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.
Donald Trump and the Crying Baby: The Real Story
It’s all over the news: the Republican candidate for the presidency, Donald J. Trump, hates babies. Even this morning’s edition of Ricochet’s Daily Shot newsletter trumpeted the disinformation campaign being waged against Trump:
Donald Trump has been having … a rough week. (Pro-tip: Candidates are supposed to kiss babies, not feud with them.)
If you’d like to hear from an eyewitness to this event, who reports a very different story about The Donald’s interaction with the baby and the baby’s mom, read the below from PJ Media. In addition to setting the record straight, the writer also paints a very different picture of candidate Trump. Adjectives used to describe the encounter include, “radiates confidence,” “soft spoken demeanor,” “didn’t forget the ‘little people.'” However, if you wish to remain in disinformation land, don’t read. I’m reminded of that important observation: it’s not who controls the sound but the echo.
Published in GeneralRead this Facebook post from Will Estrada, who attended the rally:
Today I went to the Donald Trump rally in Ashburn, VA. Since I know good people can disagree over whether or not to support Trump, I am just going to post some candid thoughts below. I report, you decide!
Since I am the chairman of the Loudoun County Republican Committee, I was working with the campaign in advance of the rally. On Monday evening, a senior Trump staffer emailed me and asked me if I would be willing to give the invocation at the rally. I said I’d be happy to, but I also told him that as a born again Christian, I end my prayers with “I pray all of this in the name of Jesus.” Since I know that in this day and age mentionoing the name of Jesus can offend some people, I said I’d understand if they preferred that someone else give the invocation. His response to me was: “We know that’s how you pray, that’s why we asked you.”
After the welcome (by John Whitbeck), invocation (by yours truly), pledge (by Sheriff Michael Chapman), and National Anthem (by Briar Woods High School Teacher Nina Peyton), we waited back stage to get a photo with Donald Trump. And then – he was there, with a crowd of staff, Loudoun County Sheriff’s deputies, and Secret Service. I was immediately struck by his presence – he radiates confidence, but also I was struck by his soft spoken demeanor. He spoke softly and thoughtfully the entire time we were backstage.
The first person to get a photo with him was an older man. We had been chatting before-hand while all of us were waiting for Trump to arrive, and he introduced himself as Lieutenant Colonel Louis Dorfman and he had served in the 82nd Airborne. He shook hands with Donald Trump, and handed him his Purple Heart saying he wanted Trump to have it as thanks for standing up for wounded vets. Trump was surprised and said something like “I can’t take this!” We were all surprised and not expecting this. It was pretty cool to see the respect this veteran had for Trump.
Then it was my turn to shake hands with Trump and get my photo taken. I told Mr. Trump that I was the chairman of the Loudoun County Republican Committee and he immediately stopped and looked at me: “Will, how do I win Loudoun?” he asked me. We started talking and he called over one of his staffers. “George, these people here in Virginia know what we need to do to win Virginia.” And then – in a really cool turn of events – John Whitbeck, the GOP chairs of Prince William County and Arlington County, Trump’s campaign staffer, and me are all huddled in a corner, photos forgotten, strategizing on how Trump will win Virginia. Trump didn’t do a lot of talking. He listened to all of us, he made sure his staff had our emails, and he said that we would have everything we needed.
As we finished up the photos, Trump looked at all the Sheriff’s Deputies. “Let’s get them in the photo,” he said. And then he was taking group photos with all of the cops. They loved it. In fact, my favorite photo I took was all of the deputies with Trump (I’ll post it tomorrow). I was struck by how Trump didn’t forget the “little people.” Even though it was just a few of us and no media, he was relaxed and took the time to get photos with everyone.
The rally itself was super cool. Lots of energy, packed room (something like 2000 people had to be turned away because the auditorium was packed – and just on 24 hours notice!), everyone stood the entire time even though they all had seats. One thing I want to mention is the baby crying, because that has been national news. Contrary to news stories, it was a very funny thing, Trump was very supportive of the mom calling her and her baby “beautiful” and “wonderful”, and then when the baby kept crying he turned it into a joke. Everyone was laughing and it was actually very endearing and funny. Not at all anti mom or anti baby like the media has portrayed it to be.
Which brings me to the final point: I was there and saw and heard the entire event with the mom and baby. There was nothing to it. But then after I’m reading all the news coverage saying “Trump hates moms and babies!!!” I started to doubt myself. Did I really miss a huge story right in front of me? I started asking others who were there, including a husband and wife with young kids. And everyone in the room said the same thing: there was no story here. Trump was being funny and personable and going out of his way to make sure the mom wasn’t embarrased by making it a funny situation.
My conclusion is that the media is selling us a narrative. Be very skeptical of what the media is telling you, because I saw it with my own eyes and it was something very different.
I don’t think you do see how this works. You seem to think that Trump is not fair game. Because… reasons! He openly brags about the jerky stuff he has done, and the jerky stuff he will do, and he wears it all as a badge of honor. That is what makes it easy to believe the worst stories about him. Because he set the character bar pretty low.
Yes, a lie is a lie is a lie. And the press does lie about Republicans. And also Trump. None of this is to say that the press is right to do what they do but it is absolutely baked into the cake and both sides know it. Hypothetical: if the press published a rumor that Trump is cheating on his wife with a young model from his agency, it might be a lie. But it would be a believable lie because he has bragged about doing almost that exact thing. If the press ran that same story about Reagan, Bush, Romney, etc. it would not have nearly the same traction.
Yes, the press are partisan hacks. Surprise! But Trump just makes their hack jobs easier by continuing to hang curve balls over the plate.
