The Greatest Argument For A Trump Presidency EVER?

Brunell Donald-Kyei is Donald Trump’s Diversity Council Vice Chair. She is a Chicago area attorney who leads Trump’s minority outreach efforts. She’s also Donald Trump’s secret weapon!

Donald-Kyei recently appeared on WGN news to discuss Donald Trump. In the short interview she may have made the best case for a Trump presidency than any other surrogate.

Even when the interviewers tried to bait her, she did not comply. They immediately started spouting off talking points that would have made Hillary Clinton proud, but she held her ground.

It was a thing of beauty.

Watch the interview here:

  • Roger Pauley

    Beautiful,just perfect,,A+

  • maria

    Ms. Donald-Kyei is a wonderful spokesperson! Let’s get her speaking everywhere!

  • Concerned citizen

    Trump only made negative comments about illegal immigrants. It was Hillary who first accused Obama of not being born in America. The sooner the media reports correctly the better for all of America. We are all Americans. I agree with this woman.

    • Mike D

      citations are needed for your claims

  • Alice

    WGN supports only liberals; but, if a person has a message, even WGN liberal sycophants can’t shake her.

  • mikebrash

    shallow thought sounds good, and the hell with the US Constitution, the
    hell with protection against a dictatorship and a police state—stop
    and frisk everywhere for everyone? Not for the rich folks in the rich
    folks’ neighborhoods you can bet on that. And what about the trillions
    of dollars…Trillions! that the taxpayers have to pay on in the
    “secret” no-interest loans to the banks and financial services
    companies? Shallow rhetoric without solutions! But it sounds good until you look for an actual solution. So typical.

  • Donna Rausa

    i love this girl! She is so friggen right!

  • Roc29

    At the time Obama’s birth certificate was being questioned Snopes confirmed that the birth certificate posted on the Whitehouse web site had been a layered PDF document and that the text was in several layers. Snopes made excuses for this.

    Since then that birth certificate was removed and replace with the birth certificate that is posted there now. Also all reference to the previous birth Certificate has been expunged.

    The question is, why was a layered birth certificate posted. Anyone with just a minimum amount of computer savvy would know that if you constructed a layered document and wanted to hide the fact that it was layered all that you had to do was print it out and then scan it back in and presto the layers are gone.

    I submit that they purposely posted an easily challenged document to create the controversy and a crisis so as to brand deniers as cuckoo. Remember, Rahm Emanuel said,.” Never let a crisis go to waste” which is right out of the Saul Alinsky hand book.

    • Molly

      I don’t think they are as smart as you think. I suspect the layered certificate was put there because some of the fields were doctored or changed. They didn’t even think other people would pick up on the layering…

      • Roc29

        Then how do you explain the current posting of a legitimate birth certificate and the expunging of any reference of the layer one from Snopes or any other source.

      • cardlink62

        It’s a fake and Obama’s a fraud.

    • Paul R Evere

      The plot thickens……

  • Rod Patrick

    I belong to the Black community. I see the opportunity lost for African Americans when the Establishment Democrats and Republicans alike are doing everything to replace both White and Black Americans with illegals in the labor sector. I’M VOTING FOR TRUMP! I hated Sarah Palin then, now I understand what she meant by “common sense”.

    • Mike D

      you kinda look white…

  • cletis

    Nothing this woman said had any substance. She had no facts, many false statements, no actual policy suggestions, nothing but emotions and vague, unsupported opinions. Nothing she said about Trump’s policies or goals amounts to anything more of the same: vague appeals to emotion and frustration. In short, she used the same techniques that a demagogue like Trump uses when speaking: Zero facts and lots of incorrect statements, sure; but mostly it’s the heavy reliance on vague, flexibly-interpretable, emotionally pleading, unsupported opinions and inflammatory rhetoric.

    Rhetoric like claiming that natural and naturalized citizens are competing with illegals for jobs, when the cynical truth is that illegals almost universally take seasonal, part-time, hard-labor, low-wage jobs that legal residents don’t want — which keeps the products sold by their employers cheaper, and puts more money in your pocket.

