Donald Trump Launches Blatantly Anti-Semitic Attack Against Hillary Clinton
- Thread starter posthuman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Change is always hard. We've been plugging along, slowly giving our freedoms away piece by piece. Suddenly a guy comes along and changes the way things are done and said. Everyone freaks out and cries foul. I've seen the exact same thing in the business world. The employees complain and whine and backstab, even make things up out of thin blue air, that the world is gonna end and how stupid all the changes are. They lament and moan about how the ship is gonna sink because of the new management. People are silly. Trump 2016.
Last edited:
This is really a disgusting lie. NOTHING has been more detrimental to black Americans than the democrat party. Democrats fought to keep blacks slaves against GOP President Lincoln, they voted IN DROVES against the 1964 civil rights act. Democrats today fight to keep blacks imprisoned in failing inner city schools refusing to allow them school choice. They make laws that penalize marriage and reward women who have children out of wedlock. Until recent they actually had a Klu Klux Klan member as a U. S. Senator (Robert Byrd), Martin Luther King Jr. was a REPUBLICAN.
You appear to be woefully ignorant of history. Judging by your love of socialism and ignorance of history you represent a sterling victory for how successful the left has been indoctrinating students in our schools. Here is the vote tallies of the 1964 civil rights act.
[h=4]By party[edit][/h]The original House version:[SUP][20][/SUP]
The original House version:
You appear to be woefully ignorant of history. Judging by your love of socialism and ignorance of history you represent a sterling victory for how successful the left has been indoctrinating students in our schools. Here is the vote tallies of the 1964 civil rights act.
[h=4]By party[edit][/h]The original House version:[SUP][20][/SUP]
- Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
- Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)
- Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
- Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
- Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
- Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
- Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
- Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)
The original House version:
- Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
- Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
- Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
- Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
- Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
- Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
- Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
- Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
[h=1]Trump insisted on including Jews and blacks at Palm Beach golf course in 1990s[/h]
By Robert Romano
“When Donald opened his club in Palm Beach called Mar-a-Lago, he insisted on accepting Jews and blacks even though other clubs in Palm Beach to this day discriminate against blacks and Jews. The old guard in Palm Beach was outraged that Donald would accept blacks and Jews so that’s the real Donald Trump that I know.”
That was author Ronald Kessler in a July 2015 interview with Newsmax, talking about Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump’s business practices when it came to building a golf course in the Deep South.
In the 1990s, Trump was running into a problem getting his golf course approved by the local town council in Palm Beach, which was imposing restrictions on his bid.
So Trump shot back with maximum effect. As reported by the Washington Post’s Mary Jordan and Rosalind Helderman on Nov. 14, 2015: “Trump undercut his adversaries with a searing attack, claiming that local officials seemed to accept the established private clubs in town that had excluded Jews and blacks while imposing tough rules on his inclusive one.”
The Washington Post report continues, “Trump’s lawyer sent every member of the town council copies of two classic movies about discrimination: ‘A Gentleman’s Agreement,’ about a journalist who pretends to be Jewish to expose anti-Semitism, and ‘Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner’ about a white couple’s reaction to their daughter bringing home a black fiancé.”
Sometimes, in judging the character of an individual, it pays to see what people actually do when nobody’s really paying attention. When it came to segregation in the South at private, all-white country clubs, it might have been in Trump’s business interests to simply look the other way. Instead, Trump did the right thing and insisted on desegregation at his golf resort.
And he won.
Soon thereafter, the local restrictions were lifted and, today, the golf course is open and remains inclusive.
It remains a point of pride for Trump, who boasted about the golf resort in a 2015 interview, “Whether they love me or not, everyone agrees the greatest and most important place in Palm Beach is Mar-a-Lago. I took this ultimate place and made it incredible and opened it, essentially, to the people of Palm Beach. The fact that I owned it made it a lot easier to get along with the Palm Beach establishment.”
At the time in 1997, then-Anti-Defamation League President Abraham Foxman praised Trump for elevating the issue of discrimination at private clubs, telling the Wall Street Journal, “He put the light on Palm Beach. Not on the beauty and the glitter, but on its seamier side of discrimination. It has an impact.” Foxman credited Trump’s move with encouraging other clubs in Palm Beach to do the same as Mar-a-Lago in opening up.
That’s the real Donald Trump. The one who dealt with a real problem to do with discrimination on race and religion in Palm Beach long before he was ever seeking public office by confronting a local planning board over its exclusive policies, determined he would do things differently.
