As the now infamous “Here’s 10 Examples of Donald Trump being racist” that is the go-to rhetoric for the anti-trump crowd when asked to prove his racism was making its way around the net, I read it a few times it was posted and a lot of the article stood out to me.
It started with the biased nature of the post and the failure to include both sides of the story from the beginning, namely the first sentence proclaiming “He failed to disavow the KKK in late February” even though he had already disavowed David Duke at a press conference beforehand (and whether they believed it or not, an unbiased journalist would have included that part of the story, but we all know how “journalism” is in 2016).
First of all, the reason I’m doing this is because “racist” is a pretty huge label to fit to someone. I may not agree w/ 100% of what Trump says/his policies, but for the most part I feel like he would be a good choice for our next President, which is funny because I was adamantly against him when he first announced he was running.
He’s definitely a better candidate than Hot Sauce Hillary.
Let me start this off by saying that I believe “Offense is taken, not given,” and with that being said people have found it profitable and beneficial to take offense to things said that weren’t even intended to be offensive.
I like to look at things with logic and reason – I don’t care much for people shoving their opinions into everyone’s faces because that just turns into subjective arguments/conversations, so when I first heard these claims of Trump being a racist I had to find out.
After all, I wasn’t gonna end up supporting some type of “white supremacist” who was only looking out for his own race. According to the left if he gets elected the end result will be slavery, or a boat back to Africa (which usually comes from people who have never been to Africa and don’t realize natural born U.S. citizens can’t be deported) so I had to find out for myself.
I’ve always been a skeptic, especially with liberal media – so I decided to look into these claims of racism that everyone was so blindly feeding into without doing any research themselves. The results were staggering. Let’s begin.
First off, let’s take a look at what the word Racist really means:
So racist is different from other description in the terms of, it’s not as much of a description as it is a mindset. To be a racist you have to actively show that you believe your race is superior to others, and without outwardly expressed actions this is something that’s hard to discern.
People these days will call you a racist based on their perception of a viewpoint or opinion of yours, but forget that to be an actual racist you have to believe in superiority and not just have said some “racial jokes/comments” a few times (if that was the case that’d mean I’m a racist against everyone).
Let’s also remember the fact that Trump has never really commented on white people as a whole in any sort of superior manner, and has regularly employed minorities in his businesses (I mean his campaign spokesperson is a Half black woman) and people who have known him for years say that he isn’t a racist.
However, apparently some journalists who’ve never met the man a day in their life feel like they have definitive proof that he is, so let’s examine these claims.
The Justice Department sued his company — twice — for not renting to black people
The most extensive write-up on this case can be found at the Village Voice profiling Wayne Barrett’s profiling of Trump and his father for the magazine in the 80’s. In it he discusses how the company was slapped with the lawsuit, but also some interesting information about the Trumps’ and the company in the midst of it.
“We stopped building and started acquiring then,” explains Donald Trump. Trump the building become Trump the management firm.”– referring to a Coney Island’s Steeplechase site Fred Trump acquired and subsequently abandoned in 1965.
It’s well known that Trump has a habit of licensing his name to buildings and projects that he doesn’t directly (a la Trump Institute), and with him testifying in federal court that he owned and managed 12,000+ units at the time it doesn’t sound unlikely.
There’s also the fact that there only corroboration there is that this was the Trumps’ doing was when “A rental agent said that Fred Trump had instructed him not to rent to blacks. Further, the agent said (Fred) Trump wanted ‘to decrease the number of black tenants already in the development “by encouraging them to locate housing elsewhere.”
Interesting that the only hint of actual racism in this case came from the man in the family who’s already pretty much been established as one. Now they say “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” but there’s also the saying of “Don’t judge a book by its cover,” and it doesn’t make sense to persecute Trump for the actions and mindset of his father.
Trump argued in court that forcing him to rent to welfare recipients (and due to the racial coding in everyone’s brains at this point, most of you will attribute that to black people even though statistics show otherwise) was wrong considering his operation was mostly moderate and luxury apartments, note the absence of any racial indications or coding. The situation was basically Trump not wanting to rent to welfare recipients, and I’m sure most people would have reservations about renting luxury housing to welfare recipients, it doesn’t make them racist.
Honestly, If you see the words “welfare recipient” and instantly think of black people, doesn’t that make you the racist?
Let’s also counter this story with the fact that in the 90s, Trump was at odds with the town council for bringing up the issue of them overlooking the issue of clubs refusing to allow minorities in. He even received praise from then President of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, “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.”
