Lewandowski Told Trump He Has To Say He's Pro-Choice Now
A few days ago, in a discussion of Trump’s transactional nature, we jokingly asked when he’ll offer free abortions in the White House clinic. Yesterday, during an interview he said that “if elected his administration would not only protect access to in-vitro fertilization but would have either the government or insurance companies cover the cost of the expensive service for American women who need it. ‘We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment,’ Trump said, before adding, ‘We're going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.’ Asked to clarify whether the government would pay for IVF services or whether insurance companies would do so, Trump reiterated that one option would be to have insurance companies pay ‘under a mandate, yes… We're doing this because we just think it's great and we need great children, beautiful children in our country.’”
Someone believes Trump when his lips are moving? Presumably, Lewandowski thought this up to persuade low-info voters that Trump is on their side and to put the Democrats in an awkward position. Something tells me that neither he nor Trump envision a great bipartisan agreement to actually accomplish this. If Trump were serious... he knows MAGA Mike's cell number. I'm pretty sure Hakeem would be delighted to provide him with 211 Democratic votes.
At a rally in Potterville, Michigan yesterday, he reiterated the point, reading a piece of a speech someone had written for him on the teleprompter: “I'm announcing today in a major statement that under the Trump administration, your government will pay for, or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for all costs associated with IVF treatments, fertilization for women. Because we want more babies, to put it very nicely. And for the same reason we will also allow new parents to deduct major newborn expenses from their taxes.”
Maybe later today we’ll hear from some Republican members of Congress who oppose this— but I doubt it. Or some insurance company lobbyists who work for firms who don’t want to see millions of dollars vanish from their bottom lines? (An IVF treatment costs at least $15,000 in the U.S., sometimes a great deal more.)
This morning, Dan Pfeiffer pointed out that Trump embraced IVF and fudged up his position on abortion as “a reaction to the polls and some preemptive defense for the coming debate. Trump’s motivation is simple— his position on abortion and the Republican-led efforts to ban IVF are political poison. The Dobbs decision sparked an uprising in America that fundamentally changed politics. According to Gallup, the number of Americans who identify as pro-choice is at an all-time high. Banning IVF is even more politically toxic than banning abortion— which is saying a lot. According to a Pew Research poll, 70% of Americans say access to IVF is a good thing. To make Trump’s problems worse, there will be abortion referendums on the ballot in Nevada and Arizona this fall. Additionally, according to exit polls, the voters who said abortion was their most important issue voted for Democrats over Republicans 73% to 26%.”
Interestingly, on Wednesday the California Assembly passed a bill that requires insurance companies to cover IVF treatments. And then yesterday it passed the State Senate as well. That means it goes to Gavin Newsom now. It would be funny if he vetos something like this when Trump is agreeing with it! There are only 9 Republicans in California's state Senate; 8 of them voted against it— right before Trump’s announcement. The right-wing California Family Council opposed the legislation as well.
Also yesterday... Trump announced he's now pro-Choice. Lila Rose, head of the anti-Choice group Live Action, is explicitly telling anti-Choice believers to not vote for Trump in November. Ian Ward reported that since Trump and Vance have come out against a number of the anti-abortion movement’s key policy priorities— including a national abortion ban, a crackdown on the abortion pill and restrictions on IVF— Rose, who leveraged her large internet following into influence in the first Trump White House, is no longer confident that Trump is an ally… ‘It’s disappointing to say— but perhaps he personally lacks principle on this issue,’ said Rose.” Yeah... perhaps.
Pols lie as an art form--I get that. Trump raises it to an art form. He nominated (and McTurtle got confirmed) 3 of the 5 SCOTUS members who voted to overturn Roe/Casey in Dobbs.
He publicly took credit for doing so many times:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-was-able-kill-roe-v-wade-rcna84897
Now, Trump is publicly supporting the abortion rights Amend. 4 here in FL. I recall when WJC signed DOMA into law in '96 and later publicly supported the SCOTUS decision striking down DOMA in 2013. Making a 180 degree turn on a hot-button issue 17 years later is bad enough--Trump making such a dramatic turn so fast boggles the mind.
Is that lie any worse than obamanation's PO? Both were meant to fool dumber than shits so they'd vote for them.
This is the point in the campaign season where the one who thinks he/she is losing will toss whatever they can think of against the wall to see what might stick. Since harris isn't promising much of anything specific, she seems to feel pretty comfortable with her polling.
Will campaigning as the NOT trump be enough? Will it win you either chamber? I guess if you're not promising to raise taxes on the rich or giving people actual health CARE or to stop supporting genocide... you're not lying. But is that enough?