Prove that Trump is a Racist

[Allandavid]

Ok I'll pick then. Let's talk about his comments about blacks being lazy. Could you cite the reference for this?

"Next in the Trump record on race came a 1991 book by John O’Donnell, who had been president of Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City. O’Donnell quoted Trump saying,“ Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys wearing yarmulkes… Those are the only kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else…Besides that, I tell you something else. I think that’s guy’s lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks.”

O’Donnell’s report was shocking, but Trump did not contest it at the time. In 1997 he was interviewed for Playboy by author Mark Bowden and he confirmed that the O’Donnell book was “probably true.”

Is Donald Trump Racist? Here's what the record shows

 

[Tree of Life]

"Next in the Trump record on race came a 1991 book by John O’Donnell, who had been president of Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City. O’Donnell quoted Trump saying,“ Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys wearing yarmulkes… Those are the only kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else…Besides that, I tell you something else. I think that’s guy’s lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks.”

O’Donnell’s report was shocking, but Trump did not contest it at the time. In 1997 he was interviewed for Playboy by author Mark Bowden and he confirmed that the O’Donnell book was “probably true.”

Is Donald Trump Racist? Here's what the record shows

Ok.

So assuming all of these quotes are accurate (I haven't seen O'Donnell's book nor have I read the Playboy article) and assuming that the context is not relevant (again, actually reading O'Donnell's book or the Playboy article would be important here), let's see what we've got...

We've got a guy who worked for Trump claiming that he made some off-color racial statements sometime before 1991 (over 26 years ago). Trump appears to have agreed that he may have said something like this in 1997.

The conclusion is that Donald Trump is a racist.

This just doesn't seem that compelling to me. I don't approve of the comments but I also must admit that I'm entirely clueless as to their context. Also it wouldn't be too difficult to find something like this coming from any major personality. It's not uncommon for people to make off color racial comments - sometimes in jest, sometimes ignorantly, and sometimes seriously. These comments can indicate very serious racism issues in a person. But they do not always indicate this. The conclusion that Trump is, characteristically, a racist is simply too weighty to be supported by a flimsy piece of evidence like this.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Ok.

So assuming all of these quotes are accurate (I haven't seen O'Donnell's book nor have I read the Playboy article) and assuming that the context is not relevant (again, actually reading O'Donnell's book or the Playboy article would be important here), let's see what we've got...

We've got a guy who worked for Trump claiming that he made some off-color racial statements sometime before 1991 (over 26 years ago). Trump appears to have agreed that he may have said something like this in 1997.

The conclusion is that Donald Trump is a racist.

This just doesn't seem that compelling to me. I don't approve of the comments but I also must admit that I'm entirely clueless as to their context. Also it wouldn't be too difficult to find something like this coming from any major personality. It's not uncommon for people to make off color racial comments - sometimes in jest, sometimes ignorantly, and sometimes seriously. These comments can indicate very serious racism issues in a person. But they do not always indicate this. The conclusion that Trump is, characteristically, a racist is simply too weighty to be supported by a flimsy piece of evidence like this.

You act that this only evidence. There is many evidence. You have seen lists.

 

[Tree of Life]

You act that this only evidence. There is many evidence. You have seen lists.

A list of alleged evidence is not evidence. And there's not much we can do with a list other than slow down and analyze its various claims - which is what we're doing. If the list amounts to a bunch of flimsy claims then the list itself is flimsy and not worth much.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

A list of alleged evidence is not evidence. And there's not much we can do with a list other than slow down and analyze its various claims - which is what we're doing. If the list amounts to a bunch of flimsy claims then the list itself is flimsy and not worth much.

In last analyze you say you haven't seen so you dismiss. Trump made racist statement. Then Trump confirm to playboy reporter he made statement. Yet you call flimsy. That denial.

Trump make racist statement regarding Judge. Even Republican Ryan call racist statement. So Trump meet definition of racist.

 

[Allandavid]

A list of alleged evidence is not evidence. And there's not much we can do with a list other than slow down and analyze its various claims - which is what we're doing. If the list amounts to a bunch of flimsy claims then the list itself is flimsy and not worth much.

Look...how about saving people time and energy. No matter how many examples are trotted out, you will dismiss them as 'not enough'...right? You've made your mind up already, it would seem. Donny can do no wrong...