I’ll leave this section off with this thought from the NetRightDaily piece:
“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.”
In fact, discrimination against black people has been a pattern in his career
This part of the HuffPo article is the funniest to me, because it’s also usually the most direct reference to his “racism” his detractors use, especially against me considering I’m a black Trump supporter. “OMG He’s racist, he said blacks are lazy why would you support him!” is something I’m used to hearing, but let’s examine these claims. What makes it hilarious is that they’re either misconstrued versions of the situation, or the he-say, she-say type of claims.
The first claim is that a high rolling gambler by the name of Robert Libutti had issues with black people dealing the cards at his table, and was alleged to have said some extremely offensive comments regarding Jews, Blacks and women. In the ensuing case Trump denied claims that he knew Libutti personally, even though Libutti claimed otherwise in a wire-tapped conversation with then-President of Trump Casinos, Edward M. Tracy claimed otherwise.
In any case, the racist and the offensive person in this situation is clearly Libutti, not Trump. It was said that the managers were responsible for ensuring that Libutti would not be around those groups that he disliked, and none of the facts or claims of this case point towards Trump regarding white people are better than minorities. The slightest claim that you may make is that there was ‘prejudice-by-association’ but that’s a weak argument, sorry.
The next claim is from the New Yorker, in it’s September 2015 issue in a story about Atlantic City. In it we find a claim from Kip Brown, someone who claims that black employees were ordered off the floor when Trump and Ivana visited the casinos.
The most interesting thing about this claim is that it is the literal equivalent of “my mom’s cousin’s uncle’s grandmom’s baby cousin’s baby sitter said Trump did this racist thing once”. Kip is described as “a bus driver, who worked the Port Authority route, up and back each morning, for Academy Bus Lines,”and besides that they give no real information or claims to verify his authenticity.
Now, I apologize if this “Kip Brown” person is actually a real person, and if his story corroborates then I guess there’d be an issue, but until someone can actually find someone to corroborate the story or actually find Kip Brown, I have a hard time believing this.
So if I go write an article on a city and I include that I talked to someone I met on the SEPTA bus who said that they have a DNA test to prove they were one of Bill Clinton’s illegitimate children, but have no verification to authenticate the story, is it really real? I mean you guys are treating these stories as facts because they sound good to your “Trump’s a racist” ingrained mindsets, but 5 minutes of research would make you realize these claims aren’t as concrete and factual as you think.
The last real part of this section refers to the claims that Trump once said at a dinner, “And isn’t it funny. I’ve got black accountants at Trump Castle and Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it,” * “The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”
When you look into this, you realize 2 things:
1). These are random claims that haven’t been corroborated by anyone else.
2). These claims were made by a former employee of his who he had a public falling out with, and was found to be making other claims in his book that were proven to be false.
The claims were made by John R. O’Donnell, who was profiled in the Philadelphia Inquirer, and at the time of writing his book “was president of Merv Griffin’s Resorts Casino Hotel (A Trump competitor). He quit in anger in April 1990 after Trump publicly criticized O’Donnell’s patron, Stephen Hyde, who ran Trump’s Atlantic City operations until being killed in a helicopter crash in October 1989.”
Interestingly enough, O’Donnell made other claims in the book that were proven to be false:
“The book was criticized by Al Glasgow, a key Trump adviser, who said it falsely accuses him of breaking the law by doing business with Trump without the required license.
Glasgow said he would have shown his license to O’Donnell or co-author James Rutherford had they asked to see it. O’Donnell expressed surprise when advised that Glasco Associates has a license. O’Donnell acknowledged that he never tried to contact Glasgow before making the charge.”
So a book written by a man who was a former employee of Trump’s that had a public falling out with him and went to work for a competitor, featuring claims that were proven to be falsely made due to a lack of research, is supposed to be believed regarding an alleged dinner conversation where Trump apparently said some offensive remarks?
This is the best proof of Trump being racist against blacks y’all have? Y’all gotta come with some better logic than that.
They also end this section referring to the controversy surrounding him apparently reneging on his alleged claims to hire a mostly minority workforce for the building of his casino, but once again this in no way shows any type of feeling of superiority over blacks or other minorities.
He refused to condemn the white supremacists who are campaigning for him
Now we get to the straight up lies.
