Nazis are BAD!!!! Trump May Well Be a White Supremacist Himself - 8/15/2017-Updated
Nazi-ism is a deal breaker for me-You too?
Nazis are BAD!!!! Trump May Well Be a White Supremacist Himself - 8/15/2017-Updated
15 August 2017 at 9:38:02 AM
Updated on 8/16/2017 to include Donald Trump's backtrack yesterday (Tuesday) at the end
Not a secret that I think Donald Trump is a disgusting person and unfit to be president. I'm actually glad he exercises his freedom of speech by tweeting his thoughts almost every day because it reveals who he is and what he does or doesn't stand for.
There was a Unite the Right nationalist rally held this last Saturday in Virginia. Participants included actual Nazis, one group of white supremacists beat up a black man, and another man drove a car through counter-protesters, killed one and injured others.
The man who ran down the counter protesters was a Nazi sympathizer. There were people carrying Nazi and confederate flags in the rally, people dressed in white sheets, dressed as storm troopers, and carrying torches.
Don't know how many of you readers had kin who served in World War II, precisely to rid the world of Nazis and white supremacists, but I did. I had a number of grand uncles who fought in the war. That doesn't include my father who served in the Korean war. I've also thought of the KKK as a vestige of the worst kind of bigotry and hatred and symbolic of the uneducated and/or deranged. Should there be even ONE person who applauds the spectacle of the defeated Confederacy (we are the UNITED States now), joined with white sheets, white supremacists, and Nazis? No. Do these people have the right to protest? Sure, even if what they protest for goes against every grain of decency. Remember when the KKK came and marched in Stephenville because they didn't like Tarleton University chastising students for racist behavior?
What did President Trump do, the man who constantly tweets bullying things, and is so resentful of anything that doesn't extensively praise him? At first, nothing. Then he had a presser where, instead of definitely calling out the Nazis, he condemned the hate on "many sides" (and repeated "on many sides").
President Donald Trump went off script and used his own words Saturday when he made that controversial decision to condemn "many sides" of the unrest in Charlottesville, Virginia, rather than to single out white supremacists, two White House officials told ABC News.
"Those were his own words," one senior White House official said of the "on many sides" comment, explicitly adding that those three words "were not" in his prepared remarks.
This is the second time in two weeks that impromptu words from the president on matters of national importance caused significant headaches for the White House.
Instead of giving a full throated blast against, um, NAZIS, etc, he avoided the subject entirely and said nothing definitively until Monday.
This brought him up for criticism (rightly) from others who expected him to come out forcefully against this group that does not support American values. Didn't make the Nazis mad, of course.
The neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer, meanwhile, praised Trump for his vagueness.
“Trump's comments were good. He didn't attack us ... Nothing specific against us,” the Daily Stormer wrote, declaring that the president was implicitly supporting their cause while denouncing the counterprotesters.
The criticism included Republicans and Democrats alike.
And the CEO of Merck, Ken Frazier, stepped down from a committee Trump had, the President's Manufacturing Council.
Within 54 minutes of Frazier tweeting this, Trump was busy harrassing him in Twitter. Because, how DARE ANYONE cross Trump??? Baby.
On Sunday, however, the White House added: "The president said very strongly in his statement yesterday that he condemns all forms of violence, bigotry, and hatred, and of course that includes white supremacists, KKK, neo-Nazi, and all extremist groups. He called for national unity and bringing all Americans together."
The statement was emailed to reporters covering Trump at his golf resort in New Jersey and attributed to an unidentified "White House spokesperson."
Yesterday (Monday the 14th), he finally give a presser (of sorts) to say what he should have said in the first place. Notice that first of all he had to go off topic and praise himself. He read off a teleprompter. Compare what he said about love with what he does every single day to bully and denigrate others. But at least he can read off a prompter. Wonder who actually wrote that for him? And why did it take him so long to be clear?
Within hours of this speech, Trump again brought up Merck. Because, you know, he loves to be a twitter bully. To all appearances, Trump is just getting petty gripe revenge on Merck because his ego was pricked. Worse, this makes his whole speech look forced, like he was told he had to do it, and better get it over with, because then he went right back to being a jerk.
Thanks partly to Mr. Frazier, the avalanche of condemnation directed at Mr. Trump became overwhelming Monday. The president responded first with a dyspeptic rejoinder to the drug company CEO but then finally uttered the words of condemnation he should and could easily have pronounced on Saturday. After two days of equivocation, he said what a presidential president would have said at the outset — that racists and neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan are “repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.”
But what punch do the right words pack when they are so obviously begrudging, belated and bestowed under the weight of overwhelming pressure? Will white supremacists such as Richard Spencer, who gleefully noted that Mr. Trump’s initial statement blamed the violence on “many sides,” while saying nothing about racists, really feel the sting of rebuke? Or will the apostles of intolerance be heartened anew, as they have been by Mr. Trump’s ascent over the course of two years?
If there is reason for hope at this dismal juncture, it is that Americans who stand on principle are recognized and extolled for having done so. By speaking truth to power, Mr. Frazier and others like him galvanized the national conversation and helped cauterize the wound inflicted by Charlottesville, at least for the moment. That, at least, should give Americans cause for pride
Because people continued to criticize him after his speech, he decided to whine about the reaction on Twitter on Monday. The problem is never with him, it's with others, because this man cannot accept responsibility.