So, when the question of David Duke’s endorsement of Trump came up on Friday, Feb. 26 at the Chris Christie endorsement press conference in Texas — the first time it came up — Trump’s first gut reaction was to emphatically disavow it.
“I didn’t even know he endorsed me. David Duke endorsed me? All right, I disavow, OK,” he said at the press conference. And he immediately moved on.
That might have been the end of the story right there, but Trump stumbled when the question came up again Sunday morning on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper, where he distanced himself from the Duke endorsement.
“I don’t know anything about David Duke,” Trump said, adding, “I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. I know nothing about white supremacists… You’re asking me a question that I’m supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about.”
Probably not altogether the best response. But for his statement a day prior, it might have even raised significant questions otherwise. Still, it was a damaging exchange for Trump and melted the Internet for a few days. Other presidential candidates like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) have since included it in their attacks on Trump.
A day later Trump recovered on NBC’s “Today Show” when it came up again, specifically on the Tapper interview, Trump said, “I disavowed David Duke a day before at a major press conference, and I’m saying to myself, how many times do I have to continue to disavow people?” Perhaps he just didn’t want to keep talking about it. Who would?
Trump also claimed his ear piece was not working really well: “I’m sitting in a house in Florida with a very bad ear piece that they gave me and you can hardly hear what he was saying.”
Trump added, “I disavowed David Duke. Now, if you look on Facebook right after that, I also disavowed David Duke. When we looked at it — looked at the question, I disavowed David Duke. So, I disavowed David Duke all weekend long on Facebook, on Twitter and, obviously it’s never enough. Ridiculous.”
It’s a fair point. Trump immediately disavowed David Duke, whose endorsement he didn’t even want in the first place.
Did he ever endorse Duke? No. Did he ever endorse the Ku Klux Klan? No. He did the opposite.
By the time the Tapper interview occurred, it is fair to say Trump was ready to move on. Tapper apparently was not.
Still, compare Trump’s statements — and his business record in Palm Beach as a prime example — to what is being said about Trump right now. “Donald Trump stumbles on David Duke, KKK,” reads the CNN headline. “Trump disavows David Duke endorsement after ducking question earlier,” reads another. It’s night and day. You’d think he had donned a white sheet and was burning crosses.
Incidentally, a similar thing famously happened in 1984 to Ronald Reagan when the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him. The difference is Reagan squished it once and for all. Reagan said at the time, “Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse.”
Was Trump as eloquent in his denunciation? Not by a long shot. But, so what? At the time, despite Reagan spurning the endorsement, there was a similar media uproar. And at the end of the day, it meant nothing and had exactly zero impact on the election. Because it was silly. Similarly, Trump went on to have a great Super Tuesday despite the hullabaloo, winning 7 out of 11 contests.
All that happened here was an ugly chapter of American history that includes white supremacy once again reared its head into U.S. politics — and was aimed viciously at Republicans even with the GOP’s clear record against slavery and segregation. The response both from mainstream media outlets and the punditry has become a predictable din and a meme unto itself of typical race card politics that attempts to portray Republicans as racists.
And it is all patently absurd.
So, move on. Based on the Palm Beach experience, Trump, unlike many others who never had to confront segregation, actually has a solid record on this issue. The attacks are unfair. And he didn’t refuse to denounce anybody, in spite of what was reported. He immediately and rightly disavowed the Duke endorsement, but as Trump noted, it’s never enough.
Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.
By Robert Romano
“When Donald opened his club in Palm Beach called Mar-a-Lago, he insisted on accepting Jews and blacks even though other clubs in Palm Beach to this day discriminate against blacks and Jews. The old guard in Palm Beach was outraged that Donald would accept blacks and Jews so that’s the real Donald Trump that I know.”
That was author Ronald Kessler in a July 2015 interview with Newsmax, talking about Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump’s business practices when it came to building a golf course in the Deep South.
In the 1990s, Trump was running into a problem getting his golf course approved by the local town council in Palm Beach, which was imposing restrictions on his bid.
So Trump shot back with maximum effect. As reported by the Washington Post’s Mary Jordan and Rosalind Helderman on Nov. 14, 2015: “Trump undercut his adversaries with a searing attack, claiming that local officials seemed to accept the established private clubs in town that had excluded Jews and blacks while imposing tough rules on his inclusive one.”
