally ran a man who had been in politics for 52 years out of his chosen profession over a debate, I mean, look, I understand what you're arguing that you all traded in for a better candidate, but Trump won the debate. He is — he is not zero for one. Are you saying that he actually did so well that he did badly?”

Simmons: “But this is exactly the problem with campaigns — but this is exactly the problem we campaigns. Very often, people are focused on the minutiae of what it means in this tact or that tact, but the question is: Are you wearing the fundamental argument? And, for right now, Donald Trump may have tactically won the debate, but strategically, it may have cost him the entire election because he ended up with a much better candidate than the one he was gained aiming for and he's probably now a couple of points behind.”

Read 4 tweets

Curtis Houck

@CurtisHouck

Aug 5

Just a master class schooling by Justice Neil Gorsuch when whacked from the left by CBS's Major Garrett.

Gorusch: "I read the other day that...I agreed with Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Jackson something like 45 percent of the time. That’s the court I know."

Garrett: "But there are people who watch this right now and say I thought I understood what Roe v. Wade meant in our country. I thought I understand what affirmative action in college admission meant, and this court told me I didn’t understand what that meant and I wrongly relied on things that I thought were settled. What would you say to those?"

Gorsuch: I would say those are deeply complex legal questions on which reasonable minds can, of course, and do disagree. And that when it comes to Roe v. Wade, for example, what did the court decide? Decided that we the people should answer that question, not nine people sitting in Washington, D.C."

CBS's Major Garrett: "How about affirmative action?"

Justice Neil Gorsuch: "Much the same thing. What did we decide? We decided that all people are created equal, that it’s not acceptable in this country to discriminate on the basis of race."

CBS's Major Garrett: "And, for those who would say but I feel something’s been ripped away from me, you would say?"

Justice Neil Gorsuch: "I would say that we’re taking it back to you. In a democracy, you’re in the driver’s seat. You’re the sovereign. Those famous three first words of the Constitution empower you. Do you really want me deciding everything for you?"

Garrett: "And for a woman in a state where she no longer has the rights she once relied on, is that cold comfort?"

Gorsuch: "Major, all I can say is I don’t know better than you do on these questions. And that most major western democracies have decided these questions through the ballot box."

Read 6 tweets

Curtis Houck

@CurtisHouck

Jul 8

🧵I transcribed the full back-and-forth with KJP and CBS’s @EdOKeefe. It was WILD. You're welcome, America....

O’Keefe: “But, Karine, you’re not answering the — the very basic, direct question!”

Miller: “[Inaudible]”

O’Keefe: “Has the Parkinson’s [inaudible] —”

KJP: “Wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on. Hold on. Wait.”

O’Keefe: “— come to the White House —”

KJP: “— wait, wait, wait a second —”

O’Keefe: “— to —“

KJP: “— wait.”

O’Keefe: “— eight times, or at least once, in regards to the President —”

KJP: ““I just —”

O’Keefe: “— specifically.”

KJP: “— hold on a second.”

O’Keefe: “That much you should be able to answer by this point —”

KJP: “But — no, no, no, no, no, no, —”

O’Keefe: “— after four days of reporting about it.”

KJP: “— no, wait a minute. Calm. Ed, please. A little respect here, please. So, every year, around the President's physical examination, he sees a neurologist. That's three times, right? So, I am telling you that he has seen an neurologist three times while he has been in this presidency. That's what I'm saying.”

O’Keefe: “Here at the White House or Walter Reed?”

KJP: “I'm telling you that he has seen them three times. That is what I'm sharing with you, right? So, every time he has a physical, he has had to see a neurologist.”

KJP: “So, that is answering that question.”

CBS’s @EdOKeefe: “No, it’s not.”

KJP: “No, it is. It is.”

O’Keefe: “Can —”

KJP: “You’re asking me —”

O’Keefe: “— Dr. Kevin Cannard come to the White House —”

KJP: “— I cannot —

O’Keefe: “— to answer questions about the President’s condition?”

KJP: “— but I just — I also said to you — Ed, I also said to you for security reasons we cannot share names. We cannot share names.”

O’Keefe: “You cannot provide names —”

KJP: “We have to —”

O’Keefe: “— of others he would have met with —”

KJP: “— we have to — we cannot —”

O’Keefe: “— but you share names of —”

KJP: “— no, no, no, no —”

O’Keefe: “— if someone came in —”

KJP: “— no, we —”

O’Keefe: “— with regards to the President.”