I mentioned earlier how Trump had already disavowed David Duke before the press conference with Jake Tapper, so that gets rid of the claim that he refused to do it. Let’s analyze this clip and look at a few key factors here:
1). One of the first things Trump said was “I don’t know anything about white supremacists, and you’re asking me to talk about people I know nothing about,” and if the man was such an open racist running an openly racist platform why would he miss the chance to issue a rally cry to the “legions of white nationalist and supremacists that will propel him to the White House?” To save face? Nah, I’m not buying it.
2). With the habit the media has of falsely labeling people with the assortment of buzzwords that’s a common tactic nowadays, why would he just go along with them and start disavowing and trash talking organizations he knew nothing about? Up until the last few seconds Jake was specifically referring to and talking about “white supremacists,” and with the way that the media distorts stories and words said in interviews this was a lose-lose situation. Trump specifically stated “you wouldn’t want me to condemn a group I know nothing about,” and this seemed to just be more of a “being cautious” sort of thing.
3). David Duke is not relevant. He hasn’t been with the Klan since 1980, and at best you can call him a white nationalist/supremacist – but this doesn’t mean that those labels apply to Trump. The fact that people are so adamant about bringing up the Klan’s and white nationalists’ supposed support of Trump is funny considering people never really think about why that is.
There are two parties in the race – one who wants to import massive amounts of immigrants, and one who is against flooding the nation with them (like our job market and economy isn’t already bad enough as is).
I also think it’s interesting to note people say that because Trump and the Klan may have similar feelings on some issues of the country, that their views are in alignment and that they’re one and the same. Malcolm X argued for separation of blacks and whites and that his race was superior to others, in the same way the Klan did. Does this mean that Malcolm X was a KKK member?
Clearly it doesn’t.
He questions whether President Obama was born in the United States
It’s funny that there’s a version of this particular story that’s also on Washington Post about Trump “lying and saying that the birther movement was started by Clinton,” when it’s the research done by the Washington Post in a story featured on Breitbart that proved it came from her camp in the first place.
- More than a full year before anyone would hear of Orly Taitz, the Birther strategy was first laid out in the Penn memo.
- The “othering” foundation was built subliminally by the Clinton campaign itself.
- Democrats and Clinton campaign surrogates did the dirtiest of the dirty work: openly spread the Birther lies.
- Staffers in Hillary’s actual campaign used email to spread the lies among other Democrats (this was a Democrat primary after all — so that is the only well you needed to poison a month before a primary).
- The campaign released the turban photo.
- Hillary herself used 60 Minutes to further stoke these lies.
If we’re going by the commonplace tactic of this election of blaming actions done by one’s supporters on them, shouldn’t this “racism” be blamed on Hillary? Plus, is the only reason that this issue is “racist” is because it features a black man being accused of being from Africa? There are white people in Africa so isn’t that a “racist” sentiment in itself?
Trump accused Ted Cruz of being from Canada for an entire election and that wasn’t called racist once, but when Democrats claim that a fellow Democrat is a Muslim from Africa and he calls them out on it he’s the racist one. I don’t get it.
He treats racial groups as monoliths
This one still makes no sense to me, especially because of the reasoning behind him being “racist” for these comments. They’re basically saying 2 things at this point:
1). Because he refers to groups like “The X” (as do I and many other people, I would bet) that he feels like white people are superior to this group. This claim makes very little sense to me, because whether you call them “black people,” “the blacks” or “African Americans” you’re all talking about the same person. Trivial things like this saturate the actual racism in the world, and by attributing these labels to every little thing you dislike (I.E. I don’t like that he called us ‘The Blacks’ so he must think his race is superior to ours) is going to make it harder and harder to identify the people who actually fit the description.
- Huffington Post explains it as “Trump relies on essentializing racial and ethnic groups, blurring them into simple, monolithic entities, instead of acknowledging that there’s as much variety among Muslims and Latinos and black people as there is among white people,” but I don’t get it at all. What type of victim mindset do you have to have to look at a statement like “I Love the Hispanics” and say “OMG! Hispanics aren’t all the same, like we are individuals! Even though you just said you love and appreciate our race, I won’t accept that because I feel like you would’ve said it differently if you were talking about white people.”
Matter of fact, most of the “racism” these days isn’t even “Superiority over minorities,” it’s “I feel like you would have treated whites different in this situation so I’m gonna call you a racist because I have forced myself to feel offended”. This sort of mindset is annoying and mundane, because you usually can’t be certain what would have happened in that regard, but people these days act like they’re experts and psychics on the matter anyway.
Which is interesting because most of these claims of racism are exactly that. They just assume he would have treated whites differently, or that he feels some type of way about a group as a whole because he commented on a few members of the group.
