Two sources at Time.
The full transcript of the interview.
Time's reporting on the interview.
Let me just start with one off-hand remark that the orange vulgarity tossed off in one of his many non-answers on abortion. The reporter was (vainly, as it turns out) trying to pin Trump down on committing to a veto on any national ban on a woman's right to choose when he said:
And you know what? That’s taken tremendous pressure off everybody. But we—it was ill-defined. And to be honest, the Republicans, a lot of Republicans, didn't know how to talk about the issue. That issue never affected me.
Ok - now we know he's BS-ing. Why? Because of this:
Donald Trump has been called out on social media for giving a speech at Friday's annual March For Life despite reportedly suggesting he asked his second wife Marla Maples to get an abortion when she became pregnant with Tiffany.
Trump criticized US abortion laws as among the most permissive in the world in a speech to anti-abortion activists at the rally in Washington, DC, and pledged his administration would always defend the 'right to life.'
But he was quickly skewered on social media as people reminded him of an interview he gave with Howard Stern in 2004, in which he can be heard telling the talk-show host that he suggested Maples have an abortion, according to tapes leaked to Newsweek from the Howard Stern Show.
Uh-oh. You mean Donald Trump told a fib? On record? To a reporter??
But let's move on. Remember this paraphrase of Maya Angelou:
When people show you who they are, believe them.
Here's how Trump succeeds in not answering the question about a federal ban:
I understand, sir. Your allies in the Republican Study Committee, which makes up about 80% of the GOP caucus, have included the Life of Conception act in their 2025 budget proposal. The measure would grant full legal rights to embryos. Is that your position as well?
Trump: Say it again. What?
The Life at Conception Act would grant full legal rights to embryos, included in their 2025 budget proposal. Is that your position?
Trump: I'm leaving everything up to the states. The states are going to be different. Some will say yes. Some will say no. Texas is different than Ohio.
Would you veto that bill?
Trump: I don't have to do anything about vetoes, because we now have it back in the states.
If taken a face-value, Trump doesn't seem to understand the purpose of an executive branch veto is.
You can read the text here. The act effectively moves the issue back into the Federal Government. Perhaps Trump doesn't understand that as well.
When asked whether states "Do you think states should monitor women's pregnancies so they can know if they've gotten an abortion after the ban" he answers:
I think they might do that. Again, you'll have to speak to the individual states.
A win for states' rights, I suppose but a loss for individual liberty.
What a Trump future looks like.
