SV411 Podcast: Rep. Zoe Lofgren on Trump’s Mental Instability

In this week’s SV411 podcast, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren speaks with San Jose Inside editor Josh Koehn about President Donald Trump’s instability, her resolution to get him a mental and physical evaluation, the fight to protect dreamers after the rescission of DACA, and who she thinks is ready to lead the Democratic Party come 2020 (hint: Al Franken).

If all you came for is the politics, skip ahead to the 13:30 mark.

Other issues discussed include the Alternative Press Expo taking place this weekend at the Convention Center, the billionaire-backed senior housing initiative and other local arts and entertainment events. Please let us know what you think of the program, and feel free to offer up suggestions for future guests. Thanks for listening.

26 Comments

  1. “Zoe: I’ve never had a private meeting with the president, so it’s not based on that.”

    Usually to give a diagnosis, doctors have to be within touching distance of the patient. They also require many years of medical school training, neither of which Zoe has done.

    BTW Josh, Podcasts are so late 90s. Just do a youtube so we can see your pretty face.

    • She’s not diagnosing him. She’s just saying his behavior is incoherent and he should be evaluated by professionals. The majority of the country agrees. What does he have to fear if he thinks he’s sane? Do you think any of what he has done so far is consistent with the behavior of a sane person? “Draining the swamp” by stacking all govt positions with Goldman Sachs alumni and Russian mob-connected goons. But then again you’re probably posting from Russia, troll.

      • >She’s just saying his behavior is incoherent
        Dan Brown: “We all fear what we do not understand.” 4d chess is not for rookies.

        > The majority of the country agrees.
        270 to win

        >Do you think any of what he has done so far is consistent with the behavior of a sane person?
        You mean running for an elected office as an outsider? I did that once, wasn’t an enjoyable experience but I wouldn’t say it makes me categorically insane.

        >“Draining the swamp” by stacking all govt positions with Goldman Sachs alumni and Russian mob-connected goons.
        Didn’t Obama do the same? Motherjones had a nice piece on it. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/12/henhouse-meet-fox-wall-street-washington-obama/

        >But then again you’re probably posting from Russia, troll.
        You’re probably posting from Zoe’s office… Policy aid.

  2. > feel free to offer up suggestions for future guests.

    Mr. Newsroom:

    How about just about anyone banned by Twitter or on Anti-FA’s silencing list or anyone who needs $500,000 or more of “security protection” to speak at Berkeley.

    Or, how about anyone whose speeches are so alarming to Sam Liccardo and Police Chief Eddie Garcia that the coppers are fearful and are ordered to stand in tight little knots and not make eye contact for their own safety.

    • So you want people to be invited based on whether you feel they’re victims or not, not based on whether they actually have something interesting to say. That does remind me a lot of the “Free Speech” event “organized” at Cal, for sure…

      • > That does remind me a lot of the “Free Speech” event “organized” at Cal, for sure…

        Good. You were paying attention.

        • To the lack of event? The messaging of victimhood? Definitely. I’d prefer to hear coherent conservative thought, but if you’re happy with spineless and idiotic so-called speakers, I guess I wish you the best.

          • I’m happy with people, spineless or otherwise, coherent or incoherent, being extended the right to speak. Period.
            And we’d all be better served if, rather than reluctantly putting up with the first amendment and our resulting obligation to allow others to express themselves, we took it a step further, truly embraced the spirit of this right, and actually listened.

  3. As Trump’s triumph has proved, it doesn’t take much a of nudge to turn a progressive into a Stalinista. Uncle Joe was a big fan of using insanity declarations against his political enemies, real or imagined. With her politburo looks and gulag charm, should we have expected any less of Zoe Lofgren?

      • In response to this stupidity, this item, a bit altered, from my archives:

        Trump’s efforts to:

        — reduce the government’s regulatory effect on industry is contrary to the communist doctrine.
        — liberate private citizens from government mandated programs is contrary to the communist doctrine.
        — reduce the individual tax rate is contrary to the communist doctrine.
        — promote free speechis contrary to the communist doctrine.
        — defend private property rights is contrary to the communist doctrine.
        — restore the rule of law and the primacy of the Constitution is contrary to the communist doctrine.

        To insinuate Trump is a communist is an indirect but foolproof way of outing yourself as an idiot.

      • We just survived 8 years of a traitor in the White House and there are more “conservatives” now than ever!

  4. Zoe, I question your mental stability. You Dems and Libs can’t seem to make anything stick on this President. How about just leaving the country.

  5. I think we need to run Zoey through the Gaydar Machine, with that low forehead I’m sure he is in drag.

  6. These comments are not only reprehensible, they are just plain stupid…

    I was gonna say ignorant but that can be cured…

    Reflecting almost exactly the current state of affairs in the White House and the personnel therein. Zoe isn’t gay, she isn’t a libertard, or a Stalinista…

    She’s a Democrat and a damned good Representative, and she’s my Representative, and Dan’s, and if you really want her gone she stands before the electorate every 24 months…

    Give it your best shot, Charlie…

    • MS. Lofgren tactic is right out of the Joe Stalin handbook on getting rid of your enemy’s, that my friend is reprehensible and not even slightly democratic.

  7. Is Ms. Lofgren also willing to agree to have mental and physical evaluation tests performed and documented by licensed professionals on herself? Many of us have long wondered and are deeply concerned about her mental instabilities and her abilities to conduct business as a public official. Perhaps family, friends, or co-workers can convince her to seek help.

  8. > As Trump’s triumph has proved, it doesn’t take much a of nudge to turn a progressive into a Stalinista.

    Another interesting similarity between Stalinism and contemporary “progressive” San Jose Politics is the “Independent Police Auditor (IPA)”

    Under the Soviet system of communism, institutions such as the Red Army had political “minders” set over them to make sure that no heresy or unsupervised thinking took place. These were the so called “political officers” and every military unit had one. The authority of the political officer superseded the regular military chain of command. A political officer with the rank of Captain could tell a Red Army Colonel or General what to do.

    The San Jose “Independent Police Auditor” is simply a political officer to make sure that the regular institutional chain of command — the City Auditor and the Chief of Police (such as he is) — can be bypassed by the Social Justice Warrior chain of command.

    As previously noted here on SJI, the recently installed IPA does not have any qualifications as an “auditor”; he is merely a doctrinaire SJW.

Leave a Reply to LJW Cancel reply