Joy Behar Issues Utterly Insane Challenge to Trump: 'Go Ahead! Try It!'
Nobody will ever accuse Joy Behar and the other co-hosts on “The View” for presenting rational leftist viewpoints (do those even exist?) on the chatty ABC network talk show.
But even given that remarkably low bar, this latest clip from the show is something else, reaching depraved new lows of bombastic fear-mongering and hysteria.
Take a watch of this clip from the Friday show for yourself below:
“So yesterday, Donald Trump sat down for an interview that aired yesterday on Univision, where laid out his agenda if he’s elected president again,” Behar said to begin the segment. “And it seems like the first item on his list — after he gets out of prison — is revenge.”
Mind you, Behar is not using that extravagant language to describe the villain from the latest James Bond movie, she’s talking about the heavy favorite to emerge as the 2024 presidential candidate from the Republican Party.
The talk show would then cut to a clip of former President Donald Trump speaking to reporter Enrique Acevedo during a Thursday night interview with the Spanish-language TV network.
“You say [your enemies have] weaponized the Justice Department, they’ve weaponized the FBI,” Acevedo said. “Would you do the same if re-elected?”
After a convenient cut that surely wasn’t missing any context, Trump responded: “If they do this, and they’ve already done it, but if they want to follow through on this, yeah, it could certainly happen in reverse. What they’ve done, they’ve released the genie out of the box.”
Another convenient cut later, Trump added: “If I happen to be president and I see somebody who’s doing well and beating me very badly, I’ll say, ‘Go down and indict them,’ mostly, they would be out of business. They’d be out. They’d be out of the election.”
The video then cuts back to Behar — who of course has to poke fun at Trump for using the wrong receptacle that begins with a “b” when discussing a magical genie — before the ladies dissected Trump’s remarks with all the fairness and nuance you’d expect from this show.
“He’s already said he’s going to come after people like General John Kelly, my former boss chairman Mark Milley, people who dared to stand against him,” said Alyssa Farah Griffin, the ostensible (token) Republican on the show.
“Mike Pence!” Behar added, which Griffin agreed with.
“Journalists,” another one of the co-hosts said.
“Yeah, I think there’s reason for all of us to be concerned,” Griffin said, before Behar butted in with some completely unwarranted hysteria.
“Us! What about us!” Behar said. “Try it. Go ahead. Try it. We have this show everyday, okay, Donald?”
It’s not completely clear what Behar is implying here, but any true conservative should oppose Trump, the hypothetical president in this doomsday scenario, using his powers to silence a talk show. That would be an actual First Amendment issue.
Now, if Trump found some minor, legal quibble that he could stretch out to the most absurd extent of the law and use that against someone?
This is where this writer would insert a shrugging man emoji… because what’s the difference between that and the four highly spurious charges Trump is currently facing?
What Behar seems to be suggesting is that Trump would use some iron fist to shut the show down, which is a patent absurdity for anyone with a lukewarm IQ.
But this is what the left is ultimately left with — lies, half-truths and manipulated misinformation — when in an arena of actual competing ideas.
There is now mounting and tangible evidence that Trump was a far more effective Commander-in-Chief than President Joe Biden right now.
Trump simply trumps (pun very much intended) Biden on everything, from concrete policy to the more abstract (but no less important) parts of being a president, like energy and keeping up appearances.
Trying to turn Trump into some dictatorial boogeyman isn’t going to work very well when the incumbent president is already doing one heck of a dictator impression as it is, anyways.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