KJP: “— we cannot — we cannot share names of specialists broadly, from a dermatologist to a neurologist. We cannot share names. There are security reasons we have to —”

O’Keefe: “They’re already on the White House visitor logs.”

KJP: “— we have to protect —”

O’Donnell: “It’s public.”

O’Keefe: “It’s public.”

KJP: “— I understand that.”

O’Keefe: “I looked it up before I came out here.”

KJP: “I hear you. I —”

O’Keefe: “It is right there for anyone to see.”

KJP: “Ed, I hear you. I cannot from here confirm any of that because we have to keep their privacy. I think they would appreciate that too. We have to give them —”

O’Keefe: “Who would? The patient or the doctor?”

KJP: “— we have to keep their privacy.”

O’Donnell: “It’s public. It is public.”

O’Keefe: “It’s public information.”

KJP: “I — I — I hear you.”

O’Donnell: “It’s listed that he went to the residence.”

CBS’s @EdOKeefe: “And you’re going to allow this to fester —”

KJP: “I — I — guys —”

O’Keefe: “— longer, Karine —”

KJP: “— guys — guys —”

O’Keefe: “— unless the White House answers —

KJP: “— guys —”

O’Keefe: “— the question.”

KJP: “— hold on a second. There's no reason to get back and — go back and forth and be this aggressive.”

O’Keefe: “Well, we’re miffed around here about how information's been shared with the press corps around here.”

KJP: “What do you — what do you missed [sic] about? What do you missing [sic] about?”

O’Keefe: “Well, he just asked about.”

KJP: “What do you — and then every time, I come back and I answer the question that you guys ask.”

Read 5 tweets

Curtis Houck

@CurtisHouck

Jun 28

🧵🍿 MSNBC's Joe Scarborough initial reaction to last night's #CNNDebate:

“Well, I think I should start by saying, without any apologies, that I love Joe Biden and Jill, and I will gladly debate anybody anytime anyplace, anywhere, over the issue of whether Joe Biden has been the most effective president in passing bipartisan legislation, in expanding NATO, in responding to the rising threat coming from China, by flexing America's strength around China, by having the strongest economy in the world, bar none, the strongest economy, actually, relative to the rest of the world in 50, 60, 70 years, the strongest dollar in half a century, the strongest military relative to the rest of the world. I would argue, and many others would argue, since 1945. I think his presidency has been an unqualified success. If, however, you believe, as do I, and as do so many people who watch this program, and who fear just how dark of a place a second Donald Trump term will take America, then I think it is critical that we ask the same questions about this man I love, respect, and whose — whose public service in saving this country from Donald Trump over the last three and a half years I honor and always will. I think we have to ask the same questions of him that we have asked of Donald Trump since 2016. And that is, if he were CEO and he turned in a performance like that, would any corporation in America, any Fortune 500 corporation in America keep him on as CEO?”

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Biden's performance in last night's #CNNDebate:

“Um, if this were Donald Trump — time and time again, we talked about the Goldwater, where’s Barry Goldwater to walk over and tell Richard Nixon it was over, to tell Donald Trump it was over. Now, the question is, do Democrats need to do the same thing of Joe Biden? I mean, these — these are hard questions, but the fact is, friends, failure is just not an option. In 2024, failure is not an option. So, who I love, who I respect, who I revere for their work and their duty to service over their lifetime really is not relevant. It's not relevant for any of us. It is not relevant for Democratic leaders. It's not relevant for anyone. The question is, can — we know Joe Biden can govern.

I'll debate that issue with anyone, and I will win. I will destroy anybody that wants to debate Joe Biden's record over the past three and a half years. He can run the White House. He can run the country effectively. Despite the barrage of lies that constantly come at him, like Donald Trump's lies last night. But can he run for president in 2024? Donald Trump lied over and over and over and over again. And Joe Biden couldn't respond to any of those lies. In fact, as The New York Times said, he spent much of the night with his mouth agape and his eyes darting back and forth. He couldn't fact check anything Donald Trump said. Not only that, he missed one lay-up after another after another. He couldn't respond effectively to Donald Trump trying to overthrow American democracy on January 6. He couldn't respond effectively to Donald Trump's continued stream of lies about his own record, and he couldn't even respond effectively on the issue of abortion where, for some reason, he darted wildly to the issue of immigration. And on immigration, as I said yesterday morning, any Democrat that can't turn to their Republican opponent and blast them for killing the strongest, toughest border bill in the history of America, drafted by a right-wing senator from Oklahoma, may not be up to the job. And so that's the question.”