    Rhetoric like claiming that Trump wants to unite all races when he is the most divisive candidate (with respect to race, ethnicity, and gender) for public office since George Wallace.

    Rhetoric like claiming that the Obama administration has failed to make good on the promise of economic recovery, when the facts show that the recovery is very real:

    1. As the job market rebounds, unemployment is lower now than it was before the recession began under Dubya, and it continues to trend downward.
    2. Household incomes are higher than when Obama took office and continue to trend upward. More importantly, while Americans at all income levels are seeing higher pay, income growth is highest for the bottom 20% of wage-earners, and least for those who earn the most — which leads into my next point:
    3. Income inequality is shrinking.
    4. The poverty rate is shrinking.
    5. The stock markets are experiencing record highs.
    6. The housing market has recovered to the point where home sales are back to where they were before the housing market bubble that was one of the key contributors to the crash.

    All told, every major economic indicator is improving and much of the damage done by the recession has been reversed, despite the fact that Donald Trump says otherwise. America is coming back, and it’s due largely to policies put in place by the Obama administration — policies that Trump has said he would reverse, as he implements changes which were long ago proven economically unhealthy for everyone except the very richest of the rich.

    Ya know; like him.

    • cardlink62

      Everything this woman said was on point and true. You didn’t hear any substance because you wasn’t looking for any. She made NO false statements. However, I can’t say the same for you. Our economy is on the verge of collapse. You obviously know nothing about economics. You can’t spend trillions of dollars and lose billions more and keep printing money without inevitable consequences. If our debtors did a margin call to recover the debt we owe, the dollar and our economy would crumble. We are already bankrupt and on the verge of collapse. The statistics you posted are lies. The Unemployed rate is misleading because it doesn’t take into consideration those who have left the work force and have given up trying to find gainful employment. There are more people on Government assistance, food stamps and welfare than in history. Income inequality has widened and the middle class has shrunk as more and more people have slipped into poverty. Yes, there has been some improvements. Gas prices are lower and inflation has leveled however, Obama vetoed cost of living increases for retired, social security recipients and other government assistance programs for 3 of the 7 years he’s been in office. Don’t believe everything the media or Obama administration tells you.

      • emptyconfessions

        The unemployed rate was determined the way that it has always been determined. It’s not misleading, you just don’t like that a Democrat was President when it got to the rate it’s at.

      • “You obviously know nothing about economics. :”

        But YOU do. What a crock. I heard dueling banjos playing when I read this

      • cardlink62

        Maybe if we’re lucky, you can squeal like a pig for us.

      • Oracle

        Little man. Look at you. I am sure you speak every night Walter Mitty.

        Don’t let your elephant mouth gets your butterfly ass into trouble.

      • BeFike

        So, don’t listen to the Obama Administration. Don’t listen to the media. Who should I listen to? Angry white guy on the internet who thinks knowing how to balance a checkbook makes him authority on economic policy?

      • cletis

        Allow me to respond to your entire comment in bite-sized chunks.

        > “Everything this woman said was on point and true.”

        I obviously disagree, and my previous comment suffices to serve as support for that statement. First, the phrase “on point” has no meaning other than to indicate that you agree with her — which is to say nothing of substance. Second, her arguments were all emotional arguments; not rational or factual ones. By the time one reaches voting age, one should have made enough purely emotional decisions to have learned that making choices that way can be fun and dangerous, but never an actual good idea. Assuming one is adult enough to have begun to use logic in one’s everyday decisions about life, love, jobs, money, and purchases, why would you decide to choose a president using pre-teen-level decision-making skills?

        > “You didn’t hear any substance because you wasn’t looking for any. She made NO false statements.”

        Incorrect. I was listening to her words analytically and dispassionately. YOU heard substance that you wanted to hear, despite the fact that there was none. Again; substituting emotion for logic.

        > “However, I can’t say the same for you. Our economy is on the verge of collapse. You obviously know nothing about economics. You can’t spend trillions of dollars and lose billions more and keep printing money without inevitable consequences.”

        Since you are clearly far more expert on economics than am I, perhaps you can provide some proof of your Trump-echoed claims of impending economic doom? Because it is clearly contradicted by the fact-based reality inhabited by those of us outside the repeat-every-right-wing-rumor-you-hear world.

