During a live-streamed interview with Washington Post reporter Robert Costa earlier today, Pete Buttigieg was asked if he thought Donald Trump should have served in the Vietnam War.
“Well, I have a pretty dim view of his decision to use his privileged status to fake a disability in order to avoid serving in Vietnam,” the former Naval intelligence officer replied.
Trump, as you may recall, avoided the draft by receiving not one, not two, but five deferments. Four of them he received by attending college. The fifth came when he got a doctor’s note saying he suffered from painful and debilitating “bone spurs.”
When asked by Costa if he believed Trump’s “bone spur” condition, Buttigieg answered the question with another question: “Do you think he has a disability?”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Buttigieg then joked that, yes, he thinks Trump has a disability, just “not that one.”
Related: Sorry, Mike Pence! Pete Buttigieg says he will never repent for being in love with his husband
The comment was met with laughter from the audience, but Mayor Pete was quick to note that, humor aside, he has serious concerns about Trump’s feigning a chronic health condition in an effort to skirt the draft.
“I don’t mean to trivialize disability, but I think that’s exactly what he did,” he said, adding, “If he were a conscientious objector, I’d admire that.”
“But this is somebody who, I think it’s fairly obvious to most of us, took advantage of the fact he was the child of a multi-millionaire in order to pretend to be disabled so that somebody could go to war in his place.”
Asked whether he was concerned about how Trump might respond to Buttigieg’s biting criticisms, the 2020 hopeful wasn’t the least bit concerned.
“I don’t have a problem standing up to somebody who was working on Season 7 of The Celebrity Apprentice when I was packing my bags for Afghanistan,” he said.
Watch.
hayesj
A thoughtful and intelligent answer that is impossible to argue with. He didn’t have to resort to name calling or petty insults. He just stated the facts.
Jim A
This is what an intelligent politician sounds like.
Bob
And I was worrying that there was no such thing anymore..
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
This guy has something severely lacking in politicians today…
His first instinct is not to toss out an insult. But rather a fact, in an intelligent articulate manner…..
“I was packing for Afghanistan…..” Sorry there ain’t a nasty come back for that one….
o.codone
Wait, wait. I have a nasty come back for that one. “Pete, you call that packing?” Haahahahahaha.
d3clark
Trump will respond by insulting him, calling him Alfred E. Newman again.
Doug
This guy never ceases to impress me.
RevJames
Not now but some day….
jasentylar
Why not now? Why is Biden/Sanders/Warren/Harris better suited? Remember we thought the better suited -experienced candidate would win last time and she lost. I don’t care that she won the popular vote by 5 million or so. Against a buffoon like Trump, it should never have been so close. Liberals need to learn SOMETHING from that. Try a different tact. Mayor Pete is different and would restore decency and respect to the highest office in the land. Not to mention his idea for the court is awesome.
ScaryRussianHeather
He won’t give a crap.. But don’t let facts stand in your way. Just keep believing fake news.
Take a history lesson.
It was common for college students to get a draft deferment while attending college during the Vietnam War. There were about 15 million men who received deferments, were exempted, or disqualified for military service. There were over 200,000 men with draft violations.
Meanwhile, Trump had a HIGH lottery number, was eligible for the draft every single year after college until the last year they were pulling out of Viet Nam – in which case he would not even have been called had he not gotten the 4F.
Donald Trump received a college deferment (2-S) starting July 28, 1964.
On July 9, 1968 he was classified available for service (1-A).
On October 15, 1968 he was given a physical exam and reclassified, qualified for service only in case of war (1-Y).
On Feb. 1, 1972 he was again reclassified as not qualified for military service (4-F). These were legitimate official deferments.
Did you write an expose about Bill Clinton who was LITERALLY a HUGE draft dodger who literally used political influence? He said: he “avoided the draft to protect myself from physical harm because I have worked to prepare myself for a political life.” (LOL). Got a deferment to attend Oxford.
Participated in many demonstrations while in the UK against U.S. policies in Vietnam. Wrote he had a “loathing” for the military, adding, “I have written and spoken and marched against the war” and continued, “I came to believe that the draft system is illegitimate.” He never got drafted.
He was also awful on military support as POTUS refusing to send tanks and armored equipment to American troops in Mogadishu, Somalia, which had desperately requested help. That decision resulted in the death of 18 American Rangers, and the wounding of 75 others.