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough says Biden “tragically did not rise to the occasion last night” in last night's #CNNDebate:

“I know people are waiting and say — oh, and David Plouffe, I have such respect for David Plouffe, he said, Donald Trump really turned off swing voters in — in a lot of focus groups once they saw him again. And that makes a lot of sense. But the door was open so many times. This race should not be close. We've been asking, why is this race close? We have no idea why this race is close. We saw last night why this race has been close. And why I fear Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States unless things change. I will say, Mika, the one thing that I know you believe, it may have been because he was sick. And I'm open to that fact. I'll just say, as I said on the show, I spent three hours with this man, maybe, back in March. Three hours, cogent, on top of the issues, on top of every issue around the world. And, last night, he simply was not on the biggest debate stage ever. And I think what surprised me and what surprised a lot of people very close to Joe Biden is the fact that this man always rises to the occasion and last night was — was sadly for him, and I believe for Democrats and this country, and, again, if you believe what's at stake in this election is what we believe is at stake, I'll even use the word tragically, tragically did not rise to the occasion last night.”

Read 4 tweets

Curtis Houck

@CurtisHouck

May 22

NBC’s @PeterAlexander: “You opened today’s briefing by talking about the latest student loan cancelations for, I think, we said — what did we say — in total, 4.75 million Americans.”

KJP: “Yeah, yeah.”

Alexander: “Now, I think it's 160,000, this latest round. Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker today described this as a massive wealth transfer for Americans who did not attend college to those who did — and he described it as a shameful play to buy more votes, six months before an election?”

KJP: “I will say to the congressional member Mike Johnson — obviously, the speaker — is that what is shameful is that Republicans continue to get in the way of helping us deliver a little bit of breathing room for Americans who deserve that opportunity — who deserve you — heard me talk about — uh — uh — about Tiffany, the young woman who — who — um — one of the things that people should know and if — if you don't is that when folks are — are receiving these — these — um — debt relief — uh — uh — announcements from President, they have an opportunity to tell their story. They have an opportunity to — to say why this matters to them and we're talking about millions of Americans who now have an opportunity to start a life, have an opportunity to move forward in a way that where they can reach that American Dream or reach whatever it is that they wanted to do not just for themselves for — for — for them for their families, so we believe — and the President is not going to walk away from doing that. He believes it's an important commitment that he made to — to Americans. It is a broken system. It is a broken system.”

NBC’s @PeterAlexander: “I guess, the question, though —”

KJP: “Yep.”

Alexander: “— is what then is the White House's message to those Americans who did not attend college for a variety of reasons, perhaps — including perhaps that they didn't want to take on all the debt that went with it right now that they feel like, in some form, they are responsible for allowing those who did not to pay their fair share?”

KJP: “Look, here's the thing. This is a President who has been very clear about re — making sure that he's building an economy that leaves no one behind, right? Making sure that —”

Alexander: “Are those people being left behind?”

KJP: “— well, no, but — but —”

Alexander: “The ones who didn’t get support because —”

KJP: “— well, no —”

Alexander: “— they didn’t go to college?”

KJP: “— I hear your question, but this is — if you look at what the President has done more holistically over the past 3.5 years, he has tried to build an economy for everyone. This is one part of his economic policy. When you think about creating — creating 15 million jobs, many of those jobs if you think about the different — uh — uh — uh — different — uh — legislation that he's obviously passed into law, whether it's the bipartisan infrastructure legislation, Chips and Science Act, it's creating jobs that are good, union-paying jobs that — where you don't need a college education — right — where you can make six figures and actually have that opportunity to start your family. He is creating an economy from the bottom up, middle out, making sure that the millionaires, billionaires and corporations are paying their fair share — fair share — right — not like Republicans in Congress who want to give them a tax giveaway. So, he's trying to make sure — this is one part of his economic policy, but as he's thinking forward, as he's looking at all Americans, all communities, he wants to make sure that there is an economy that doesn't leave — again — doesn't leave anybody behind and as — historically, that trickle down economics does not work, and he does not want to see that, so we have given opportunities and we want to continue to give opportunities for folks who feel like they need a little bit more help.”

