“It’s a disgrace that you would take a New York Times article and just read negative quotes,” the congresswoman said to host Shannon Bream
Rep. Elise Stefanik does not like being reminded that she once called Donald Trump a “whack job” and “insulting to women.” During a Fox News interview, the New York Republican got heated when host Shannon Bream read excerpts from a New York Times article that included quotes showing Stefanik was initially critical of Trump’s candidacy in 2016.
The Times article quoted Stefanik telling a radio station in 2016 that Trump was “insulting to women” in the Access Hollywood tape where he bragged that he liked to “grab” women “by the pussy.” The paper also obtained a message where Stefanik said Trump was a “whack job” and reported that Stefanik’s former friends said she believed Trump was “too awful and ridiculous to be taken seriously.”
“It’s a disgrace that you would quote The New York Times with nameless, faceless, false sources,” Stefanik, the Republican Conference chair, said when Bream asked why she changed her mind about Trump.
“But they’re quoting your friends,” Bream said. “I’m giving you a chance to respond to that.”
“They’re not quoting my friends. Those names are not included because they are false smears,” Stefanik responded.
But, as Bream noted, “There a number of names of people who are quoted in the article.”
When Bream brought up Stefanik’s quote that Trump was “insulting to women” in his Access Hollywood comments, the congresswoman blamed the Democrats for leaking the tape. But according to a source who spoke to The Wrap, “somebody at NBC News or the ‘Today’ show leaked the tape.”
“That was insulting,” Stefanik said Sunday of the tape. “However, Shannon, I stood by and supported him, and I strongly support him.” She went on to say that Trump has supported women by hiring them to “senior positions” and by promoting “women’s economic opportunity.”
“I have been proud to support him. It’s a disgrace that you would take a New York Times article and just read negative quotes when… I was the only Republican elected woman from the Northeast who voted for him in 2016, who has strongly supported him, and I’m proud to be one of his strongest allies today,” Stefanik said.
While Stefanik may have eventually come around to support Trump and declare herself “proud” to be “ultra-MAGA” as she did last month, the congresswoman did not endorse him during the 2016 primary. She was openly critical of his proposed policies even a month before the general election, often avoiding mentioning Trump by name.
And as Bream said, “Folks can go read that article for themselves. There were names, people who went on the record.”
Stefanik is reportedly in the running to be Trump’s vice presidential running mate, and she was one of the first members of Congress to endorse his 2024 bid for the White House. She also voted to overturn the 2020 election results and has not committed to certifying the 2024 election results.
Stefanik spoke to Bream via satellite from Israel, where she delivered a speech to parliament (called the Knesset) — a rare occurrence for a visitor to the nation. She criticized President Joe Biden for holding back bomb shipments during Israel’s assault on Gaza due to the number of Palestinian civilians being killed by the Israeli military.
To me, it felt like there was some cultural turning point with the absurd denials of the GWB administration. It set some nasty precedents that have only escalated the scale of bad faith in politics and discourse. Now there seems to be positively no shame in having no shame at all.
If you want to become vice president, you should have a prepared answer for this right? Something like, I changed my mind after seeing how Trump handled X while being president, or after meeting him face to face. Sure those would also be lies, but at least you don’t look like a complete moron.
Sadly, any time a politician should dare change their mind in the face of new experience/evidence they are attacked for waffling, indecisiveness, untrustworthy, or unpredictable by competitors. Nuance and evolving perspectives are punished severely in politics. Of course in this case it’s nothing so noble, but many good politicians have been undone by admitting to changing their minds.
I think this is the classic strongman, fascist handling of criticism. It’s not that something changed. No, it’s the critic that’s wrong! How dare they say such lies, they never needed to change because they’ve always been this way!
“Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.”
To be fair most people don’t bother doing any research whatsoever and go off looks, what their social circle//family/church is doing, instincts, vibes, or something else equally arbitrary. Then they go to the general and if there’s even more than one person on the ticket, then they just vote for their “team” because That’s what they’ve been conditioned to do.
We don’t have a 2 party system. We have a broken first past the post voting system that becomes 2 party automatically. It can’t change until the way voting is held changes.
Add comment