Interestingly, he chose AFTER THAT to retweet a white supremacist. For someone who supposedly condemns hate groups like the KKK and Nazis, he sure seems to want to associate with them.
Don't forget that Trump has actual Nazis and white supremecists in his cabinet. If he truly is against this, why does he dignify these people by having them in prominent positions in his government? And why does he not call this a terror attack, which it was? Makes me think he only read the statement but does not believe what he said, because he possibly is a white supremacist himself (remember his crazy diatribe about Obama's birth certificate?)
Consider the first time the president’s name appeared on the front page of the New York Times, more than 40 years ago. “Major Landlord Accused of Antiblack Bias in City,” read the headline of the A1 piece on October 16, 1973, which pointed out how Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice had sued the Trump family’s real estate company in federal court over alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act.
“The government contended that Trump Management had refused to rent or negotiate rentals ‘because of race and color,’” the Times revealed. “It also charged that the company had required different rental terms and conditions because of race and that it had misrepresented to blacks that apartments were not available.” (Trump later settled with the government without accepting responsibility.)
Oh and remember: we knew all of this before he was elected president of the United States of America. He was elected in spite of all this (yet another reminder that “not all Trump supporters are racist, but all of them decided that racism isn’t a deal-breaker”).
This is racism 101 from a sitting US president. And it is the stark and undeniable truth, and key context, that is missing from much of the coverage of the political fallout from Charlottesville. Journalists, opinion formers, members of Congress and members of the public continue to treat Trump as they would any other previous president — they expect their head of government to come out and condemn racism with passion, vigor, speed and sincerity. But what do you do if the president is himself a long-standing purveyor of racism and xenophobia? What then? Do you still demand he condemn and castigate what is essentially his base? Do you continue to feign shock and outrage over his lack of shock and outrage?
Remember this: In Trump's world, there isn't really right and wrong. There are people who love him/work for his interest and people who hate him/work against his interests. There is no gray area between those two poles.
If you are in the love category, you are, by definition, good. The reverse is true for those Trump puts in the hate column.
Posobiec likes Trump and supports Trump. That's all Trump cares about. That Posobiec has pushed conspiracy theories and is a card-carrying member of the alt-right doesn't matter to Trump. Those are Posobiec's issues! Not Trump's! All Trump is doing is retweeting someone making a good point!
Of course, Trump himself saw his candidacy born in a conspiracy theory -- Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States -- and has continued to peddle false conspiracy theories (Ted Cruz's father was involved in the JFK assassination, Muslims were celebrating on New Jersey roofs on 9/11, Barack Obama wiretapped phones in Trump Tower) throughout his candidacy and presidency.
Later on Tuesday, Trump had an off the rails, erratic press conference in which he backtracked to what he originally said, the "both sides" type of thing. This naturally encouraged the white supremacists.
So many things wrong here. Donald Trump was forced, the second time, to read something he clearly did not believe in, so he angrily set the record straight yesterday. We see him.
WASHINGTON — President Trump buoyed the white nationalist movement on Tuesday as no president has done in generations — equating activists protesting racism with the neo-Nazis and white supremacists who rampaged in Charlottesville, Va., over the weekend.
Never has he gone as far in defending their actions as he did during a wild, street-corner shouting match of a news conference in the gilded lobby of Trump Tower, angrily asserting that so-called alt-left activists were just as responsible for the bloody confrontation as marchers brandishing swastikas, Confederate battle flags, anti-Semitic banners and “Trump/Pence” signs.
“Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth,” David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan leader, wrote in a Twitter post shortly after Mr. Trump spoke.
Richard B. Spencer, a white nationalist leader who participated in the weekend’s demonstrations and vowed to flood Charlottesville with similar protests in the coming weeks, was equally encouraged. “Trump’s statement was fair and down to earth,” Mr. Spencer tweeted.
Back to my original point, about whether Trump could himself be a white supremacist. Apparently some of his WH staff was upset, not that he said what he did, but that he said it so openly.
it is important to understand the precise nature of their distress. It is emphatically not because they are shocked to learn their boss is a racist, a fact that has been established through numerous episodes, such as Trump’s insistence a Mexican-American judge was inherently biased against him, his call for a Muslim immigration ban, his slander of Ghazala Khan, and so on. They are angry that Trump revealed beliefs they wish to keep hidden. “Members of the president’s staff, stunned and disheartened, said they never expected to hear such a voluble articulation of opinions that the president had long expressed in private,” reports the New York Times.
This raises the question once again of why they are working for Trump at all. A legitimate public rationale can be made for serving the administration in certain roles. The federal government plays a vital role in domestic and global security, Trump is a dangerous and erratic figure, and somebody needs to try to steer him away from decisions that would provoke unalterable tragedy. That justification covers serving Trump as a foreign-policy adviser, or as homeland security and disaster-response officials.
New poster comments are moderated,
meaning they won't show up until approved... or not. Be
patient-we have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You
want to be rude? totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your
post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest
comments but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or
govt propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not
necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammersMore on commenting