The Washington Post report continues, “Trump’s lawyer sent every member of the town council copies of two classic movies about discrimination: ‘A Gentleman’s Agreement,’ about a journalist who pretends to be Jewish to expose anti-Semitism, and ‘Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner’ about a white couple’s reaction to their daughter bringing home a black fiancé.”
Sometimes, in judging the character of an individual, it pays to see what people actually do when nobody’s really paying attention. When it came to segregation in the South at private, all-white country clubs, it might have been in Trump’s business interests to simply look the other way. Instead, Trump did the right thing and insisted on desegregation at his golf resort.
And he won.
Soon thereafter, the local restrictions were lifted and, today, the golf course is open and remains inclusive.
It remains a point of pride for Trump, who boasted about the golf resort in a 2015 interview, “Whether they love me or not, everyone agrees the greatest and most important place in Palm Beach is Mar-a-Lago. I took this ultimate place and made it incredible and opened it, essentially, to the people of Palm Beach. The fact that I owned it made it a lot easier to get along with the Palm Beach establishment.”
At the time in 1997, then-Anti-Defamation League President Abraham Foxman praised Trump for elevating the issue of discrimination at private clubs, telling the Wall Street Journal, “He put the light on Palm Beach. Not on the beauty and the glitter, but on its seamier side of discrimination. It has an impact.” Foxman credited Trump’s move with encouraging other clubs in Palm Beach to do the same as Mar-a-Lago in opening up.
That’s the real Donald Trump. The one who dealt with a real problem to do with discrimination on race and religion in Palm Beach long before he was ever seeking public office by confronting a local planning board over its exclusive policies, determined he would do things differently.
So, when the question of David Duke’s endorsement of Trump came up on Friday, Feb. 26 at the Chris Christie endorsement press conference in Texas — the first time it came up — Trump’s first gut reaction was to emphatically disavow it.
“I didn’t even know he endorsed me. David Duke endorsed me? All right, I disavow, OK,” he said at the press conference. And he immediately moved on.
That might have been the end of the story right there, but Trump stumbled when the question came up again Sunday morning on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper, where he distanced himself from the Duke endorsement.
“I don’t know anything about David Duke,” Trump said, adding, “I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. I know nothing about white supremacists… You’re asking me a question that I’m supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about.”
Probably not altogether the best response. But for his statement a day prior, it might have even raised significant questions otherwise. Still, it was a damaging exchange for Trump and melted the Internet for a few days. Other presidential candidates like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) have since included it in their attacks on Trump.
A day later Trump recovered on NBC’s “Today Show” when it came up again, specifically on the Tapper interview, Trump said, “I disavowed David Duke a day before at a major press conference, and I’m saying to myself, how many times do I have to continue to disavow people?” Perhaps he just didn’t want to keep talking about it. Who would?
Trump also claimed his ear piece was not working really well: “I’m sitting in a house in Florida with a very bad ear piece that they gave me and you can hardly hear what he was saying.”
Trump added, “I disavowed David Duke. Now, if you look on Facebook right after that, I also disavowed David Duke. When we looked at it — looked at the question, I disavowed David Duke. So, I disavowed David Duke all weekend long on Facebook, on Twitter and, obviously it’s never enough. Ridiculous.”
It’s a fair point. Trump immediately disavowed David Duke, whose endorsement he didn’t even want in the first place.
Did he ever endorse Duke? No. Did he ever endorse the Ku Klux Klan? No. He did the opposite.
By the time the Tapper interview occurred, it is fair to say Trump was ready to move on. Tapper apparently was not.
Still, compare Trump’s statements — and his business record in Palm Beach as a prime example — to what is being said about Trump right now. “Donald Trump stumbles on David Duke, KKK,” reads the CNN headline. “Trump disavows David Duke endorsement after ducking question earlier,” reads another. It’s night and day. You’d think he had donned a white sheet and was burning crosses.
Incidentally, a similar thing famously happened in 1984 to Ronald Reagan when the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him. The difference is Reagan squished it once and for all. Reagan said at the time, “Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse.”
Was Trump as eloquent in his denunciation? Not by a long shot. But, so what? At the time, despite Reagan spurning the endorsement, there was a similar media uproar. And at the end of the day, it meant nothing and had exactly zero impact on the election. Because it was silly. Similarly, Trump went on to have a great Super Tuesday despite the hullabaloo, winning 7 out of 11 contests.
