Washington D.C., Aug 4, 2020 / 04:15 pm (CNA).- EWTN News Nightly’s lead anchor Tracy Sabol conducted a White House interview with President Donald Trump Aug. 4. Below is a transcript of that interview provided by EWTN News Nightly.
EWTN News Nightly said it has also reached out for an interview to Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.
Catholic News Agency is a service of EWTN News.
Tracy Sabol: Thank you so much, Mr. President, for speaking with us today. We appreciate it.
President Trump: Thank you.
Tracy Sabol: We have a lot to get to. But I first want to talk about the economy. Where we are right now, of course, we’re starting with another round of stimulus. Can you talk about that and what’s needed for Republicans and Democrats to meet in the middle?
President Trump: So we had the greatest economy in the history of the world, not only in our country, in every country. We were beating China, beating everybody. They were having the worst economy they’ve had in over 67 years. So we were doing with the tariffs and all the things that I was doing. And then we had to close it up. It came from China. They should have stopped it. They could have stopped it, but they didn’t. They stopped it from going into their country, but they didn’t stop it from here, Europe, or the rest of the world. And we had to close it up and we did that. And now we’re coming back and we’re doing stimulus. We’ve already done it, as you know, very successfully. And we’ll probably have something worked out. We’ll see what happens. The problem with the Democrats, as you know, they want bailout money for their states and cities that have done so poorly under Democrat leadership. And I’m not happy with that. It’s not appropriate. This is having to do with the corona, I call it the “China-virus.” And so I think we’re doing very well. We had the best job numbers we’ve ever had, percentage-wise. You take a look at what happened, [indiscernible] close to seven million jobs over the last two months. New numbers are going to be coming out very soon. We’re back. We’re doing very well. I think next year is going to be one of the best years we’ve ever had. And it looks very, very strong.
Tracy Sabol: Looking forward to the third quarter: How do you anticipate that looking?
President Trump: I think the third quarter is going to be good. I think it’s going to be good. I think the fourth quarter is going to be very, very good. But we’re just coming out of something that we had no choice. We saved millions of lives by closing. If we didn’t close it up, you would have lost millions of lives. And by closing it, I mean, we’ve done a really good job. The ban on China was very important. We banned people coming in, highly infected, and we banned people from coming in from China and then from Europe. We did the ban on Europe, very important. It really, I think, is going to be, I think we’re going to have a very special economy in about…for next year. But I think third quarter actually is going to be very good.
Tracy Sabol: A lot of things shut down, including churches. Let’s talk about that and the importance of reopening churches. I know you’ve talked about that.
President Trump: I think they should open the churches. It’s up to the governors. But, I think, and I’m recommending it, you open the churches. They’ll spread, they’ll be socially spread, they’ll have masks and they’ll do what they have to do, you know, the hygiene and everything else that we know. It’s a very simple list, but I think it’s very unfair that they have– I saw Jim Jordan the other day talking about it very well, that they have 50,000 people protesting and they’re standing on top of each other practically, and yet you’re not allowed to go to church. You don’t go to schools. We want to open our churches. We want to open our schools. And everybody wants to be safe. They know what to do. They’ll stay away. And, you know, we’ll be the same way. Maybe you’ll have an extra service or two or three. But they have to let the churches open. They want to put, the Democrats want to put them out of business. They want to put the churches out of business. And it’s very unfair. So they don’t complain about the protests, which are horrible in many cases. You look at Portland, it’s a disaster, but they don’t want the churches open, they don’t want the schools open, they don’t want offices open. So it’s a very, very unfair situation to a lot of people.
Tracy Sabol: Mr. President, is there a way to deem churches as essential businesses? How can we do that?
President Trump: I am looking at that because I think it’s enough already. You have some states, I think they never want them open. They don’t want churches open. Look, the Democrats, frankly, if you look at the radical left, Democrats, which are radical left now, they’ve gone radical left. Whether you’re talking about life or whether you’re talking about almost anything, they’re not liking it. They’re not liking it.
Tracy Sabol: I know that you’ve heard about the vandalism, the horrific vandalism. Many, many churches have been vandalized over the past recent weeks. When you heard about that, what did you think?