 

[381465]

Look...how about saving people time and energy. No matter how many examples are trotted out, you will dismiss them as 'not enough'...right? You've made your mind up already, it would seem. Donny can do no wrong...

...or right, depending on your political agenda.
True objectivity is hard to find.

 

[Allandavid]

...or right, depending on your political agenda.
True objectivity is hard to find.

You find that objectivity in the evidence. And plenty of it exists...

 

[Tree of Life]

Look...how about saving people time and energy. No matter how many examples are trotted out, you will dismiss them as 'not enough'...right? You've made your mind up already, it would seem. Donny can do no wrong...

Do you wilt so easily?

 

[Allandavid]

Do you wilt so easily?

I've found it almost always pointless trying to be heard by those with their heads in the sand...

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Do you wilt so easily?

How he wilt? He give evidence. Trump own racist words. Trump confirm he said racist words. You not accept that not wilt. That you not accept reality.

But that fine. By definition of racist, Trump is racist. Is not question. Many resigns from many council over Trump statements on Tuesday for Trump defending Nazi and KKK.

 

[KCfromNC]

"X is false" does not logically follow from "unreliable source said X".

Who said it did?

 

[KCfromNC]

You act that this only evidence. There is many evidence. You have seen lists.

That's the strategy - complain that there's too much to respond to, and then when the claims are narrowed in response, claim that there's not enough to establish a pattern.

 

[Tree of Life]

That's the strategy - complain that there's too much to respond to, and then when the claims are narrowed in response, claim that there's not enough to establish a pattern.

I'm not saying there's not enough to establish a pattern. It's just that each claim is rather flimsy.

 

[RogerRoger]

Yeah I dunno. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be anything of much substance here.

I disagree - Can you explain away Gorka's ties to the group?

Better yet, can you even explain why Gorka was hired in the first place? He is President Trump's foreign policy advisor, claiming expertise on radical islamic terrorism, but has spent no time in the middle east, and does not speak Arabic. His dissertation, one of his only claims to policy expertise on Islamic terrorism, is highly criticized.

One foreign policy professor notes:

Mia Bloom, a widely published expert on terrorism and a professor at Georgia State University, recalls an encounter with Gorka on a terrorism panel at the Defense Intelligence Agency. "Gorka knows virtually nothing," she says. "His views are a mixture of Islamophobia and racism. We'd been given questions in advance, we were paid for our appearance, and he just [expletive] his way through it – and he brought books to sell!"
​

Apparently the White House tried to move Gorka laterally:

According to one insider, Gorka's dubious qualifications may have saved him. "The White House tried to find him a job at another agency," says the source. But no luck: "Nobody wanted him."
​

By all accounts, Gorka is a non-expert with dubious experience and credentials. Why is he now a top adviser? I'd say it's because of his ideology

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

I'm not saying there's not enough to establish a pattern. It's just that each claim is rather flimsy.

Trump make racist statement to press. Trump confirm racist statement true. Is NOT rather flimsy.

Example: Man make confession he kill your children to press. Man confirm he kill your children when asked again. And you would say "Let him go is flimsy evidence"?

 

[Belk]

I'm not saying there's not enough to establish a pattern. It's just that each claim is rather flimsy.

In what way is a claim that is "probably true" according to the person it is about flimsy?

 

[Tree of Life]

In what way is a claim that is "probably true" according to the person it is about flimsy?

It's flimsy for a few reasons:

1. I'm lacking all context. It would be helpful to see an actual excerpt from the original book or the Playboy interview.
2. In the absence of the above, all we have is someone's rehashing of someone else's rehashing of what was said.

So source documentation would strengthen this piece of evidence considerably. Or would perhaps weaken it considerably if the source documentation introduced further vagaries that were open to interpretation.

 

[KCfromNC]

It's flimsy for a few reasons:
I'm lacking all context. It would be helpful to see an actual excerpt from the original book or the Playboy interview.

Can you help me out and give an example of what sort of context would make the statement less racist?

In the absence of the above, all we have is someone's rehashing of someone else's rehashing of what was said.

That, and Trump agreeing that the statement sounded accurate.

 

[Tree of Life]

Can you help me out and give an example of what sort of context would make the statement less racist?

I would like to see any context or source material. This could confirm the racism of the statement or could show that what's been quoted as having been quoted is not really what was said or meant.

That, and Trump agreeing that the statement sounded accurate.

Again I'd like to see some source material for this. Is that too much to ask?