The facts of the issue aren’t in dispute. I read the transcript and I’m confident what he said was a joke. I take issue with two broader things:
1. Trump fans thinking that they are neutral arbiters of the things Trump says. i.e. You seem to think that a) being at the event, and b) not being press makes the account automatically reliable. As I stated, I don’t dispute the facts but I’m not going to necessarily swallow any editorial comment
2. Whether or not what the press say about him is true, is irrelevant to me. If the press claims are merely plausible, there’s a problem. Trump set the table to make their hack stories plausible.
Why do you limit it to the offhand jokes department?
Does not seem like we are going to be rescued by SMOD this time.
Mary Mapes and Dan Rather were too soon. “Fake but accurate” is apparently OK if it is the current nominee.
Well, isn’t that special? Hillary just continues to lie in our faces, saying that Comey verified everything she has been saying about her emails. But your only criticism is for Trump.Will this country be better off after 4 years of Clinton, rather than Trump?
Considering that Melissa’s post is actually about how the press is treating Trump, Chris’s remark is well within the bounds of discussion here. Further, the comments here have not been debating whether we should be voting for Hillary or Trump, or who is the worse human being or candidate.
If you wish to turn the discussion into a critique of Hillary, perhaps it would be better to author a new post on the subject rather than diverting the conversation here.
The press can say anything they want and they choose their lies. It’s not the candidates fault when it comes to this level of deceit and propaganda.These people are great at making lies believable no matter what. Who would have believed Hastert was a gay pedophile?
How come Bill Clinton can still show his face in public? No, the crux of this matter is what’s focused on, and what is judged. The truth matters little in this equation and believability is irrelevant.
What is the Bush family doing to keep people from believing they are shills for international bankers? What are Jews doing to dispense with the claim that they run Hollywood? What are Germans doing to dispense with the claim they are racists? Oh, that’s right, they are taking in thousands of Muslims. But how’s that working? never enough. What are police doing to keep BLM from claiming they target blacks for murder?
These lies and half-truths can always be exploited by what’s ‘believable’. You seem to think you can minimize it by changing behavior.
Is this supposed to be some kind of spanking, Mr Moderator? How about the editors and commentators start doing multiple posts on Hillary and her Foundation? I’m just a lowly paying member. This used to be a “center” right conversation spot. It would seem appropriate to focus on the most antithetical of the two candidates, for a change.
Notice when someone gets alinskied it’s always the recipient’s fault.
I’m trying to keep tempers from flaring here. For every complaint that this site is in the bag for Hillary, there is a complaint that pro-Trump members are shown excessive leniency for abusing other members.
As am I.
This is a member’s post, and it is defending Trump. Further, it was promoted to the Main Feed by the editors as both as a counterpoint to the other posts critical of Trump, and because it was well written and pertinent. If, as a member, you would like to see a main-feed post on Hillary and her foundation, then feel free to write one. I’d do it but it’s beyond my expertise to do so.
And for what it’s worth, I’ve said multiple times here that I’m voting for Trump barring actual evidence that he eats babies.
http://ricochet.com/ulysses-s-trump/
Which candidate is that exactly?
So perhaps we should stick with the leftwing diversion of campaign topics, and not divert from their diversion.
Diverticulitis isn’t good.
Look, squirrel!
To be fair to the members puzzled by the original title, the active members tends to think of themselves, not The Daily Shot, as Ricochet. Along with reading The Daily Shot, not reading The Daily Shot is also a popular pastime among the membership, and so for many members, it would be confusing to use Ricochet in its entirety as the metonym for one outlet of it that doesn’t much concern them.
Obviously, it was necessary to change the title in order to move this to the Main Feed, though perhaps a different title like “My Shot at The Daily Shot” would have been more clarifying.
For what it’s worth, I edit The Daily Shot, and read that line as a joking aside — something the newsletter is filled with. The single reference included a link to the nontroversy, so readers could make up their own mind as to whether this “scandal” was an issue. As I argued on this week’s Conservatarians podcast, Babygate seemed like another dumb media creation that should be disregarded.
It fits into the notion that us trump haters have as him having no impulse control and insulting the mother wasn’t particularly a good idea…
The Washington Post comes clean on the Trump baby story.
Too late. Damage done. “A lie is halfway around the world before the truth even gets its boots on“, as Mark Twain was reputed to have said.
The process is the punishment. The press hates Trump and has judged him an enemy, and thus, its acceptable to lie about him in the cause of defeating him. They don’t even look at it as lying. They look at it as a necessary tactic, but for a virtuous purpose.
I agree. I’d like to give them credit if credit is due, but count me as skeptical. They are covering for themselves. This might be a result of something they are beginning to see, though. This really is a fight for credibility, and the media is definitely losing with Trump supporters who see things differently, and Trump is going right at them. I’m loving it.
How is Trump rebounding in the polls now? Maybe people have now seen that that Muslim guy was an immigration lawyer who’s former firm did Clintons taxes and set up her e-mail server, and by-the-way is a sharia advocate which for Muslims overrides the Constitution he was waving? And that there’s a distinct double standard regarding Gold Star families with Democrats? And that Obama’s claims Trump was unfit for office reminded everyone how utterly unfit Obama himself is?
And the anti-Trumpers here don’t care that this was a lie. Rather, they blame Trump for supposedly giving the media the opportunity to lie and allegedly being the kind of person about whom such a lie might be believed.
Because they’re principled.
Which brings me to the final point: I was there and saw and heard the entire event with the mom and baby. There was nothing to it. But then after I’m reading all the news coverage saying “Trump hates moms and babies!!!” I started to doubt myself.
This is the media’s goal. Are you gonna believe us or your lyin’ eyes? It seemed like good-natured ribbing to me. When I ponder where the vast majority of voters get their “news.” I tremble for the future of the country.