It’s something people like to do a lot nowadays – take a comment from you on a specific person or thing and blow it outta proportion to make it seem like you feel disparagingly against an entire group when those weren’t your intentions, and they can’t prove it.
They also try to end this with the Taco Bowl tweet, and this little tidbit from Jeb Bush stating:
“It’s like eating a watermelon and saying ‘I love African-Americans,’” Bush quipped.
But they aren’t the same because while Tacos are a food originated from Mexico (and the word has a different meaning in Spanish than it does in other dialects), Watermelon has nothing to do w/ black culture and in fact the stereotype has a history of being used in a demeaning and racist way towards blacks in the U.S.
He trashed Native Americans, too
This one is interesting, because this is one of the few times where the claims being made are actually verifiable, but even then it doesn’t bleed “racism” like the left wants you to believe.
Trump was gonna open a Casino in Bridgeport, Connecticut, but he learned he would be competing with one owned by the Mashantucket Pequot Nation. He testified to the House Subcommittee on native American Affairs that “they don’t look like Indians to me… They don’t look like Indians to Indians.”
Was this necessary? No.
Was this a good way to go about it? Probably not.
Does this mean he has anything against Native Americans as a whole? Not at all.
When you look at life, everyone sees it in their own particular frame and point of view. You will never completely understand someone else’s frame, because you haven’t live their life and vice versa.
To Trump he sees certain facial features that he feels like help identifying people, it’s a feature of humans that has been studied in psychology. I see it all the time in the black community when people refer to things like “Can we get some praise for some Darkskinned women without eurocentric beauty features?” and things of that nature.
Facial perception is a facet of psychology, and there’s even a phenomenon called the “cross-race effect” which discusses how it’s easier to be able to identify your own race than any others. In this event Trump was mistaken, and the comment may have been insensitive, but racist? Superior to them because of his comment? nah.
He encouraged the mob justice that resulted in the wrongful imprisonment of the Central Park Five
First of all this headline is just hate-baiting with the way they worded it. He didn’t “encourage mob justice” that “resulted” in their wrongful imprisonment, his ad didn’t come out until two weeks after corruption was already being committed in the case.
Now don’t get me wrong – this is one of the things I find Trump completely wrong for. Contrary to popular belief I don’t agree with 100% of what the man says, but then again I don’t do that with anyone. I’m not a fan of the Death Penalty especially for reasons like this, and I feel like there are numerous other ways he could have gone about it, but “racism” being attributed to this is interesting.
Remember when I said “most of the “racism” these days isn’t even “Superiority over minorities,” it’s “I feel like you would have treated whites different in this situation so I’m gonna call you a racist because I have forced myself to feel offended” earlier? This is definitely one of those cases.
So what this comes down to is this, a bunch of people who don’t know and have never met Trump before in their lives making judgments about his character due to them wanting to satisfy their own preconceived notions about wanting to hate him.
There’s a woman who actively worked for, knew and was a friend of Trump’s commenting on and discussing her feelings for his reasons on doing what he did.
And the only thing people will take out of all of this is “WELL IF WHITEY DID IT WOULD YOU HAVE STILL FELT THAT WAY?!”
Like I said earlier, that mindset is trivial and an easy way to blame something on racism and call someone a racist when you have no proof or evidence for the claim. It’s a cop out basically.
You also have to take into account the aspects of the case.
“Trisha Meili was comatose for 12 days. She suffered from severe hypothermia, severe brain damage, Class 4 (the most severe) hemorrhagic shock, and loss of 75–80 per cent of her blood from five deep stab wounds and a gash on one of her thighs, and internal bleeding. Her skull had been fractured so badly that her left eye was removed from the eye socket, which in turn was fractured in 21 places, and she suffered as well from facial fractures. The initial medical prognosis was that Meili would die. She was given last rites. The police initially listed the attack as a probable homicide. At best, doctors thought that she would remain in a permanent coma due to her injuries. She came out of her coma 12 days after her attack, and spent seven weeks in Metropolitan Hospital in East Harlem. When she emerged from her coma, she was initially unable to talk, read, or walk.“
At the time of Trump’s ad people were under the impression that this was a brutal and barbaric attack done by a group of degenerates, and when they learned she lost 80% of her blood and almost lost an eye most people were horrified.
Considering the media stirring up tensions by claiming these men were part of large groups of teens who would go into Central Park at night and cause mischief, people were scared.
Do I think he went about it wrong and could have stayed out of it?
