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:

Mr. 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.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 127 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    If Maria from West Side Story can feel pretty, the Donald can feel rich.

    • #121
  2. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    EThompson:

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake:

    EThompson:

    Jamie Lockett:

    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.

    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.

    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.

    It is a shame that DocJay is no longer with us.  His observations were quite insightful and preferable to the anti-Trump cicadas that predominate presently.

    • #122
  3. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    By anti-Trump cicadas I presume you mean “conservatives”

    • #123
  4. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Jamie Lockett:By anti-Trump cicadas I presume you mean “conservatives”

    No.

    • #124
  5. EThompson Member
    EThompson
    @

    Salvatore Padula: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.

    What’s the matter with you? A J.D. from ND is a big deal and you know it.

    I don’t question the frivolity of some of the Donald’s suits. I’m your worst enemy because I approve of any individual’s right to protect themselves and I’m hoping this individual (if elected) chooses to take umbrage at the endless slights made against my country.

    • #125
  6. Salvatore Padula Inactive
    Salvatore Padula
    @SalvatorePadula

    Liz- My point was not that Donald Trump is frivolously litigious, though he is. It was Donald Trump was unable, in a suit he chose voluntarily to initiate, to provide any evidence that he is worth more than a few hundred million dollars. For a man whose claim to competence is based almost exclusively on having built a multi-billion dollar fortune this alone should be disqualifying. If Trump isn’t a fabulously successful businessman, by his own reasoning, he’s not much of anything.

    I’m not saying you need to be a great businessman to be a great president, but that’s the rationale behind Trump’s whole candidacy. If Trump isn’t the great success he claims (and he hasn’t been able to provide any evidence that he is) he’s nothing more than a loudmouth jerk with too much spray tan and a bad combover.

    • #126
  7. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    I just checked a couple of P&Ls and I can’t find a line for Capitalized Wishes or Feelings Equity. I really think I’m missing out on an opportunity to raise my company’s valuation with feelings.

    • #127
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.