President Trump: I think it’s a disgrace. And I think it’s partially because they’re not allowed to function, they’re not allowed to really function. And I think it’s disgraceful that it can happen. And, you know, they want to defund the police. They want to stop the police. They want to have them at least to a minimum. And we’re just the opposite. I just got endorsed by Texas law enforcement, by Florida, all of the sheriffs and the law enforcement. I think, I can’t imagine them ever, I can’t imagine law enforcement ever endorsing Biden. He’s got a hard time in a lot of ways, let’s face it, but I can’t imagine that ever happening. So we just about have everybody endorsing us in terms of law enforcement. And, you know, with the churches, you need some law enforcement to help you out also. But it’s the fact that they’re closed and they you know, bad things happen when they’re closed. It’s a very terrible situation, what they’re doing to churches and these are governors that are radical left or Democrat, it’s almost becoming the same thing. And I don’t think they want churches open.
Tracy Sabol: What can be done to stop this vandalism? What do you think?
President Trump: Well, what you need is you need the law enforcement. It’s areas usually run by radical left Democrats. I mean, where you have Republican leadership, where you have Republican governors and mayors, you don’t have this problem. You have this problem where you have radical left Democrats in virtually every instance. So what you have to do is elect Republicans. And if you had a Republican, as an example, if Biden got in, you’d have Portland all over our country. It would be like Portland. These people are agitators. They’re anarchists. You’d have that all over our country. You know, we stopped it, we stepped in and a lot of people said we were early. Well, let us let us be early. Better early than late. But we did a good job there. We did a great job in Seattle that would have been burned to the ground, frankly. But with Portland, and we didn’t do our big job, we did a much smaller job. We had to protect our building, and our buildings, actually, a number of buildings. But the courthouse would have been burned down. The courthouse would have been destroyed if we didn’t step in. People said, “Oh, we went early.” Well, if we didn’t go then, the courthouse would have been destroyed because Seattle was not protecting it. So you would have that situation all over the United States. And that’s unacceptable.
Tracy Sabol: And, Mr. President, on top of mind for a lot of parents, including myself: the reopening of schools. I know you just tweeted about that. Can you talk about that?
President Trump: I want the schools open. First of all, children are unbelievably strong, right? Their immune system. Something’s going on because out of thousands of deaths in New Jersey, thousands, because I just saw the statistics, many thousands of people died, one person under the age of 18. And that was a person I believe had diabetes on top of everything. So children just are, I guess I heard one doctor say, virtually they’re immune from it. They have a strong, they have a very strong something, and they are not affected. And we have to open our schools. You know, there’s a big danger to keeping people locked in. And they’re also finding it’s wonderful to use computers, but it’s not a great way of learning. They now know that it’s much better to be with a teacher on campus or in a school, that’s much better than looking at a computer all day long. So we have to get our schools open. We have to get them open soon.
Tracy Sabol: And if there was one message you wanted to say to our viewers, what would it be right now?
President Trump: Well, I think anybody having to do with, frankly, religion, but certainly the Catholic Church, you have to be with President Trump when it comes to pro-life, when it comes to all of the things, these people are going to take all of your rights away, including Second Amendment, because, you know, Catholics like their Second Amendment. So I saved the Second Amendment. If I wasn’t here, you wouldn’t have a Second Amendment. And pro-life is your big thing and you won’t be on that side of the issue, I guarantee, if the radical left, because they’re going to take over, they’re going to push him around like he was nothing.
Tracy Sabol: Well, thank you so much, Mr. President, for the time today.
[…]
About the courageous Jennifer Roback Morse, yours truly recalls her vigorous testimony before the Legislature of the state of Washington in 2012, when legalization of gay “marriage” was on the docket, or on the table, or the bed, or whatever.
Testifying that same morning, here also was a quite handsome young man of twenty years, a poster child in white shirt and tie and whose parents divorced when he was twelve. After having been shaped by his father’s absence, he had recently reunited with his father–for whom he discovered that he now had a deep attachment. He would like to find an older man just like his father to intimately share the rest of his life. The bobble heads of legislators nodded in compassionate sympathy. Only moments before, in the crowded front of the chamber, two sympathetic male staffers, also in white shirts and ties, embraced each other with prolonged excitement, each chortling aloud without blushing, “I have ‘straight’ love. . . .”