All that happened here was an ugly chapter of American history that includes white supremacy once again reared its head into U.S. politics — and was aimed viciously at Republicans even with the GOP’s clear record against slavery and segregation. The response both from mainstream media outlets and the punditry has become a predictable din and a meme unto itself of typical race card politics that attempts to portray Republicans as racists.
And it is all patently absurd.
So, move on. Based on the Palm Beach experience, Trump, unlike many others who never had to confront segregation, actually has a solid record on this issue. The attacks are unfair. And he didn’t refuse to denounce anybody, in spite of what was reported. He immediately and rightly disavowed the Duke endorsement, but as Trump noted, it’s never enough.
Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.
M
Look at these polls out today ...
https://mevle95.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/trump-ahead-clinton-among-independents/
https://mevle95.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/trump-ahead-clinton-among-independents/
Trump insisted on including Jews and blacks at Palm Beach golf course in 1990s
By Robert Romano
“When Donald opened his club in Palm Beach called Mar-a-Lago, he insisted on accepting Jews and blacks even though other clubs in Palm Beach to this day discriminate against blacks and Jews. The old guard in Palm Beach was outraged that Donald would accept blacks and Jews so that’s the real Donald Trump that I know.”
That was author Ronald Kessler in a July 2015 interview with Newsmax, talking about Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump’s business practices when it came to building a golf course in the Deep South.
In the 1990s, Trump was running into a problem getting his golf course approved by the local town council in Palm Beach, which was imposing restrictions on his bid.
So Trump shot back with maximum effect. As reported by the Washington Post’s Mary Jordan and Rosalind Helderman on Nov. 14, 2015: “Trump undercut his adversaries with a searing attack, claiming that local officials seemed to accept the established private clubs in town that had excluded Jews and blacks while imposing tough rules on his inclusive one.”
The Washington Post report continues, “Trump’s lawyer sent every member of the town council copies of two classic movies about discrimination: ‘A Gentleman’s Agreement,’ about a journalist who pretends to be Jewish to expose anti-Semitism, and ‘Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner’ about a white couple’s reaction to their daughter bringing home a black fiancé.”
Sometimes, in judging the character of an individual, it pays to see what people actually do when nobody’s really paying attention. When it came to segregation in the South at private, all-white country clubs, it might have been in Trump’s business interests to simply look the other way. Instead, Trump did the right thing and insisted on desegregation at his golf resort.
And he won.
Soon thereafter, the local restrictions were lifted and, today, the golf course is open and remains inclusive.
It remains a point of pride for Trump, who boasted about the golf resort in a 2015 interview, “Whether they love me or not, everyone agrees the greatest and most important place in Palm Beach is Mar-a-Lago. I took this ultimate place and made it incredible and opened it, essentially, to the people of Palm Beach. The fact that I owned it made it a lot easier to get along with the Palm Beach establishment.”
At the time in 1997, then-Anti-Defamation League President Abraham Foxman praised Trump for elevating the issue of discrimination at private clubs, telling the Wall Street Journal, “He put the light on Palm Beach. Not on the beauty and the glitter, but on its seamier side of discrimination. It has an impact.” Foxman credited Trump’s move with encouraging other clubs in Palm Beach to do the same as Mar-a-Lago in opening up.
That’s the real Donald Trump. The one who dealt with a real problem to do with discrimination on race and religion in Palm Beach long before he was ever seeking public office by confronting a local planning board over its exclusive policies, determined he would do things differently.
So, when the question of David Duke’s endorsement of Trump came up on Friday, Feb. 26 at the Chris Christie endorsement press conference in Texas — the first time it came up — Trump’s first gut reaction was to emphatically disavow it.
“I didn’t even know he endorsed me. David Duke endorsed me? All right, I disavow, OK,” he said at the press conference. And he immediately moved on.
That might have been the end of the story right there, but Trump stumbled when the question came up again Sunday morning on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper, where he distanced himself from the Duke endorsement.
“I don’t know anything about David Duke,” Trump said, adding, “I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. I know nothing about white supremacists… You’re asking me a question that I’m supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about.”
Probably not altogether the best response. But for his statement a day prior, it might have even raised significant questions otherwise. Still, it was a damaging exchange for Trump and melted the Internet for a few days. Other presidential candidates like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) have since included it in their attacks on Trump.
A day later Trump recovered on NBC’s “Today Show” when it came up again, specifically on the Tapper interview, Trump said, “I disavowed David Duke a day before at a major press conference, and I’m saying to myself, how many times do I have to continue to disavow people?” Perhaps he just didn’t want to keep talking about it. Who would?