        And if, as you imply, you believe that a large federal deficit is a bad thing, then you should despise George W Bush. His contribution to the national debt was 2.5 times the dollar amount of Obama’s (6.1 trillion versus 2.4 trillion). Even his daddy added more to the debt per 4-year term than Obama (1.5 trillion in four years versus Obama’s average of 1.2). And that’s in non-inflation-adjusted dollars; if you account for inflation, Obama looks even better.

        > “If our debtors did a margin call to recover the debt we owe, the dollar and our economy would crumble. We are already bankrupt and on the verge of collapse.”

        I’m surprised I have to explain this to you, given your expert level of economics knowledge, but that’s not the way it works. At all. The US govt didn’t go to foreign banks and take out loans; foreign banks invested in the US govt by buying T-bonds. T-bonds, as an expert like you obviously knows, have a pre-set maturation age; the bearer can’t cash them in before that date. So (a) there’s no way those foreign investors can call in the debt in the way you seem to be thinking, (b) this means that those foreign investors have a vested interest in the US economy doing well so that they can realize their yields at maturity, and (c) the fact that these foreign banks invested in the US economy in the first place only demonstrates that they have faith in the strength and resilience of the US economy. In fact, the US Dollar is seen as one of the safest investments on the planet — which is why so many foreign investors buy dollars and T-bonds.

        So no; unlike an actual bank loan where there’s some collateral that the lender can legally confiscate in lieu of payment, those purchasing Treasury Bonds have no recourse if the govt doesn’t pay out on them as agreed; they simply lose their money (and presumably think twice about buying another T-bond). So again, the fact that foreign banks are purchasing T-bonds shows their faith in the value of the dollar and the strength of the US economy.

        Also, if the economy is in the terrible shape that you and Donald Trump claim it to be, then why are corporate profits up so much? Specifically, those profits have gone up almost 250% since Obama took office. Dubya’s increase of a little under 150% would sound great by itself, but pales in comparison.

        But again, I’m surprised that someone who is lecturing me on my ignorance regarding economic issues needs to have this explained to them. (This is sarcasm; I’m really implying that you are actually the one who has knows nothing about economics, because, you know, of the fact that you have demonstrated quite thoroughly that this is the case.)

        > “The statistics you posted are lies.”

        I’m afraid you have confused the concept of “lies” with the concept of “facts.” You shouldn’t believe every you read or hear on right-wing websites like this one, or on Fox News.

        > “The Unemployed rate is misleading because it doesn’t take into consideration those who have left the work force and have given up trying to find gainful employment.”

        That is true; the unemployment (not “unemployed”) rate — which is currently at 5.0%, the historical average for the figure — does not take into account those who have left the workforce altogether. The Congressional Budget Office — which, I’m sure I don’t need to tell you is a bureaucracy completely independent of either the President’s or Congress’s influence — estimates that as of one week ago, the true unemployment rate, when accounting for those “missing” unemployed people, was 6.1%. (I have no idea if there is a known value for the historical average of the adjusted value; sorry.) Let’s compare these numbers to the peak of the unemployment rate(s) during the recession, when the official rate was 10.0% and the adjusted rate was 11.1%. Both measurements have decreased by 5.0% since their peaks, which is pretty impressive.

        So the point is that whether you use the 5.0% or the 6.1% numbers, unemployment has dropped precipitously, and is yet another indicator of a robust, recovering economy.

        But if you want to ignore unemployment figures altogether and focus instead on a jobs-related statistic that you may find more agreeable, how about the cold, hard number of private sector jobs? (Private sector jobs, of course, as an expert like yourself must be well aware, are only created when private businesses are doing well enough to hire on, and therefore indicate directly the strength of the economy — as opposed to public sector jobs, which may bode well for the newly-employed individuals in question, but which obviously come with an associated cost to the treasury.) This number also makes Obama look really fucking good: While Dubya presided over a net loss of nearly half a million jobs during his two terms, the Obama administration has seen a net gain of a little over 11 million jobs. That’s right; under Obama, more than 22 TIMES as many jobs were CREATED than were LOST under Dubya. But go on: Tell me more about how bad the employment outlook is in this festering hellscape of Obama’s America.

