From Steve Cortes, CNN Political Contributor (whose likely to get the Paulie treatment)

News anchors and pundits have repeated lies about Donald Trump and race so often that some of these narratives seem true, even to Americans who embrace the fruits of the president’s policies.  The most pernicious and pervasive of these lies is the “Charlottesville Hoax,” the fake-news fabrication that he described the neo-Nazis who rallied in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017 as “fine people.”

Just last week I exposed this falsehood, yet again, when CNN contributor Keith Boykin falsely stated, “When violent people were marching with tiki torches in Charlottesville, the president said they were ‘very fine people.’” When I objected and detailed that Trump’s “fine people on both sides” observation clearly related to those on both sides of the Confederate monument debate, and specifically excluded the violent supremacists, anchor Erin Burnett interjected, “He [Trump] didn’t say it was on the monument debate at all.  No, they didn’t even try to use that defense. It’s a good one, but no one’s even tried to use it, so you just used it now.”

Well, Trump NEVER said that was what he meant. This is the problem with talking like an idiot, as Trump does, he talks about one subject, specifically, then in the middle of that switches to another aspect in that general theme....  remember when Obama said "you didn't build that..."  and the right wing got all up in arms...  that's an example of this, and the right NEVER accepted that when Obama switched there that he was referring to the roads and bridges that provide the infrastructure for the businesses to be as successful as they could be.  That's why I HATE thread hijackers and whataboutism...  stay on topic, it's simple, if you can't do that then you can't have a reasonable debate cause I could bring in you know how the moon comes out at night... that cow just jumped...  never seen anything like that before....  see how stupid that is


My colleagues seem prepared to dispute our own network’s correct contemporaneous reporting and the very clear transcripts of the now-infamous Trump Tower presser on the tragic events of Charlottesville.  Here are the unambiguous actual words of President Trump:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did. ---um, pictures of... the tiki marches..  that group? right?  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”  yes, white nationalists were protesting the taking down of that statue, and renaming the park... so are those the fine people you are talking about... so far that's the only people you are talking about.. people in those pictures, those being white nationalists and those same people protesting the removal of the statue and renaming of the park, at NOT POINT in this blurb has Trump injected any other group of people, just that perhaps some white nationalists were interested in the statue and the park and some white nationalists were just there to cause trouble... either way, still white nationalists..., he never said, "there were some people who aren't white nationalists, who were just there to express concerns about the park and the statue." cause even those people aren't stupid enough to march beside neo nazis and join them for their cause . this man needs to learn messaging... or maybe he doesn't the way he talks could be interpretted many ways and MANY white nationalists think he's on their side....

After another question at that press conference, Trump became even more explicit:


“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.”  

to expand on this "You had people and i'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists. They should be condemned totally. You had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. The press has treated them absolutely unfairly." no, I think if you're marching beside neo-nazis and white nationalists and not rethinking your cause...  just maybe....

As a man charged with publicly explaining Donald Trump’s often meandering and colloquial vernacular in highly adversarial TV settings, I appreciate more than most the sometimes-murky nature of his off-script commentaries.  But these Charlottesville statements leave little room for interpretation.  For any honest person, therefore, to conclude that the president somehow praised the very people he actually derided, reveals a blatant and blinding level of bias. nah, no so much, knowing the history of Trump, his actual racism, this man defending Trump is the blind one.


Nonetheless, countless so-called journalists have furthered this darnable lie.  For example, MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace responded that Trump had “given safe harbor to Nazis, to white supremacists.”  Her NBC colleague Chuck Todd claimed Trump “gave me the wrong kind of chills. Honestly, I’m a bit shaken from what I just heard.” Not to be outdone, print also got in on the act, with the New York Times spewing the blatantly propagandist headline: “Trump Gives White Supremacists Unequivocal Boost.” How could the Times possibly reconcile that Trump, who admonished that the supremacists should be “condemned totally” somehow also delivered an “unequivocal boost” to those very same miscreants?  because the white supremacists believe it and are acting on it, hate crimes have gone up every year Trump's been in office, he emboldens them

But like many fake news narratives, repetition has helped cement this one into a reasonably plausible storyline for all but the most skeptical consumers of news.  In fact, over the weekend, Fox News host Chris Wallace pressed White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney on why Trump has not given a speech “condemning … white supremacist bigotry.”  Well, Chris, he has, and more than once.  The most powerful version was from the White House following Charlottesville and the heartbreaking death of Heather Heyer.  President Trump’s succinct and direct words:


“Racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.”

right that was take 2, AFTER he got pressured into saying that...  since he screwed up his first attempt so badly even many members of his own party were calling on him to say something more strongly against racism, he had to be called into action to make a statement any 3rd grader would see as obvious after such an event as Charlottesville

Despite the clear evidence of Trump’s statements regarding Charlottesville, major media figures insist on spreading the calumny that Trump called neo-Nazis “fine people.”  The only explanation for such a repeated falsehood is abject laziness or willful deception.  Either way, the duplicity on this topic perhaps encapsulates the depressingly low trust most Americans place in major media, with 77 percent stating in a Monmouth University 2018 poll that traditional TV and newspapers report fake news.  In addition, such lies as the Charlottesville Hoax needlessly further divide our already-polarized society.

Instead of hyper-partisan, distorted narratives, as American citizens we should demand adherence to truth -- and adherence to the common values that bind us regardless of politics. In the words of our president: “No matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God.”

But to be fair, though he did recant on his racist comments, it just goes to show that he's stupid enough to say them in the first place.


Recanted racist comments????

WebsterMark wrote on 03/21/19 at 08:52:08:


He had to clarify afterwards.  He had to RECANT - re·cant
/rəˈkant/Submit
verb
past tense: recanted; past participle: recanted
say that one no longer holds an opinion or belief, especially one considered heretical.
"heretics were burned if they would not recant"

...knowing the history of Trump, his actual racism...

You know that for a fact do you?

He had to clarify afterwards.  He had to RECANT - re·cant

You used recant in the sense that he 'no longer held an opinion'.

Trump did not recant because he had nothing to recant for.

Yes, he did.  He stated 'some very fine people on both sides' - never clarifying what he meant (like an idiot would do without any forethought).

Then later, he was asked about the white supremacists and only then did he recant on his statement.

Let's be clear, racist and bigoted are in the eye of the beholder in many, not all, but many situations.

I disagree.  

However, if you believe that's the case here, then there are only two scenarios.  Either trump's a racist or an idiot.  Meaning - he says racist things either because he believes them or he doesn't know any better.

Neither one is defensible.

Throwing out the term racist or bigot for anyone you happen to disagree with is on a pretty low rung of the scum ladder. You do that to silence critics or quite descent.