Yes, but when we go around claiming racism simply because “I DON’T THINK YOU WOULD ACTED LIKE THAT FOR A WHITE PERSON” it starts to become a “Boy Who Cried Wolf” situation.
He condoned the beating of a Black Lives Matter protester
First of all, while I do think it’s wrong that people are being attacked for their views I also think it’s wrong how biased the media is in reporting it. Trump supporters regularly get attacked and assaulted for their support of him as well, there was even an 8 year old who was pepper sprayed as a result of her mother bringing her to a Trump Rally.
Before you get into the “Why would you bring your child to a Trump rally, you know how they are blah blah” consider how Victim-blaming is unacceptable in almost every other facet of society, but when Trump supporters are the the victims of crime and harassment it’s acceptable to blame them. How interesting.
A 16 year old Black Trump supporter (who I’ve had the pleasure of interviewing) has been receiving death threats since he went viral for supporting Trump and debating a BlackLivesMatter supporter. It’s dangerous to be an open Trump supporter, and yet liberals and the media make it seem like we’re the ones that are so violent.
One question: When have you ever heard of Trump supporters going to a Bernie or Hillary rally and beating people up and throwing eggs or protesting outside of the rally antagonizing people? Very rarely, if ever right? Isn’t that interesting…
But in this particular case it can’t be racist if Trump didn’t know who the man was or what skin color he was, as evidenced by him stating he didn’t see the incident. People love to try to apply these “Well a white man said this about a black man so it must be racist” type of attitudes to situations like this with no evidence to support it, and that’s the type of thing that annoys me. I’d rather we go after real racists, not the “I don’t like the way he did this so I’m gonna claim racism” type.
It’s also interesting to note that the now infamous “Trump promises to pay supporters’ legal feeds” quote has been grossly misconstrued from it’s original meaning/intent. As reported from an interview in Thweek.com, Trump stated:
“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them,”“I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.”
So basically he was saying that if you have to defend yourself from the violence of the Anti-Trump crowd (and they pepper spray children, so we know some of them have no morals) and find yourself in legal trouble he will pay your legal fees. Not “Go out and beat people up and I’ll pay for it” like the deceptive media spun it to make him seem like some sort of super villain.
He called supporters who beat up a homeless Latino man “passionate”
This one was one of the most interesting ones, for a multitude of reasons I ended up finding.
1). When you search the headline for the story you can find archived versions that mention him calling the men passionate, but the actual story on Boston Herald’s website has no mention of it. I archived it in case they try to change anything later, but why would this interesting little tidbit not still be included in the original article? A disclaimer at the bottom says it’s an archived version, and “they don’t always include videos, charts or graphic” but this was text.
2). There’s also the factor of their not being a video of him actually saying this, at least not anywhere I could find. Without video evidence this seems to be nothing more than another attempted smear job by the media. There’s no way to even tell if the two statements were in any way connected.
3). Even if this was true, people using this as an example of him being “racist” are clearly reaching.
He stereotyped Jews as good negotiators — and political masterminds
This one isn’t gonna take much to really ‘debunk’ because it’s a dumb claim.
The semantics of Judaism being a religion and not a race aside, what type of world do we live in where making a positive assumption about a group of people is offensive? How is saying they are good negotiators a bad thing? The victimized mindsets people live in make it easy for them to label anything “offensive” as racist, but in this day and age they’ll find it hard to prove it.
If this is the case, I guess there are a hell of a lot of racist rappers then.
There’s also the issue of him supposedly stating:
“You’re not going to support me, because I don’t want your money,” he said. “You want to control your own politician.”
It honestly sounds like a bad joke (and Trump does have a slight tendency to show his sense of humor in ‘unorthodox‘ ways but if this makes him racist then I guess pretty much 90% of comedians are racist (or sexist, or misogynists, or homophobes – whichever portion of the buzzword salad feels applicable).
Well, that’s the examples from the famous Huffington Post article, but let’s go and look at some of the other claims of “racism” out there.
Trump calls Mexican Immigrants “rapists and criminals”
It’s amazing to me how many people believe this and yet can’t tell me the full paragraph he said this statement in or where they even heard it…. because most haven’t.
People these days go along with headlines and skim articles (if they even get that far) and take things to be instant truths. They don’t approach anything with a healthy air of skepticism and are gullible enough to believe anything that sounds remotely good to them.
They don’t want to dig beyond the surface of anything because they’re satisfied with the mirage on the surface of the water. That’s why this is such an infamous quote, and with people’s lack of analytical skills they don’t truly comprehend what was said.