        > “There are more people on Government assistance, food stamps and welfare than in history.”

        This is true as well; there are indeed more Americans on some form of public assistance now than ever before – and that’s a good thing. It’s part of the recovery process: The govt spends money to kickstart the economy by getting it into the pockets of the poorest Americans through social programs, and they spend it, which keeps them fed, clothed, and sheltered while the money they’re pumping into the economy stimulates the businesses they patronize, which in turn drives inter-business commerce and job creation.

        Now, I know that it’s a conservative mantra that spending money on social programs is like throwing it away because the poor spend all their money on drugs, alcohol, and big-screen TVs, while spending money by cutting taxes on the rich is the real stimulus the economy needs because this fuels job creation. Unfortunately, like most (if not all) conservative mantras, this is all complete poppycock. First off, the rich-people-are-job creators myth is easily disproven with the simplest facts: Job growth under Republican Presidents who cut taxes on the rich — like, say, Reagan — has been much less than under Democratic Presidents who raised taxes on the rich — like, say, Clinton.

        > “Income inequality has widened and the middle class has shrunk as more and more people have slipped into poverty.”

        These statements are absolutely the opposite of true; the exact opposite is the case.

        > “Yes, there has been some improvements. Gas prices are lower and inflation has leveled”

        I appreciate your concession, and I will reply in kind: Obama had little to do with either. Unlike the unusual Ford/Carter era “stagflation” period, times of low employment and low wages usually depress demand for products, resulting in low or even negative inflation — so what we’ve seen in terms of inflation during this recession is normal for a depressed economy. One benefit for Obama is that unlike Bill Clinton’s handling of Reagan’s then-record debt, Obama has been free to leave corporate tax rates at the low rate set by Dubya, which has resulted in the high corporate earnings I mentioned above. However, And gas prices being this low is due more to OPEC disunion than to anything Obama did.

        > “however, Obama vetoed cost of living increases for retired, social security recipients and other government assistance programs for 3 of the 7 years he’s been in office. Don’t believe everything the media or Obama administration tells you”

        Honestly; your fundamental ignorance of basic facts about the American economy is beginning to make me wonder just how much of an expert you really are! Obama does nothing to determine those increase; there were no “vetoes.” By law, the annual Social Security cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, is based on the Consumer Price Index, and since inflation is so low, so is the CPI. The exact formula used is set by the Social Security Act (SSA), enacted in 1935. Aside from the fact that you are blaming Obama for something he has no control over, you are basically complaining that inflation is low.

        Don’t believe the copy/pasted screed you read in mass emails or Facebook statuses.

        TL;DR: 100% of what you said was true was actually a lie. 100% of what you said was a lie is actually true. 100% of what you appear to believe about economics is wrong. And when you look at actual facts instead of merely listening to baseless pleas to emotion, you see that 100% of what you said was good is actually bad, and 100% of what you said was bad is actually good. It would seem to the casual observer that your opinions are echoes of the Republican party line sound bites and talking points that are disseminated by Fox News.

        I urge you to look at actual facts from reputable sources, and ignore your emotional bias and all the dogmatic overhead that comes along with it. (Hint: A good source is not email, Facebook, or websites like this.) I really wish people in general would think dispassionately and logically about these vitally important issues, rather than getting all fired up by populist rhetoric and believing anything you hear that fits with the manufactured narrative.

      • Molly

        You’re totally wrong on the gov’t debt, and you are mixing the terms deficit and debt. You lack of knowledge renders the rest of your post useless.
        It took the United States, which declared independence in 1776, 229 years to accumulate its first $8,000,000,000,000 ($8 trillion) in federal debt—with the debt first surpassing that level in October 2005. Since Obama took office, the debt has more than doubled to around $19 trillion – in less than 8 years!
        Assuming 2.67% GDP growth for 2016, Obama will leave office having produced an average of 1.55% growth. This would place his presidency fourth from the bottom of the list of 39*, above only those of Herbert Hoover (-5.65%), Andrew Johnson (-0.70%) and Theodore Roosevelt (1.41%). The last time the GDP growth was this bad was during the Great Depression.