Trump also claimed his ear piece was not working really well: “I’m sitting in a house in Florida with a very bad ear piece that they gave me and you can hardly hear what he was saying.”
Trump added, “I disavowed David Duke. Now, if you look on Facebook right after that, I also disavowed David Duke. When we looked at it — looked at the question, I disavowed David Duke. So, I disavowed David Duke all weekend long on Facebook, on Twitter and, obviously it’s never enough. Ridiculous.”
It’s a fair point. Trump immediately disavowed David Duke, whose endorsement he didn’t even want in the first place.
Did he ever endorse Duke? No. Did he ever endorse the Ku Klux Klan? No. He did the opposite.
By the time the Tapper interview occurred, it is fair to say Trump was ready to move on. Tapper apparently was not.
Still, compare Trump’s statements — and his business record in Palm Beach as a prime example — to what is being said about Trump right now. “Donald Trump stumbles on David Duke, KKK,” reads the CNN headline. “Trump disavows David Duke endorsement after ducking question earlier,” reads another. It’s night and day. You’d think he had donned a white sheet and was burning crosses.
Incidentally, a similar thing famously happened in 1984 to Ronald Reagan when the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him. The difference is Reagan squished it once and for all. Reagan said at the time, “Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse.”
Was Trump as eloquent in his denunciation? Not by a long shot. But, so what? At the time, despite Reagan spurning the endorsement, there was a similar media uproar. And at the end of the day, it meant nothing and had exactly zero impact on the election. Because it was silly. Similarly, Trump went on to have a great Super Tuesday despite the hullabaloo, winning 7 out of 11 contests.
All that happened here was an ugly chapter of American history that includes white supremacy once again reared its head into U.S. politics — and was aimed viciously at Republicans even with the GOP’s clear record against slavery and segregation. The response both from mainstream media outlets and the punditry has become a predictable din and a meme unto itself of typical race card politics that attempts to portray Republicans as racists.
And it is all patently absurd.
So, move on. Based on the Palm Beach experience, Trump, unlike many others who never had to confront segregation, actually has a solid record on this issue. The attacks are unfair. And he didn’t refuse to denounce anybody, in spite of what was reported. He immediately and rightly disavowed the Duke endorsement, but as Trump noted, it’s never enough.
Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.
By Robert Romano
“When Donald opened his club in Palm Beach called Mar-a-Lago, he insisted on accepting Jews and blacks even though other clubs in Palm Beach to this day discriminate against blacks and Jews. The old guard in Palm Beach was outraged that Donald would accept blacks and Jews so that’s the real Donald Trump that I know.”
That was author Ronald Kessler in a July 2015 interview with Newsmax, talking about Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump’s business practices when it came to building a golf course in the Deep South.
In the 1990s, Trump was running into a problem getting his golf course approved by the local town council in Palm Beach, which was imposing restrictions on his bid.
So Trump shot back with maximum effect. As reported by the Washington Post’s Mary Jordan and Rosalind Helderman on Nov. 14, 2015: “Trump undercut his adversaries with a searing attack, claiming that local officials seemed to accept the established private clubs in town that had excluded Jews and blacks while imposing tough rules on his inclusive one.”
The Washington Post report continues, “Trump’s lawyer sent every member of the town council copies of two classic movies about discrimination: ‘A Gentleman’s Agreement,’ about a journalist who pretends to be Jewish to expose anti-Semitism, and ‘Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner’ about a white couple’s reaction to their daughter bringing home a black fiancé.”
Sometimes, in judging the character of an individual, it pays to see what people actually do when nobody’s really paying attention. When it came to segregation in the South at private, all-white country clubs, it might have been in Trump’s business interests to simply look the other way. Instead, Trump did the right thing and insisted on desegregation at his golf resort.
And he won.
Soon thereafter, the local restrictions were lifted and, today, the golf course is open and remains inclusive.
It remains a point of pride for Trump, who boasted about the golf resort in a 2015 interview, “Whether they love me or not, everyone agrees the greatest and most important place in Palm Beach is Mar-a-Lago. I took this ultimate place and made it incredible and opened it, essentially, to the people of Palm Beach. The fact that I owned it made it a lot easier to get along with the Palm Beach establishment.”