The rest is history…
“In the regular November 2012 elections, voters for the first time approved the legalization of same-sex marriage by popular vote in three states: Maine, Maryland, and Washington [an unsuccessful referendum]. Maine’s law took effect on December 29, 2012. Maryland started allowing same-sex marriages on January 1, 2013. In Washington state, the first [FIRST!] licenses were distributed on December 6, with the first marriages on December 9 following the mandatory three-day waiting period [Wikipedia].”
Then, of course, the United States Supreme Court climbed in bed (5-4), reversing millennia of Civilization with the stroke of a pen, or whatever. Said Chief Justice John Roberts: “Celebrated today’s decision, but do not celebrate the Constitution.” https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/26/417720924/roberts-celebrate-todays-decision-but-do-not-celebrate-the-constitution
Well, I’m not surprised. The massive entertainment industry (even children’s entertainment), the artistic and creative industries (especially children’s authors of books), the political world, many influential companies that employ people at really good wages, and especially the academic community, along with many of the historically mainline churches (who seem to be bleeding members!) have all embraced and endorsed everything that the very powerful and visible Same Sex Lobby groups have presented as “facts”. These three social organizations, much more than the orthodox “religious world”, influence almost everyone, even devoted Christians.
I think that same sex couples can raise well-balanced children IF they include heterosexuals in their circles of friends and allow their children to spend time with coaches, teachers, friends, relatives, etc. who hold opposing views from them, and make it clear to the child that he/she is a unique individual who needs to follow the path that is really “them” and not try to be someone they are not. I think that’s tough for many younger people nowadays, who have swallowed the mantra that we can all “be all that we can be!”
I also think that’s tough for many “straight” (and LBGTQ+) parents who often expect their children to be something they’re not; e.g., very intelligent, or artistic, or “religious” or athletic (especially athletic!), or outgoing and popular, or contemplative and sensitive.
If SSA couples raise children who turn out to be well balanced it’s only through the Grace & Mercy of God, not because of their domestic circumstances.
It’s bad enough when a single parent has to raise a child without a mother or father due to death or desertion. Children can understand that. It’s entirely a different thing when a biological mother or father is purposely erased through an anonymous donor/surrogate.
Overturn Anthony Kennedy’s insane quackery woke-religion, which is absolutely abusive to all, especially children and young people.
Common Law [for the US the common law of England] conveyed to the legal mind traditions drawn from natural law, universally acknowledged legally observed standards, reasoned opinions, religious principles, stare decisis verdicts that were the basis for an ordered society.
As Chief Justice Roberts, Scalia, the other dissenting justices during the 2015 majority decision to permit same sex marriage, the Constitutional based understanding of marriage exclusively between a man and a woman, drawn from tradition, was struck down by a radical, irrational intrusion into that commonly held understanding.
It is the same as saying a man can be a woman, or that we cannot define what a woman is – which is exactly what has transpired since the 2015 Scotus decision. Logical or Right Reason has been undermined. Only a reversal of that decision can remove legality from that immoral madness. Unfortunately, ending the practice requires a moral conversion of our culture.
Catholicism in context must first put its own house in order regarding the trend toward normalizing homosexual behavior in house to be effective in reversing it in the general population. Otherwise homosexuality will lead to the destruction of mankind.
True, Father Peter. It is, in essence, discriminating against the essence of being, in essence, a Loving Husband or Wife, Father or Mother, in order to accommodate the engaging in or affirmation of sexual acts that regardless of the actors or the actors desire, even if the actors are a man and woman united in marriage as Husband and Wife, deny the Sanctity and Dignity of every Human Person, and are thus Physically, Psychologically, Spiritually, and Emotionally harmful. We can know through both Faith and reason, any follower of Jesus The Christ who desires to accommodate the engaging in or affirmation of demeaning sexual acts , which are disordered because they deny the Sanctity and Dignity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and thus The Sanctity and Dignity of every Beloved Son or Daughter from the moment of conception to natural death, ipso facto separates oneself from The One Body Of Christ, due to the fact that Love, which is always rightly ordered to the personal and relational inherent Dignity of the persons existing in a relationship of Love, is devoid of every form of Lust.
