Is What President Trump Said True?

Is What President Trump Said True?

by Gregory Noble

Is it true? In a discussion about a FB meme posting last week someone responded to my comments about President Trump with a particular accusation concerning the President and white supremacists. The individual said in part, “this man who refuses to condemn white supremacists (Charlottesville)….”

I have heard this comment before. Most recently it was the center piece rationale for getting into the race by Democrat Presidential nomination contender Joe Biden.

What is it that Trump has actually done, or failed to do? One thing he has done is to say, “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,” ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/…/8c4b7fc2-6b80-11e9-a66d-a8…)

Of course, that quote by the President is juxtaposed against other comments, even in the article referenced above, showing where the President then allegedly backtracks by placing those racists into a moral equivalency with people who were opposing them.

“Trump himself had merely been supporting those same purportedly peaceful protesters when he said there were ‘very fine people on both sides,’ he continued.” (ibid)

“In one breath, he said, ‘I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis or the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally’ — a statement his allies have latched on to in defense of his handling of the issue to claim the president was always clear in his denunciations of bigotry and hate-fueled violence.

Yet, in the next breath, Trump asserted, ‘there’s blame on both sides . . . very fine people on both sides.’ ” (ibid)

Above are actual quotes from the President. At the same time those quotes are strewn within the editorial opinions of the authors in a manner which creates the impression the President harbors pro-racist sentiment, or at least seeks support from those who are motivated by such passions.
What the President actually said though is different and clear when you listen to what he said in context:

“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. 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.” 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.”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/…/trump_didnt_call_neo-na…

People do not have to agree with or support President Trump. Clearly. At the same time it isn’t a matter of political debate when the aim is intentional misrepresentation through parsing of his words in order to claim he is supporting something he explicitly condemns, just because he refuses to use pre-approved words the media and corrupt politicians are trying to force him to say.

This form of discussion isn’t about debating what the man believes. This is about propaganda to defame him through selectively using his verbatim words, interposed with editorial comment, because people disagree with policy positions unrelated to the topic at hand.

So, is it true he refused to condemn white supremacists? You decide.