Donald Trump calls Michele Bachmann disloyal for skipping Iowa debate

By Andy Mannix Fri., Dec. 9 2011 at 11:42 AM

Michele Bachmann - Donald Trump 2012?

Michele Bachmann is now the fifth Republican candidate to announce she will not participate in the December 27 debate in Des Moines, Iowa, and Donald Trump is not taking it well.

Trump, who is slated to moderate the debate, said he was "very disappointed" in Bachmann during an interview with Don Imus Friday. Trump says Bachmann has sought guidance from him multiple times and even tentatively offered to make him her running mate, so he's a little confused at why she's turning on him now.

From the interview:

You know who I'm very disappointed [in]? Michele Bachmann. She came up to see me four times. She'd call me, she'd ask me for advice. She said I should be her vice presidential -- you know, if she wins, she would like to think about me for the vice presidency.
And most importantly, I did like a two hour phone call for her with her people, and it caused me certain problems. People said 'are you endorsing her?' And the answer was no. And after all that she announced she was not going to do the debate. It's called loyalty. It's actually called loyalty. How do you do that? I mean, it's amazing to me.

As of today, only Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have agreed to the debate. The problem for most candidates is that Trump is still toying with a presidential bid as an independent, which he admitted in today's interview.

But that's not stopping Trump from taking it personally. In a recent CNN interview, Trump also accused Mitt Romney of lacking the "courage" participate in the debate.

Watch the full interview with Imus below:

Previous Bachmannia:

Michele Bachmann dumbstruck by 8-year-old's comment: 'My mommy's gay, but she doesn't need any fixing'

Protesters stage sit-ins at congressional offices, demand meetings over economy

Marcus Bachmann: The City Pages Interview

Tags:

Don Imus, Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney

We Recommend

Michelle Bachmann

On a political level she is a fool to say no to this debate. She barely gets any face time at the current debates. This might be her last chance to get lots of free air time to talk to the Republican base. Currently Newt is the front runner after taking over from Cain. If those two idiots are good enough for the base I don't see why Michele couldn't be as well. She is about as equally stupid and crazy as those two with none of the sexual scandals. The Republican base is a bunch of stupid clowns so they won't care that Donald Trump is hosting a debate. I bet more Republicans like him than any member of the media that isn't on Fox News. I agree with Imus that it would have been the highest rated debate too. If she hit it out of the park and Newt stumbled she would have a real shot of grabbing momentum right before the Iowa primary. The Iowa primary is dominated by religious nut jobs who should really like Michele. Her current plan is stupid. What is she doing? Pretending she has high ethical standards just like 5 of the other candidates? What is her reward? A zero bump in the polls and 5 minutes of face time at the next debate? It's crunch time Michele you got to make a big move to make a big gain in the polls. Oh well, what can you expect from Michele and her staff of idiots?

green23

"Her current plan is stupid."

And that's why "the libs" fear Bachmann, remember.

Whenever a candidate is too damaged to win election, the wingnuts simply declare that "liberals" are scared of the candidate.

"Liberals" are supposedly terrified of Palin, Cain, Bachmann, and Perry. This is 'proven' by the way they laugh about them. It doesn't *have* to make sense; it's a Republican narrative.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk

Disloyal?Isn't that exactly what we want?Isn't that exactly what Obama had promised?The elimination of "crony capitalism"?

green23

Please explain how passing up a Republican debate has anything to do with eliminating crony capitalism.

While it's hard to make any sense of your comment, it seems as if you are implying that Bachmann is pursuing Obama's agenda. Weird. And, apparently, "we" want Obama's agenda advanced, too. Are you an Obama supporter now?

I'm sure this is just another failed attempt at a coherent remark on your part, rather than any bizarre shift in opinion, but it's always a challenge to tease any kind of meaning out your words.

You use the word "promise" far too loosely, as well. If Obama said he thought it would snow today, no doubt you would call that a "promise", too. I am unaware of any such "promise" to "eliminate crony capitalism". I'll have to remember that when you talk about how cozy Obama is with Wall Street.