Sunday School 9/6/20: Extra Credit

For this week's Extra Credit, I went looking for folks talking about the allegations that the president referred to US military veterans as "suckers" and "losers."

I hit the mother lode with the This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom, where Martha Raddatz was hosting the conversations. She's been on a multi-state tour, and noted that shortly after she arrived in Denver, the article in the Atlantic about Trump's comment hit. She asked voters for their reactions; here are a few of them.

It broke my heart. 

We're not losers. We're not suckers. He's - the government sent us over there (Vietnam). We didn't say, 'send me, send me to war. The government sent us to go fight for this country.

My immediate reaction was what is this? This doesn't make a lot of sense. And each allegation was supported by anonymous sources.  (This man said he absolutely doesn't believe the article).

He tweets a lot, he says a lot and gets all about going after (a) certain voting bloc. It's not what he really feels. And so, when you take it back to national security, I'm really worried that he's going to put men and women needlessly in harm's way.

It didn't surprise me. You can see what he said about Senator McCain from the very start. I think that (he's) someone who respects the military vote but that's not the same thing as respecting the military. 

And, she talked with former Secretary of Defense (and former Republican Senator) Chuck Hagel, asking him for his reaction.

...if these comments are real (and I'll address that in a second) but if they're real, it's beneath the dignity of any commander in chief, truly they're despicable. Now, one of the points that one of the veterans made which was a good point, these are anonymous sources. But let's go back to the words from Trump himself, coming out of his own mouth, starting in 2016 about - what he said about John McCain and what he continued to say about McCain. 

How he degraded the service of Generals Mattis and McMaster, and just recently, General Kelly, the history of this president over the last three, four years is pretty clear. The 2018 experience when he did not go to the American military cemetery in France, to recognize and honor the World War I Marines, every other leader went, every other leader drove, leaders of Germany, France, Canada. And you can go through a litany of past things that he said from his mouth, actions that he's taken, and it corroborates really the Goldberg article in "The Atlantic”.

Hagel also said he thinks this will resonate with servicemen and women,

because what I’ve just said, he's on the record with saying things himself over the past few years. And that -- that makes the credibility of this article and those anonymous comments more and more credible. Now, I said before, if you want to make an anonymous comment and if you feel so strongly about that that you make that comment to an established, well-respected reporter and a magazine, then you ought to have the courage to go out and use your name, too. I’ve always believed that. I think it’s important now. If these guys who said it or allegedly said it, think it’s that important for the future of this country, then they should show some courage and step forward as well.

Interestingly, Raddatz asked one of the doubting veterans she talked to about this if he'd believe it if "someone appeared who had provided information in that article and said it on the record in front of a camera" and the gentleman was still unsure about believing it. Hagel noted that some folks will never believe it, "no matter what is said, no matter who says it," noting

...and that's just the reality of politics and freedom of expression, and we have a great country where you can believe what you want to believe. But facts are facts, Martha. And the reality of those facts (is) pretty clear. I think it's a pretty clear indictment of this president's attitude towards our veterans.

He'll use them. Of course, he’s used them in the last three and a half years as props in his actions, in his statements. No president has ever done that -- use your veterans, use your active military as props. I mean, couple of months ago, he sends an airborne division into Washington, camps them outside of Washington, the mayor didn’t ask for that. The police chief didn't ask for that in Washington, D.C. But it's a continuation of the same actions and words we have seen from this president the last three and a half years.

I have to agree with Hagel. It IS believable that Trump could have said this, given what he's said about and said to veterans, members of a Gold Star family, and his penchant for grasping for the military to get involved in his pet projects (the Wall), the DC stuff that Hagel mentioned, and his repeated claims that he'll "send in the National Guard"- something that's not even his responsibility, for Pete's sake.

The comment by the one veteran, the one who said Trump loves the military voter, not the military? Solid gold.

Also on the show fielding questions on this issue? Ohio's Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, who served in the Senate with both Chuck Hagel and John McCain. His reaction?

Well, Martha, I -- I read the article. But, you know, any time I've been with the president, there's ever been any discussion about the military, he has been extremely respectful, what you would expect of the president. So, you know, that's -- that's been my personal experience.

Raddatz talked about the fact that even Fox News had confirmed parts of the article (other news agencies have done the same).  But DeWine agreed with Hagel that "people should come forward, adding that

...you know, anonymous sources are -- are interesting, but, you know, it's never going to have the credibility, I think, for the general public unless someone -- you know, people actually come forward and are willing to do that.

He said that he doesn't agree with Trump's comments about McCain, whom DeWine called "a dear, dear personal friend."

Raddatz wondered about the over 19 million veterans in the country, who accounted for 13% of 2016 voters (per exit polling). Then, 60% of them voted for Trump, 34% for Hillary Clinton, and asked if DeWine thought this could make a difference in this year's election. He said he really didn't know.

...you know, we're into the campaign. You know, a lot of things come out in a campaign. And I think sometimes people, when -- when they only come out during a campaign, you know, people are somewhat skeptical about them. This is -- you know, we're into the 60 days. And so I don't know what, you know, impact that's going to have. I think, you know, what the president has done in regard to the economy before we hit the -- the virus, you know, I think people in Ohio generally very happy with that. You know, the president made commitments in regard to the Supreme Court and -- and federal courts. We're very happy with what he's done there. So, you know, it's going to -- look, it's going to be a close race in Ohio. I think the president will win Ohio. But Ohio's always going to be a -- a battleground state. And, you know, no -- neither side can ever take Ohio for granted.

You know? On that last part, he's right: neither side can ever take Ohio for granted. And he's right on the part before that, too, I suspect: there are probably lots of single-issue voters, like the ones who focus on Supreme Court justices. Those people cannot be discounted, in this or any election.

See you around the virtual campus. And if you're not wearing your mask, you're doing it wrong.