Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump’s David Duke Denials
David Suderman, Senior Editor at Reason Magazine, is wondering why Trump pretends to not to have any knowledge of supporter David Duke, when in 2000 Trump specifically pointed Duke out as the reason why Trump wouldn’t ever run on a ‘Reform Party’ ticket.
Trump supporters: What say you?
Donald Trump Repeatedly Refuses to Disavow Support From Former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke
Trump claims he doesn’t know who Duke is. He did in 2000.
Over the course of his campaign, Donald Trump has managed to attracted openly racist supporters, including, most recently, David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan (KKK) grand wizard who declared last week that voting against Trump would be “treason to your heritage.”
So how does Trump feel about Duke’s endorsement? Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper this morning whether he would disavow Duke’s endorsement and the KKK, the GOP [frontrunner – FIFY Suderman] repeatedly declined to do, saying, instead, that he just didn’t know much about David Duke.
Here’s what Trump said:
I don’t know anything about David Duke, OK? I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don’t know. I mean, I don’t know — did he endorse me or what’s going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you’re asking me a question that I’m supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about.
When Tapper followed up, clearly noting Duke’s connection to white supremacy and the Ku Klux Klan, Trump again responded that he would “have to look at the group” before weighing in further.
But Trump certainly knew who David Duke was in 2000. As The New York Times reported at the time, Trump declined to be a presidential candidate on the Reform Party ticket explicitly because of Duke’s Klan connections:
Published in GeneralMr. Trump painted a fairly dark picture of the Reform Party in his statement, noting the role of Mr. Buchanan, along with the roles of David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and Lenora Fulani, the former standard-bearer of the New Alliance Party and an advocate of Marxist-Leninist politics.
“The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani,” he said in his statement. “This is not company I wish to keep.” [via Justin Green]
Indeed, Trump seemed to know who David Duke was last Friday, when he gave a flip disavowal of the former Klansman’s support: “David Duke endorsed me? OK, alright. I disavow, OK?”
Since then, Trump appears to have decided to play dumb about Duke and the Klan, and to pretend that he knows nothing about them at all. That’s a lie, and it’s a lie that tells you plenty about the kind of campaign that Trump is running.
That, and it should also be reiterated that Trump is not a conservative. Conservatives are free to support him, but it might be a good idea to keep that fact in mind. Ace of Spades sums it up neatly:
Which of Trump’s four bankruptcies brought on by too much debt load and inability to negotiate favorable interest rates make for impressive financial acumen? Or was it his masterful ability to grown his inheritance slower than an Index Fund would? Or perhaps it’s his use of outright fraud for which he is currently being sued that point to his business acumen? No wait I have it – it’s the way he constantly overestimates his net worth so as to hoodwink impressionable people who substitute wealth for substance and character.
Trump’s denial of any knowledge of who David Duke is and his history is about as believable as his assertion that he is being audited by the IRS because he’s a “Strong Christian.” Any one who is as old as Trump is and has paid only modest attention to current events over the years knows about Duke.
Trump isn’t Hitler or Mussolini or Stalin or Mao. But he isn’t Truman or Churchill or Thatcher or Havel,, etc. He is a deeply flawed man with a very large ego. Perhaps Truman would define him in ulcers. He does enjoy living large and being in the spotlight. It is difficult to criticize him because he makes no claim to decency. He sets the bar low and meets it.
Did everyone see the Mussolini thing at Gawker? It is pretty stunning. Go here to read:
How We Fooled Donald Trump Into Retweeting Benito Mussolini
http://gawker.com/how-we-fooled-donald-trump-into-retweeting-benito-musso-1761795039
Then someone posted this video in the comments:
@ilduce2016
Hilarious!
The whole country is having a major problem with the white supremacist groups. It’s a big problem.
I find Trump’s word choice interesting. “I know nothing,” was the only reply nativist American Party members would give to questioners in the 1850s. So much so that they are basically only remembered as Know Nothings (and as KKK progenitors). More proof for me that Republicans are going the way of the Whigs. I’ll just tuck this tidbit under my tinfoil-hat.
I don’t think it’s a tinfoil-hat observation; I think it’s an important one. Whether he intended it or not, he evoked that. He either doesn’t know what he’s evoking, which is frightening, or he does, which is frightening. But definitely it’s one or the other.
And then he says in his defense, “What difference does it make.”
I wonder how far this could actually go: What’s the ultimate limit of his ability to say and do shameful things and retain his support? Could he, in fact, shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and still enjoy the support of his fans?
You are right. It just seems like crazy talk. Honestly, if I didn’t follow John Podhoretz and Jonah and see the stuff they retweet, I wouldn’t believe the KKK was still a thing.
Trump did not forget what he said on Friday. His dodge was a deliberate act, and the white supremacists will notice and love him more.
I said the GOP, not the “right.” In 2008 I was listening to both Sean Hannity and Glen Beck discuss Reverend Wright, but vast numbers of voters never heard anything about it except for leftist excuses.
McCain never mentioned any of it as far as I heard, and later Romney famously ran his campaign on the basis that Barry was just a nice guy in over his head.