NBC’s @PeterAlexander: “And I guess to put just a fine point on it right —”

KJP: “Yeah.”

Alexander: “— now for the 4.7 million Americans who have received this debt relief, the averages, you said, at the start of this —”

KJP: “Yeah. About 35,000.”

Alexander: “— this was $35,000 their relief has been for, so I guess why don't those individuals who didn't receive $35,000 in debt cancellation deserve a $35,000 check from other Americans for what other means they would want to use it?”

KJP: “You're talking about the — ”

Alexander: “The people who didn’t go to college, so they’re not getting debt relief — the $35,000 that they don’t get because they didn't go.”

KJP: “I mean, we’re talking about folks who are in debt who are literally being crushed — literally being crushed because they took — and they took — you know — they took —”

Newsmax's James Rosen: “They’re not literally being crushed? Let’s be —”

KJP: “ — financially. Okay. Is that okay with you? Okay. But — ”

Rosen: “[Inaudible]”

KJP: “— I know. But crushed financially. Um — and — uh — so, they're trying to get their lives back on track — right — they’re trying to get into a place because they took — they took a bet on themselves in a different way — right — and betting of — of themselves and going to college and some of them, it is difficult to do that, right? And they did that financially. It's hurt them, and we want to give them that breathing room. But it's not just folks who have debt because of colleges. We’re trying to help people in different — in different communities as well. Uh — folks who don't have to get that college degree and can get — make six figure salary. That is one of the things that the president was very proud of when he passed the bipartisan infrastructure legislation, when he signed the Chips and Science Act. Those are really important components of what he's trying to do as well. Let's — if you think about making sure healthcare — healthcare is more affordable, getting that prescription drugs — many for diabetes, for cancer, making sure those costs are lower — insulin, so there are many ways that the President has made sure that Americans have what they need to move forward with their lives, create and build a family where they feel like they're going after their dreams as well. And so, look, you know, we want to make sure that, again, the student loan piece is one part — one part of the President's economic policy, and the President’s not going to step away from it. He's not going to back down because he believes it's the right thing to do.”

Alexander: “Thank you.”

Read 4 tweets

Curtis Houck

@CurtisHouck

May 6

🧵

NewsNation’s Elizabeth Vargas: “Also in your you write about North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. You've been questioned several times on this in the last couple of days because you've issued a retraction. You said that it shouldn't have been in the book — this passage — that it was a mistake. Why shouldn't it have been in the book? Is it untrue?”

Kristi Noem: “No, what I said is that when this was pointed out that we — we made an adjustment to what the content was in the book. I've met many world leaders around the world. I've been to the DMZ. I've been traveling for years and years talking to world leaders. Just that name should not be in the book and I'm not going to discuss those personal meetings.”

NewsNation’s Elizabeth Vargas: “Your spokesman told Politico that the world leaders names were conflated in the book. What does that even mean?”

Kristi Noem: “What it means is that I met with many world leaders. Many of them —

Vargas: “Did you —

Noem: “— some —”

Vargas: “— meet with Kim Jong-un?”

Noem: “— some of them were in the book and some of them are not in the book and that — when I this was brought to my attention, I immediately took actions and asked to have his name removed.”

NewsNation’s Elizabeth Vargas: “But why did you remove it? Is it because it's untrue —”

Noem: “Because —”

NewsNation’s Elizabeth Vargas: “— that passage?”

Noem: “— no, I’ve been — this is something that I think is — I'm not going to talk about. I don't talk about personal meetings with world leaders and I'm going continue to stay there.”

Vargas: “But clearly, if you're taking out of the book, it's because it's untrue.”

Noem: “I’ve given you my answer. No, and that's not the answer. I would say that, you know, I would say that, you know, this is something that I asked to have adjusted, and have the content and that name removed and that is — that is truly what the action has been.”

Read 10 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Curtis Houck

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @CurtisHouck

Curtis Houck

Curtis Houck

Curtis Houck

Curtis Houck

Curtis Houck

Curtis Houck

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!