Unhinged Jane Fonda: 'Shut Down The Country' If Trump Fires Mueller
Rumors have abounded, almost since the Russian Collusion investigation began, that President Donald Trump might fire special counsel Robert Mueller. Many have weighed in on the matter and actress Jane Fonda recently took her turn at the topic during a 92Y panel talk, according to Page Six.
The outlet reported that the 80-year-old had advice for the audience about what to do if Trump actually fired Mueller: “We have to get in the streets — nobody should work.”
“We should shut down the country. Shut it down!”
“People always say, ‘Was it worse in the ’60s and ’70s?’ It was not! This is the worst!”
“This is an existential crisis. And if we don’t do what needs to be done — in terms of making our voices heard, and our votes heard — that’s it! We don’t have time.”
A wealthy actress talking about people not going to work as a means of protest may be doable for her, but for the average person, not so much. Fonda probably can afford to go long periods of time without working. Most people cannot.
Her comments were not limited to what was reported by Page Six, however. They were also reflected in an interview published by The New Yorker just days before.
https://twitter.com/MattLiasse/status/1045108264185278465
In the “edited and condensed” interview, she greeted Michael Schulman as “she was scrolling through her phone, reading breaking news.” She jumped into political talk right away.
“Did you just hear that Rod Rosenstein once proposed secretly taping President Trump and removing him via the Twenty-fifth Amendment? Yhat’s not going to help.”
Schulman then asked her about Trump firing Mueller. Her response was similar to what she reportedly said at the panel days later. “We take to the streets. We pour into the streets and we protest like never before.”
Nevermind that it is within Trump’s constitutional power to fire Mueller. Throwing tantrums seems to reign supreme when it comes to the left and pretty much anything Trump does or says.
She also claimed Trump was a victim who was traumatized by his father and “not protected by his mother.” She added that “it must have been really bad. And we are reaping the results of that early trauma.”
In that same vein of a traumatized Trump, she also explained her personal approach to dealing with him. In it, she tied in his “trauma” to the protests she called for.
“Well, I don’t like him. I’m making the distinction that Martin Luther King did: you don’t have to like them, but you have to love them. Because, if we carry hate, we’re the losers.”
“We have to understand where the behavior comes from. Let’s not enable her or him, but let’s not hate him, because it steals something from your own soul.”
She also talked about the need to be radical and have empathy for Trump voters. Who are also apparently victims, with some white supremacists thrown in for good measure.
“Empathy is radical in this kind of environment. We’ve got to understand why people voted the way they did.”
“Yes, there are some people—don’t even bother. They are dyed-in-the-wool white supremacists.”
“Who knows what their wounds were? I don’t hate them for it, but I’m not going to waste my time.”
“But there’s a whole lot of people in the middle of this country who are so scared and in such pain, because they feel betrayed. As well they should!”
“Nobody’s been paying attention to them. That’s when you begin to learn: you talk to them.”
While empathy and talking to political opponents are great things, they seem to be at odds with her calls for protests that require working people to stop work. That hurts the very people she says to be empathetic to when they can’t use the businesses and services the protesters would be skipping out on.
Are the protesters EMTs, doctors, public transportation drivers? Are they daycare providers?
How is it a good idea to protest something that is within the president’s constitutional authority? Particularly when it could hurt the protesters as well as those she advises her side to show empathy for?
People on the right routinely criticize “liberal logic” as being highly flawed. Fonda’s thought process here does not help discount that theory.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