OH another Clinton and a place called Benghazi.
Donald Trump is a patriot and has placed our military as #1 priority- you can’t take that away from him and leave yourselves open to tons of whataboutisms.
truthseeker
Careful there dropping all of those facts.
I find it ironic that liberals who are against war and against a draft are now angry that someone didn’t serve in war. Do liberals now endorse the war in Vietnam? Meanwhile, you know if there was a draft, in the present day, every single person crying “Blumpf’s bone spurs” would use every reason they could to avoid being drafted.
IWantAFullBeard
Truthseeker – my lord you are stupid. I’m sorry to say such a thing but you truly are.
truthseeker
@IWantAFullBeard
Ah ok. So when you have no facts or counter-points, just resort to calling people stupid. What’s next? Going to call me a big meanie and a doo doo head?
Heywood Jablowme
I’ll try to follow your “logic” – it’s bad for someone to avoid participating in a war they think is a mistake. But it’s good for someone to avoid participating in a war they do believe in, or are indifferent to, as long as other people besides him take the risk. Does that sum it up?
truthseeker
@Heywood Jablowme
Clearly you can’t follow basic logic unless it’s spelled out for you because that’s not what I said.
The logic is that serving in a military capacity, especially in a pointless war, is not for everyone and those who don’t feel up to that challenge should not be judged. However, if you’re going to judge someone on that, you should be ready to do the thing you criticize someone for not doing.
Put your thinking cap on today
Heywood Jablowme
@”truth”seeker: “The logic is that serving in a military capacity, especially in a pointless war, is not for everyone and those who don’t feel up to that challenge should not be judged.”
Wow – that’s a very nice defense of Bill Clinton, even if it contradicts everything you wrote about him above. But you seem to have forgotten that Trump went to a military high school. And if you think Trump ever criticized Vietnam as a “pointless” war you are incorrect. Perhaps you’ve been thrown off by his many LIES about how he supposedly always opposed the Iraq war (he didn’t).
“However, if you’re going to judge someone on that, you should be ready to do the thing you criticize someone for not doing.” Hey, that’s a pretty good defense of Pete Buttigieg!
truthseeker
@Heywood Jablowme
” that’s a very nice defense of Bill Clinton, even if it contradicts everything you wrote about him above”
What did I write about Bill Clinton above? I never mentioned him. Once you tell a lie about me, it is hard for me to take you seriously. You should apologize for lying about me
You still haven’t put that thinking cap on
Cam
I see the phony accounts are here to try to derail the topic with whatever poo they can fling at the wall.
Topic, Mayor Pete called out Trump for lying about bone spurs and dodging the draft.
Kangol2
You got it! They love Drumpf and the GOP, but don’t say a peep when their beloved leader and party are promoting and advancing anti-gay policies, judges, anything!
truthseeker
The only phony account is DCguy using his old Cam screen name
You can’t dodge a draft if your number was never called
fur_hunter
This was an excellent hour-long interview. He answered questions in a responsible and productive way. He stated facts and not FAKE NEWS! I truly wish him well. I believe that he would do well as leader of the country and who not tolerate the ‘Good Ol Boy’ attitude that exists in Washington. The interview was extremely worth watching.
Herman75
Trump looks at Pete and then decides Trump is a stable genius. The guy is wrong in the head.
Just remember, all you old farts that attended Woodstock ended up voting for Trump, and zuk P00t1ns deek now.
Gary Q VV
If not in 2020, Buttigieg will someday be in the Oval Office, if he pursues his objective. Americans are starting to wake up to the fact that the ultra-wealthy entities are pulling the strings of their carefully chosen puppets to spread their vile poison and sway and squelch the populous “right here in the good ole US of A” (examples: Fox “News”, far-right religious mongers, greedy & power-hungry hypocritical politicans). How else do you think these puppeteers were able to put a slimy nobody, Trump, into the honorable Office of the President? The Russians helped, but in only a relatively small helping hand in the tomfoolery. These puppeteers fear Mayor Pete and others, and are implementing their usual covert actions to void anything they fear. Buttigieg has a mass following which puts these puppeteers “en garde”. They certainly are not inclined to allow some f*g Democrat to rule “their country”. Listen up you guys, history repeats itself; maybe some of you know what I’m referring to.
truthseeker
@Gary Q VV
What are you even talking about?