At the time in 1997, then-Anti-Defamation League President Abraham Foxman praised Trump for elevating the issue of discrimination at private clubs, telling the Wall Street Journal, “He put the light on Palm Beach. Not on the beauty and the glitter, but on its seamier side of discrimination. It has an impact.” Foxman credited Trump’s move with encouraging other clubs in Palm Beach to do the same as Mar-a-Lago in opening up.
That’s the real Donald Trump. The one who dealt with a real problem to do with discrimination on race and religion in Palm Beach long before he was ever seeking public office by confronting a local planning board over its exclusive policies, determined he would do things differently.
So, when the question of David Duke’s endorsement of Trump came up on Friday, Feb. 26 at the Chris Christie endorsement press conference in Texas — the first time it came up — Trump’s first gut reaction was to emphatically disavow it.
“I didn’t even know he endorsed me. David Duke endorsed me? All right, I disavow, OK,” he said at the press conference. And he immediately moved on.
That might have been the end of the story right there, but Trump stumbled when the question came up again Sunday morning on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper, where he distanced himself from the Duke endorsement.
“I don’t know anything about David Duke,” Trump said, adding, “I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. I know nothing about white supremacists… You’re asking me a question that I’m supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about.”
Probably not altogether the best response. But for his statement a day prior, it might have even raised significant questions otherwise. Still, it was a damaging exchange for Trump and melted the Internet for a few days. Other presidential candidates like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) have since included it in their attacks on Trump.
A day later Trump recovered on NBC’s “Today Show” when it came up again, specifically on the Tapper interview, Trump said, “I disavowed David Duke a day before at a major press conference, and I’m saying to myself, how many times do I have to continue to disavow people?” Perhaps he just didn’t want to keep talking about it. Who would?
Trump also claimed his ear piece was not working really well: “I’m sitting in a house in Florida with a very bad ear piece that they gave me and you can hardly hear what he was saying.”
Trump added, “I disavowed David Duke. Now, if you look on Facebook right after that, I also disavowed David Duke. When we looked at it — looked at the question, I disavowed David Duke. So, I disavowed David Duke all weekend long on Facebook, on Twitter and, obviously it’s never enough. Ridiculous.”
It’s a fair point. Trump immediately disavowed David Duke, whose endorsement he didn’t even want in the first place.
Did he ever endorse Duke? No. Did he ever endorse the Ku Klux Klan? No. He did the opposite.
By the time the Tapper interview occurred, it is fair to say Trump was ready to move on. Tapper apparently was not.
Still, compare Trump’s statements — and his business record in Palm Beach as a prime example — to what is being said about Trump right now. “Donald Trump stumbles on David Duke, KKK,” reads the CNN headline. “Trump disavows David Duke endorsement after ducking question earlier,” reads another. It’s night and day. You’d think he had donned a white sheet and was burning crosses.
Incidentally, a similar thing famously happened in 1984 to Ronald Reagan when the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him. The difference is Reagan squished it once and for all. Reagan said at the time, “Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse.”
Was Trump as eloquent in his denunciation? Not by a long shot. But, so what? At the time, despite Reagan spurning the endorsement, there was a similar media uproar. And at the end of the day, it meant nothing and had exactly zero impact on the election. Because it was silly. Similarly, Trump went on to have a great Super Tuesday despite the hullabaloo, winning 7 out of 11 contests.
All that happened here was an ugly chapter of American history that includes white supremacy once again reared its head into U.S. politics — and was aimed viciously at Republicans even with the GOP’s clear record against slavery and segregation. The response both from mainstream media outlets and the punditry has become a predictable din and a meme unto itself of typical race card politics that attempts to portray Republicans as racists.
And it is all patently absurd.
So, move on. Based on the Palm Beach experience, Trump, unlike many others who never had to confront segregation, actually has a solid record on this issue. The attacks are unfair. And he didn’t refuse to denounce anybody, in spite of what was reported. He immediately and rightly disavowed the Duke endorsement, but as Trump noted, it’s never enough.
Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.
the republican and democrat parties of the 1860's are not the republican and democrat parties of today.
the republican and democrat parties of the 1960's are not the republican and democrat parties of today.