“Catholicism in context must first put its own house in order regarding the trend toward normalizing homosexual behavior in house to be effective in reversing it in the general population. Otherwise homosexuality will lead to the destruction of mankind.”
Respectfully, Catholicism is ordered to The Word Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Incarnate, Our Savior, Jesus, The Christ, thus Catholicism is in order and practiced by The Faithful, The One Body Of Christ, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
Those who deny Christ’s Teaching on Sexual Morality, having ipso facto defected from The Catholic Faith, until they repent and affirm Christ’s teaching , are not to be counted among The Faithful, least it appear one can remain in communion with Christ and His One , Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, while denying The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, The Perfect Divine Eternal Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ, Who Proceeds From The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ.
That divine ordering of the Mystical Body doesn’t ensure that all its members are living lives that reflect that order. That includes hierarchy. As such there’s sin in the Church today, the egregious sin of homosexuality. A faithful elect will remain to the end. In the end the Church teaches it is Christ who will be the victor of Satan and evil.
Natural Law, the reflexion of the Eternal Law as Aquinas teaches the Natural Law Within, refers to the innate ability to distinguish good from evil. We find it recognized by Cicero who said the law of nature is the same in Rome as it is in Athens.
It is prescient knowledge realized in the act of deliberation of a moral act. Which is why the Church says the Decalogue is a reminder God gave to Man through Moses. As a natural faculty we don’t require grace to apprehend the natural law, thus it’s the bedrock for conscience. Although grace assists in its apprehension and consistency in practice.
Apart from Natural Law there are laws or principles of behavior that surpass Natural Law and are revealed by the Holy Spirit. These revealed principles of behavior are those that are necessary for salvation and best recognized in Christ’s passion, and the willingness to suffer deficit to oneself for the good of others.
Tullius Cicero in De Legibus Book I says, “And there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times”.
If the Ruth institute was founded for the purpose of defending traditional Christian marriage, would their endorsing any study pertaining to a defense of their position be a credible reason for believing it? Since we all tend to stack the deck in our favor there is little hope that their case is presented objectively. Is it likely that they would ever cite a study which came to opposite conclusions as being good or accurate? No not at all.
I am not making any statement about the mission or reputation of the Ruth Institute ( about this I am totally ignorant) , I’m only trying to make the point that it is very difficult if not impossible to defend our moral values by citing sociological studies. Professionals on both sides of the fence can come up with “studies “ which support their biases.
I am 100% pro traditional family values and I don’t need any study to confirm it and no number of opposing studies will ever change my mind. Period.
I think you might have it backward, James – the Ruth Institute isn’t endorsing the Regnerus study; the Regnerus study affirms the Ruth Institute’s positions. I’m no sociologist, and I haven’t poured over any of the data or read the study; but based on the commentary provided by the Cornell Sociologists from their Multiverse Analysis on Regnerus’ data, it sounds like they were hoping to discredit Regnerus’ study; but instead re-affirmed his result. That said, the point of the article seems to say that there is scholarly, robust research (even in the field of Sociology! and even from a school like The University of Texas!), that reaffirms the value of providing traditional marriages and family composition for the material welfare of offspring.
I think i remember that The Ruth Institute tries to help victims of the Sexual Revolution. Defending marriage would correlate with that goal I guess.
Surely you wouldn’t reject every study an organization like The Ruth Institute makes public on the grounds that studies with differing outcomes exist?
I’m cautious about these kind of things too but you’d have to look at the criteria and populations studied to make a comparison.
Studies and polls do mean something but they can also be set up for certain outcomes.
From an NCR article today:” Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D., is founder and president of the Ruth Institute, which helps the victims of the Sexual Revolution recover from their experiences and become advocates for positive change.”
A premise for homosexuality’s universal expansion and the destruction of mankind is the dissolution of moral principles that correctly direct the will toward its correct object. Remove those rational, religiously held principles and the will loses its direction toward a due end. Reason wanders where pleasure leads it, abnormal sexuality becomes an option solely based on pleasure.
And the absence of a well formed conscience!