      • salahudin

        Mollyl, cletis is obviously a paid SOROS troll and basement dweller as Queen Killary stated in an wikileaks e-mail. So much time on his hands. So much misinformation from the communists. Just another day in the life of paid TROLL/Liar/.

      • cletis

        1. You need to look up the definition of “internet troll.”
        2. You need to look up the definition of “obviously.”
        3. Likewise for “liar,” “misinformation,” and “communist.” (Although if you think that communists are feeding me misinformation, I think you may also want to look up both the definition and availability of “antipsychotic.”)
        4. When did Hillz refer to me in a wikileaks email? And if I’m in a basement, why do I look down two floors to ground level when I look out my office window?
        5. Where do I sign up to get this Soros money?!!??

      • cletis

        Nice try. While you’re correct that I incorrectly used the word “deficit” to mean “debt” (at no point did I actually refer to a deficit), and I did screw up and use an old reference for Obama’s debt figures — which was pretty lazy and careless of me — that does not in any way “render the remainder of my comment useless”; it merely renders incorrect the numbers I used in the ONE PARAGRAPH where I talked about debt, and has no impact on the remainder of my comment, where I addressed Treasury bonds, corporate profits, unemployment, non-employment, job growth, welfare and assistance programs, tax cuts versus tax hikes, ans Social Security. I guess suggesting that my errors in the paragraph on debt numbers invalidated the remainder of my post was a lot easier than acknowledging the validity of those comments?

        Back to debt, though: Since the total amount of debt is not important — only our ability to pay it off on time and at low interest rates is important — that one paragraph is arguably the least important part of my comment.

        Debt is not in and of itself bad, and in fact most economists agree that debt is a vital mechanism for stimulating the economy. As I wrote above, what’s important to the health of the economy is how much it costs to pay the interest on that debt. Since interest rates have been so low that the cost of servicing the debt has been going down, we’ve been doing well. However, interest rates will again begin to rise as the economy continues to recover, so it’s a good thing that Obama has been reducing spending –and therefore the deficit — each year since the stimulus package.

        As far as your reference to GDP: First, many economists feel it is an outdated statistic which is meaningful only in a manufacturing-based economy, which we no longer are. This is perhaps because it is merely a measure of how much money is changing hands; not a measure of whether those dollars are contributing to the growth of the economy. Anyway, if we disagree with those economists, and we say that GDP and GDP growth is an important metric in assessing the health of the economy, we should consider your comment that “The last time the GDP growth was this bad was during the Great Depression.” That’s exactly the point I was making in my previous comment, and it ties in to the debt as well: Just as in the Great Depression, we have to spend our way out of this mess.

      • Mike D

        I was about to say to myself, “I really should stop reading the comments sections of articles. It’s disheartening to see how foolish, ignorant, and confident people can be.” Then I read this response. Holy cow did you set him straight. Thank you!

      • cardlink62

        Oh shut up already. DAMN.

    • sarah farrar


  • Nicholas Humphries

    Has anybody done a study about jobs? That is number now versus pre technology. Labour additions to country GDP. Output for populous versus export. I bet that there would be an interesting story and technology has killed the labour market by creating only a small percentage of the jobs it replaced.

  • Kathleen Karp

    Yes, yes,yes! You are exactly right! Thank you for your tenacity in telling the truth as it is Ms. Kyei. We need to stick together as Americans ! A country is only as strong as it’s citizens working together making sure it thrives instead of tearing each other and the country apart and the government causing dicord amongst us!

  • Joseph r carreiro sr

    This lady stands for truth in action and come from a very Spiritual standpoint. Love her for her bravery and honesty.opinion.

  • Twlghtangel Mostoller Merrill

    love this woman she speaks for everyone

  • Harry Gaines

    I love to read through the stupidity that gets spewed on these right-wing “news” sites, it makes it very apparent to me just how stupid and uninformed you are, you brainless fucks will believe anything that follows your mindless narrative. Well Stay Stupid and trump on ye brainless basket dwellers!