The “ultra-wealthy entities” that you reference didn’t even support, donate to, or endorse Donald Trump in the last election. They all support and financed Hillary Clinton and nearly all of the “ultra-wealthy entities” in the US are liberal Democrats: Alphabet / Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Soros Fund Mgmt, Apple, Saban Capital, Microsoft, Warren Buffet / Berkshire Hathaway, etc. Over $87 million of her donations came from Wall St. and over $23 million came from the entertainment industry.
If you look at the current 2020 Democratic candidates, the “ultra-wealthy entities” that you say are the boogeymen are funding them and not Donald Trump. Alphabet / Google, Microsoft, Apple, Lockheed Martin, Soros Fund Mgmt, Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, WB, CITI Group, AT&T, Wells Fargo, CBS, Disney, Wall St, etc. are all funding the 2020 Democratic candidates including Buttigieg.
You should research this stuff before commenting. I remember previously you thought Wikipedia and Wikileaks were the same thing.
Gary Q VV
@truthseeker As usual you missed the real message in a comment. What I conveyed had nothing to do if the ultra-wealthy individuals or entities are Democrats or Republicans, there are pitiful slim balls in both parties. You need to open your eyes and mind. Okay?
The only references to a political party was “Democratic Buttigieg”, and that’s only because he’s a Dem. And being a “far-right religious mongers”, could actually be neither party. So, I must assign you a project: 1) re-read my comment, 2) Do a better job of real research before broadcasting unintentional misinformation.
By the way:
The list of ultra-wealthy entities you haphazardly compiled is not the ultra-wealthy of which i spoke. The true puppeteers are way above those amateurs. Think bigger, much bigger.
In addition, seven years ago the top 100 donors of 2012 gave 41 percent of all the money collected by outside spending groups, and of their donations, 71 percent went to conservative groups. The trend towards conservative groups has wavered little since that time.
Some of the leading Republican-oriented donors were Jon Huntsman, Sr., father of the 2012 Republican presidential hopeful; Richard and Bill Marriott of the hotel chain; and casino mogul Sheldon Adelson. Adelson topped the list at more than $90 million in donations — three times what the next top donor gave.
The Republican advantage in 2012 is even more visible in a Forbes list of the top 40 billionaire backers on each side — including more than just those who donated to outside spending groups, such as direct campaign donations or those who fundraise for a candidate. Of those 40, 29 supported conservative groups and candidates, and just 11 supported liberals.
Republicans tend to donate to and use non-disclosing groups more than Democrats do, said Center for Responsive Politics spokeswoman Viveca Novak. Conservative political nonprofits spent almost five times as much as liberal ones in 2012, according to Open Secrets data. So far in 2014, they have spent almost twice as much.
That said, there were some notable liberal billionaire donors in 2012, as well, including filmmaker Steven Spielberg and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman.
truthseeker
@Gary Q VV
You’re talking a lot of wish wash
“What I conveyed had nothing to do if the ultra-wealthy individuals or entities are Democrats or Republicans, there are pitiful slim balls in both parties”
True but what you originally said was that the “ultra-wealthy individuals” fear Mayor Pete (not according to donation receipts) and that they coordinated to elect Donald Trump (false when you look at where the bulk of the wealthy donation went – nearly all to Hillary Clinton). In 2016, Clinton raise almost $1 billion and outspent Trump 10:1
“The list of ultra-wealthy entities you haphazardly compiled is not the ultra-wealthy of which i spoke. The true puppeteers are way above those amateurs. ”
Then who are they? Name them. If you’re talking people like the Rothschilds (est. worth of $2 trillion), they supported Hillary Clinton and even have her personal email. Their family trashes Donald Trump constantly.
You reference 2012 a lot but I don’t care about donations from 7 years ago. I’m talking about the current political climate which has changed vastly. Obama and Romney were basically the same person, just corporate funded puppets. In the 2016 election and now, we see many of those same corporations now funding liberal Democrats and liberal causes.
One thing you should be concerned about are politicians who have nothing, go into politics, then come out worth millions (i.e. Pelosi, Obama, Clinton, Sanders, McCain, Bush, etc) even though their salaries range from $80k – $400k (for President) / year while in office.