"what have you done for me lately" ?
the African American population in recent history overwhelmingly supports the democratic party. the same is true of other minorities: Hispanics, Jews, Arabs -- all non-white voters have been voting democrat something like 80% to 15% going even as far back as Eisenhower. Kennedy was the last president to dent that spread, and they voted against him something like 60% to 35%.
but the racist elements in America in recent history overwhelmingly align themselves with the republican party. prior to the civil rights era, they didn't. that's true! but now, they do. that's also true.
the republican narrative is that the switch in political domination of the south is completely due to 'the view that the democratic party turned its back on its Christian heritage' -- but racism in America justified itself - and still justifies itself - on twisted views of Christianity.
both parties are evil. both parties tell disgusting lies about themselves and about each other. both parties want you to believe they are God's political arm and that you are voting against righteousness if you do not vote for them. both parties are liars, and neither one is "the party of Christianity."
it proves that Trump isn't racist because he made sure his resort wouldn't block minorities from spending their money there? w/e. have you seen the political climate? the one that makes you an instant pariah if you don't make darn sure that you are inclusive to minorities?
i didn't say 'the republican party is racist' -- but if anyone happens to be racist today, statistically that person is also a republican.
so i'll put it again: which candidate do white supremacists like the KKK and neo-nazis support this year? which party do anti-semites support this year ((hint: Arabs are also "Semitic")) ?
this isn't a question of which party Abraham Lincoln was a member of, or whether you yourself are racist. it's a question about what's happening now and who exactly this "lesser evil" some Christians tout is.
the republican and democrat parties of the 1960's are not the republican and democrat parties of today.
"what have you done for me lately" ?
the African American population in recent history overwhelmingly supports the democratic party. the same is true of other minorities: Hispanics, Jews, Arabs -- all non-white voters have been voting democrat something like 80% to 15% going even as far back as Eisenhower. Kennedy was the last president to dent that spread, and they voted against him something like 60% to 35%.
but the racist elements in America in recent history overwhelmingly align themselves with the republican party. prior to the civil rights era, they didn't. that's true! but now, they do. that's also true.
the republican narrative is that the switch in political domination of the south is completely due to 'the view that the democratic party turned its back on its Christian heritage' -- but racism in America justified itself - and still justifies itself - on twisted views of Christianity.
both parties are evil. both parties tell disgusting lies about themselves and about each other. both parties want you to believe they are God's political arm and that you are voting against righteousness if you do not vote for them. both parties are liars, and neither one is "the party of Christianity."
it proves that Trump isn't racist because he made sure his resort wouldn't block minorities from spending their money there? w/e. have you seen the political climate? the one that makes you an instant pariah if you don't make darn sure that you are inclusive to minorities?
i didn't say 'the republican party is racist' -- but if anyone happens to be racist today, statistically that person is also a republican.
so i'll put it again: which candidate do white supremacists like the KKK and neo-nazis support this year? which party do anti-semites support this year ((hint: Arabs are also "Semitic")) ?
this isn't a question of which party Abraham Lincoln was a member of, or whether you yourself are racist. it's a question about what's happening now and who exactly this "lesser evil" some Christians tout is.
Last edited:
This is just window dressing. who do the abortionists support. Who do the people that hate what today represents for people who love our country and the principles that it stands for support? Who do the people support who want open borders and to let murderes rapists and disease infested immigrants live among us? Who is Hilary's hero? Margarate Sanger ring a bell....a person who stated exactly how she felt about black people. The waters are only muddy because leftists want them that way.
I have to disagree with this. While it's true that most of the white supremacists I know of threw their support behind Trump, racism does not equal white supremacy. I doubt Louis "[Judaism is a] gutter religion" Farrakhan;
Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson; or Al “White folks was in the caves while we [blacks] was building empires … We built pyramids before Donald Trump ever knew what architecture was … we taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it."[FONT="] [/FONT]Sharpton are voting for Trump this year.
It seems natural to me that a white supremacist would want to join the party with fewer black people in it. Moreover, the people didn't just switch parties lickedy-split like you assert. George Wallace stayed a Democrat his whole political life, As he saw the climate change from "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" to social programs, he switched his positions to match the climate. (and won much support from the black community in his latter years.)
Incidentally, during my Google search to recall the vitriolic racist things Democrats have said, I uncovered this gem from the then head of Al Sharpton's "buy black" program. “Keep [going] right on by Freddy’s, he’s one of the greedy Jew Bastards killing our people. Don’t give the Jew a dime. [Expletive] the Jews.”
So I must conclude by answering your question. The KKK and the neo-Nazis support Trump. Anti-semites are all over the map, many of them are Democrat. (Obama's former pastor was very anti-Jew, to say nothing of his ugly comments towards Italians.)