Do we really see distingush between a same sex home from a broken home? Perhaps I don’t.
God created two sexes, not one. Homosexual activity is abhorrent. But the progressive movement looks to expand recognition of Gay rights. The dilemma for straights is how we conduct our relationship with Gays going forward?
Can we isolate them? I have Gay friends. Will there be a bill to outlaw same sex marriage? Will that attempt at containment trigger violence? There have been many attempts to evangelize Gays. A major attempt was made in Minnesota…
Several years ago, former U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann and her husband Marcus created a “clinic” using the slogan “Pray the Gay away”. They practiced “Conversion Theory”. It was closed for improper record keeping. The “impact” of the clinic remains largely unknown, except for several men who said their mental anguish was the result.
We must continue our trek to “address” the issue. However, it remains an issue until we know how we do it. God help us.
‘Do we really see distingush between a same sex home from a broken home? ”
***************
Yes, Mr. Morgan I think so. While prison populations are largely boys from single parent homes that can reflect poverty as well as the absence of a father in the home.
I’m guessing psychological issues will look different when children are “created” through anonymous donors & surrogates. I know a woman who found out her conception happened in that fashion & she had a real breakdown. It completely turned her world upside down.
Children aren’t pets or commodities. They have inherent human rights & one of those is to know & have a relationship with their father & mother, if living. And their extended family also.
mrscracker: so much truth in what you write. Shout it from the rooftops!
Thank you, Deacon Edward and God bless you.
“Reality is greater than ideas” – what reality, which idea? When? How?
The reality that man is biologically grounded which necessarily informs his interior and his society
Or
That state of affairs where delinquents and criminality are not backing off “so therefore” -the therefore being a mental idea process- “therefore” they must be facilitated – a combination of moralized obliging “must”/“ought” and of creating activity and directing action for real
With the latter being given not only ascendancy but being presented as absolute.
Very sad. My cousin and his wife are still friends with two women (I knew them in HS, younger than me, but don’t think they were gay then or they hid it).
When gay started to be “accepted” in society they came out. They married when that became a thing you could do. They ended up “adopting” 2 babies who are mid/late teens. We were all at a picnic and my aunt heard the boy, sadly lament saying, “I’m never going to have a dad”. It broke my heart. Unfortunately, he did while growing up, had a lot of behavior issues. I suspected because his family wasn’t “normal” and wanted a dad like other families. Horrible. His sister also had some difficulty, but she “seems” sort of ok in comparison, but she has females that are like her. Although, not having a dad could cause bad decisions when dating/marrying. It’s hard to be around them, the boy is miserable, the girl trying to deal with it and the “moms” look miserable /unhappy too, bc the kids aren’t completely happy. I’m sure the son has told them what he thinks and resents them or even hates them for doing that to him. Extremely heart breaking.
I had thought what would I think if I was in that situation. I’d be confused, and feel like I wasn’t grounded. And I’d totally lament not having what most people had a dad and a mom. I’d probably run away and stay at a friend’s if I could or ask family members if they could adopt me! I would be beyond miserable.
Wish I could adopt their kids and get them out of that selfish situation. How could you make a decision to have kids without thinking about the repercussions that they would have to endure-being made fun of in school-haha you don’t have a dad/mom.
If one chooses to act on their propensity toward homosexual, don’t adopt or surrogate children. You bringing them up in an unnatural situation., that in most cases cause harm-confused, behavioral/ anger, self-harm or suicide. It’s one thing if people make their own decision to be gay, but, don’t drag children into it. 🙏🏻
Re Fr. Morelli above (7:17) – “Unfortunately, ending the practice requires a moral conversion of our culture”.
Agreed. A tall order but that’s what’s required.
I note that the Baptists have urged a rethinking of Obergefell.
From a phenomenological perspective, imagine for a moment the life experience of a person who comes to know the fact that his/her life began as a result of the union of donated ova and sperm in a petri dish adopted by two (or three or four since laws are indeed fungible) homosexuals. Imagine for a moment that this is you.
There will always be problems when we encourage the patients to run the hospitals and the lunatics to run the asylums. It is doubtful that the Creator made a mistake in creating men and women with their unassailable characteristics and function for reproduction of their species.