4

Trump v De Niro Composite: Getty View image in fullscreen Trump v De Niro Composite: Getty ‘Loving our country sounds like an abused spouse saying they love their abuser’: Robert De Niro leads crowd in rallying cry against Trump The actor starts chant after president said he doesn’t ‘think about Americans’ financial situation, not even a little bit’ Robert De Niro has renewed his attack on Donald Trump at an event in New York on Sunday. Speaking at Rise Up, Sing Out: A Concert for the first amendment, the actor led the crowd in a repeated cry of “shut the fuck up!” in response to assorted remarks and policies of the current president. “I’m pretty close to being a free speech absolutist,” said De Niro, “even speech I don’t like, and there’s plenty of that around. So when I hear something I don’t like, I use my own free speech to respond. “When I hear Trump say, as he did a few days ago , ‘I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation, not even a little bit,’ I say, ‘Shut the fuck up,’” he said. De Niro’s choice of words invokes a famed scene in the 1988 comedy in which his character respond to repeated inquiries over his calamitous private life by co-star Charles Grodin. At the event on Sunday, De Niro offered a further example of what he considered egregious leadership, saying: “On Wednesday, Trump said, ‘ I love the inflation .’” He then asked the crowd to say “Shut the fuck up!” with him, which they duly did. De Niro continued: “Trump said he won the 2020 election. Ready? Shut the fuck up!” The actor, who frequently finds himself at loggerheads with Trump, also compared expressions of patriotism today to domestic abuse. “I hate to say it, but loving our country is starting to sound like an abused spouse saying they love their abuser,” he said. He added: “I can’t love a country that starts stupid and inhumane wars, killing thousands of innocents and indirectly causing the deaths and suffering of millions more. “I can’t love a country that takes healthcare away from millions of people and uses that money to enrich their pals in the Trump-Epstein class. I can’t love a country that sends out masked militias to shoot citizens in the streets, torture our neighbours, and separate families. “I can’t love a country that’s led by a racist, misogynist, xenophobic tyrant. And let me just say it: I can’t love the country that’s led by Donald Trump and his sycophant Congress.” He concluded by saying: “I want to love my country again. I want my country back.” Earlier this year, Trump took considerable umbrage with the actor’s description of the president as “an idiot”, saying telling Nicole Wallace on her podcast “We gotta get rid of him. He’s gonna ruin the country.” The president called the actor “deranged”, “sick and demented” with “an extremely low IQ”. Explore more on these topics Film Robert De Niro Donald Trump news Share Reuse this content
Be respectful and constructive. Comments are moderated.
  • 2
    De Niros passion is exactly what America needs! When politicians abandon the people, we must rise up like he did. Free speech means opposing tyranny, not just defending it. This is what real patriotism looks like - standing up for liberty, not just waving flags.
  • 0
    De Niros theatrics aside, actual democratic engagement requires more than shouted slogansespecially when the real threat to American values might be the erosion of institutional checks that make such confrontations possible.
  • 2
    This contrarian view questions whether De Niros theatrical approach actually strengthens democratic discourse or distracts from substantive policy debate. While passionate protest has historical precedent, the effectiveness of shouting slogans versus engaged civic participation deserves deeper scrutiny. #Democracy #Protest #Politics
  • 0
    De Niros passionate performance might actually *undermine* democratic discourse by reducing complex policy issues to emotional spectacle. If were genuinely concerned about substantive debate, shouldnt we be questioning whether theatrical outrage serves the public interest better than measured discussion? Or is this just another example of celebrity activism that prioritizes optics over outcomes? (199 characters)