I watched the video along with reading the transcript, and many people took what Trump was saying out of context. First of all, he never meant that all Mexican immigrants were rapists and criminals – not even all of the illegals. The first thing he said before he made the “offensive” comments was:
“These are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you.” *pointing at people in the crowd*
So everyone completely ignored the fact that he started off saying that Mexico has good people (their best) and he’s differentiating them from the ones he’s referring to, and decided to take his words out of context (because anyone with critical thinking ability could put 2 + 2 together and realize he was talking about illegal immigrants).
The next part is what everyone in the Anti-Trump crowd has taken offense to without really understanding what was said:
“They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
and let’s break this down to make it easy to understand.
1). Yes, he was talking about illegal immigrants and not all Mexican immigrants. While it may have been offensive and I admit he should have been more careful/clear with his choice of words, the sentiment he’s expressing isn’t new in terms of our nation’s worries. In fact some of the same outlets that are now slandering him have addressed the issue before, but they were more clear with their words as to not have them misconstrued.
2). Trump said in a later interview that he got this information from a Fusion article (which he did misread and misinterpret) stating that many women who come to this country from Mexico tend to pay the price of either giving up their bodies willingly, or being raped. This is an issue that could have been handled better, but is it an issue of Trump thinking less of Mexican immigrants? Not unless you wanted to take offense to something that wasn’t there. Even after he clarified his statement, people still can’t bring themselves to comprehend this correctly.
3). Even after finishing with “Some, I assume, are good people” people still found it necessary to overlook that and instantly scream that Trump called all Mexican immigrants rapists and criminals. Sometimes I wonder do people look at information to truly comprehend it, or just to satisfy their own preconceived notions.
Trump wants to ban muslims
This is another one that could have been worded better when it was first said, but he has since clarified and people just aren’t happy with/wont accept the clarification. Recently, speaking in a phone call with NBC he stated:
Trump said his Muslim ban would apply “in particular [to] the terrorist states.” Also noted is: Trump did however open up the ban to include all people, of all religions who come from Trump-designated terror states. When pressed by NBC’s Hallie Jackson on whether his ban would apply to other religions other than Islam, for example Christians in Syria, Trump allowed that : “Christians are going to be vetted very, very seriously, if you’re a Christian and you try to get in from Syria.”
So it seems like his focus with the ban and the vetting is more-so countries with recent histories of terrorism and not necessarily religion.
It makes sense, especially with the increasing number of attacks and bombings happening across the world today, to at least look into these issues and not just ignore them like there is no problem.
Also noting, on the subject of his attitude towards ISIS’ influence on Islam’s relationship w/ the world:
On Wednesday (June 22nd), in a large room at his Trump SoHo Hotel, the GOP nominee discussed ISIS as an entity separate from Islam as a whole and distinguished them from “peaceful Muslims.” He said at the time: “ISIS also threatens peaceful Muslims across the Middle East, and peaceful Muslims across the world, who have been terribly victimized by horrible brutality – and who only want to raise their kids in peace and safety.”
So it’s clear that he can distinguish them from the rest of the Muslim population like most people can, and wants to tackle the threat that ISIS is growing into.
Trump says Judge Curiel unfit to do his job because he’s Mexican
I only wanted to throw this last one in here because there’s been a lot of confusion that would be easy to clarify.
For one he never said Curiel couldn’t do his job because he’s Mexican, Trump and his team had gotten an association that the Judge was involved with confused with a Latino advocacy organization they claimed to have been protesting his rallies.
He also added that Curiel may have been biased against him because of his ethnicity due to Trump’s plan to build a wall, which i agree is a statement he could have gone without saying. However, according to CBSNews Trump was attempting to have Curiel recused from the case in October 2014 because of “animosity towards Mr. Trump and his views,” and with the media falsely branding him as the most racist, sexist xenophobe to walk the planet for the entire election it does make you wonder.
Well that’s pretty much the entire list that people parrot when asked to prove how he’s racist these days, if it even gets that far before they block/scream at you.
Has he said some things that were a bit offensive? Yes, I can admit that. One thing he needs to work on is being more careful with his wording – he seems to have issues with being vague at the wrong times.
Was there racism? Anything that made me feel like he was going to put us back in chains or send blacks back to Africa and deport all the Hispanics?
Not at all, and if you went through all of this and still feel that that’s the case, I don’t know what to tell you other than cognitive dissonance is a hell of a drug and I wish you the best.