That’s failure. The GOP needs to be making a political case, not leaving it up to talk radio and the internet.
Then perhaps the GOP should stop trying to sabotage his campaign, and get behind him like they demanded rank-and-file conservatives get behind obvious failures like Dole and McCain.
Considering the thorough, miserable of the GOP to successfully defeat the left during my lifetime- what’s the difference? That it would take the left slightly longer to get its way?
In any case the fevered devotion the party establishment has for open borders will end America as we know it anyway, so I’ll stick with Trump.
At least there’s a chance he’ll secure the border.
Talk is cheap.
The US government and the global businesses that operate here care nothing about the various murderous regimes they do business with or how many people they kill.
I note that China harvests organs from criminals, Vietnam murdered millions of South Vietnamese friendly to the US, Iran is a terrorist state bent on destroying us, Cuba has a maximum wage of $25 a month- but the US government and its friends have no trouble at all doing business with any of them– and have worked hard to overcome public opposition to do so.
Lip service counts for nothing.
I have been willing to go Trump over Hillary. Hillary is a stroke-addled opportunist who would sell the country out from under us in a flash. Trump at least appeared to be a patriot.
But these disavowals, forgetting the disavowals, redisavowing…I’m wondering if Trump’s having the same memory problems.
Sad if true!
I think the only thing that would actually harm Trump is if it came out that he isn’t worth as much as he says he is.
If this happens, I want to know his secret.
Watch the John Oliver video, where Trump says in court that his estimates of his worth fluctuate based on his mood.
That’s not a joke. It happened.
As a businessperson, I don’t find a thing unusual about this statement. There are days when one can find the silver lining in everything you have done and others when you feel as if Armageddon is fast approaching.
You gotta be there to get it.
I had thought this had already come out multiple times. It seems to have happened often enough that some folks have even made timelines of it.
Given that, I’m not sure how another instance would hurt him.
Most people are utterly unaware of this. If you could make every Trump supporter watch the John Oliver video, he’d lose half of his support.
Which thread was this posted on? I saw it, planned to go back up the page and watch it, and now can’t find the damn thing. So many comments flying I can’t even keep track of my own.
http://ricochet.com/make-donald-drumpf-again-with-john-oliver/
Thanks.
That’s ridiculous. If you’re a business person then you operate under a different accounting standard than any I have ever heard of. Businesses, especially real estate businesses like Mr Trumps are very easy to run a valuation analysis on.
Sometimes. Sometimes words matter. Sometimes they even take courage.
But for purposes of discussion I’ll grant the point: again, no one who does not have the basic moral clarity and rudimentary nerve to even pay the cheap lip service of calling evil evil will not get my vote.
It’s truly ridiculous if one has never run a business personally and pretends to know anything about it save through hearsay. If you are an entrepreneur, I would certainly entertain your personal observations and experiences. True entrepreneurs are always interested in learning about others, particularly the successful ones. Author Walter Isaacson must be living well off the royalties of his book about Jobs.
I was informed elsewhere that Jamie is an entrepreneur. Members differ, though, on how much they like to bring up their credentials while on Ricochet, so maybe it’s not the sort of thing Jamie would mention himself.
Elsewhere? Perhaps Jamie needs to show his credentials before making blanket statements about particular subjects; why should he get a pass when doctors, lawyers, politicians, etc. do not?
If Jay deleted the “Doc” before his avatar, I might question his commentary on the many helpful medical examples he has chosen to share with us all.
I also pay closer attention to economic observations made by David Sussman and BrentB67 after reviewing their profiles.
Your pal Jamie Lockett has made few observations about my posts except to comment that I appear as one most likely to burn crosses in my front yard so you’ll pardon me if I disregard your remarks on this particular subject.
Liz- I have J.D. after my name, so I hope you’ll give credit to the legal point I’m going to make.
Donald Trump initiated a libel suit against an author who claimed Trump was worth only a few hundred million. Trump’s suit was dismissed with prejudice and he lost his appeal because he was unable to provide any proof that the author’s claim was false. Trump didn’t even show enough to go to trial. Now it’s absolutely true that to prevail under our libel laws Trump would have had to prove not only untruth, but malice as well, but his suit was dismissed because he couldn’t even provide any evidence that the author’s claim was false. I’m telling you that, as a legal matter, if Trump’s net worth was anywhere near the billions he claims Trump would have easily been able to provide enough evidence to avoid dismissal.
Net worth doesn’t mean how wealthy you feel at a given moment.
Don’t want to get too far into the weeds here but here’s something short: I started my first production company at 27 operating out of WB, our deal was cancelled via the writers strike so I hung out my own shingle as an independent producer for WBtv managing various individual productions including budgeting, scheduling and personnel management prior to working on one feature film as a financial analyst. After leaving the industry I went to work for a small software company as COO/CFO.
The funny thing is: none of this matters! My personal history has no bearing on Donald Trumps fantasy that his net worth is subject to his moods. By all means Liz please explain how ones perception changes the reality of cold hard numbers. Maybe it’s in the GAAP standards? I have a copy at my office so just give me the page or section reference number – it’s probably listed right after the amoratization schedule for Unicorn Feces.