Challenge:Liberals on this Board...Especially Students...Show HARD Evidence that Trump is Racist

[Pogo]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

 

[bendog]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

 

[Correll]

I guess you missed the entire Republican Primary, when most of his enemies were white males.

That Trump does not comport himself as you want, is not racism, and thus off topic.

Oh please! False equivalency- horseshit logical fallacy . The field was all white save for the perennial token black who is an idiot in his own right. Yes Trump was relentless and merciless on all of them . That proves and disproves nothing.

Your words.


"Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "

As YOU stated, he was just as "relentless and merciless" with his white enemies as he was with the minorities ones.


So, while that's not a comprehensive list of him treating white people as rough, if not worse than he was with Khan, it certainly makes that case that his treatment of Khan was not evidence of racism.


Which shitcans the number one example from your list.


Page 42 and counting and none of you libs can meet the OP challenge.

You are hopelessly in denial, or playing a sick game. You're insisting on focusing on the Khan incident out of context, ignoring his numerous attacks and hateful policies against Muslims and other minorities. Now your trying to say that because he attacked white people who were his political rivals is proof that he is not racist?? Give me a ******* break!

He treated Khan, a political operative of the left, the same way he treated other political enemies.


Regardless of skin color, race, age, sex, height. ect ect ect.


That you see that as evidence of racism is YOU being the one in denial.

More equine excrement...Don't try to tell me that I'm in denial. I have to wonder about anyone who defends this piece of shit.....what is in your heart

Opinion | Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List

Minorities As Uppity and Ungrateful
Donald Trump has been obsessed with race for the entire time he has been a public figure. He had a history of making racist comments as a New York real-estate developer in the 1970s and ‘80s. More recently, his political rise was built on promulgating the lie that the nation’s first black president was born in Kenya. He then launched his campaign with a speech describing Mexicans as rapists.

T

he media often falls back on euphemisms when describing Trump’s comments about race: racially loaded, racially charged, racially tinged, racially sensitive. And Trump himself has claimed that he is “the least racist person.” But here’s the truth: Donald Trump is a racist. He talks about and treats people differently based on their race. He has done so for years, and he is still doing so....

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal POsts.



Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal Posts.


Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

 

[Slyhunter]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

 

[Pogo]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

Oops --- no linky-linky?

Well just so you understand, I don't know what you're even talking about ---- did he specify which people or what? Because I know nothing of who "very fine people" specifically specified.

Guess you lie.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Oh please! False equivalency- horseshit logical fallacy . The field was all white save for the perennial token black who is an idiot in his own right. Yes Trump was relentless and merciless on all of them . That proves and disproves nothing.

Your words.


"Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "

As YOU stated, he was just as "relentless and merciless" with his white enemies as he was with the minorities ones.


So, while that's not a comprehensive list of him treating white people as rough, if not worse than he was with Khan, it certainly makes that case that his treatment of Khan was not evidence of racism.


Which shitcans the number one example from your list.


Page 42 and counting and none of you libs can meet the OP challenge.

You are hopelessly in denial, or playing a sick game. You're insisting on focusing on the Khan incident out of context, ignoring his numerous attacks and hateful policies against Muslims and other minorities. Now your trying to say that because he attacked white people who were his political rivals is proof that he is not racist?? Give me a ******* break!

He treated Khan, a political operative of the left, the same way he treated other political enemies.


Regardless of skin color, race, age, sex, height. ect ect ect.


That you see that as evidence of racism is YOU being the one in denial.

More equine excrement...Don't try to tell me that I'm in denial. I have to wonder about anyone who defends this piece of shit.....what is in your heart

Opinion | Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List

Minorities As Uppity and Ungrateful
Donald Trump has been obsessed with race for the entire time he has been a public figure. He had a history of making racist comments as a New York real-estate developer in the 1970s and ‘80s. More recently, his political rise was built on promulgating the lie that the nation’s first black president was born in Kenya. He then launched his campaign with a speech describing Mexicans as rapists.

T

he media often falls back on euphemisms when describing Trump’s comments about race: racially loaded, racially charged, racially tinged, racially sensitive. And Trump himself has claimed that he is “the least racist person.” But here’s the truth: Donald Trump is a racist. He talks about and treats people differently based on their race. He has done so for years, and he is still doing so....

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal POsts.



Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal Posts.


Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

43 pages now and it's apparent that no amount of evidence of his racism will jolt you out of your delusional stupor, if that is, in fact, what we're dealing with here. More likely, you know what he is, but don't have the integrity to admit it. That makes you an apapologist for a racist and therefore no better.

The fact that he has, on occasion, had harsh words for non minorities-mainly political opponents- does not, in any way, negate the pattern of rhetoric, and behavior leveled at minorities over many years. The end.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

You lie! He said "there were good people on all sides" To him the white nationalists are "good people"

 

[Snouter]

The Donald helped integrate Palm Beach and he got an award from Jessie "I Have a Scheme" Jackson for helping Negroes. The "racism" smear was devised by the Swamp and parroted by morons who hate ******.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The Donald helped integrate Palm Beach and he got an award from Jessie "I Have a Scheme" Jackson for helping Negroes. The "racism" smear was devised by the Swamp and parroted by morons who hate ******.

Rev. Jesse Jackson speaks out against Trump's 's***hole' comments

 

[Slyhunter]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

You lie! He said "there were good people on all sides" To him the white nationalists are "good people"

On all sides of the argument going on at the time. The argument going on at the time was whether or not to keep the confederate statues.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

You lie! He said "there were good people on all sides" To him the white nationalists are "good people"

On all sides of the argument going on at the time. The argument going on at the time was whether or not to keep the confederate statues.

Actually, as a liberal I say keep them all in museums along with those dedicated to Columbus and any historical figures who were slave owners or who slaughtered native Americans. Fair??

 

[Correll]

Your words.


"Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "

As YOU stated, he was just as "relentless and merciless" with his white enemies as he was with the minorities ones.


So, while that's not a comprehensive list of him treating white people as rough, if not worse than he was with Khan, it certainly makes that case that his treatment of Khan was not evidence of racism.


Which shitcans the number one example from your list.


Page 42 and counting and none of you libs can meet the OP challenge.

You are hopelessly in denial, or playing a sick game. You're insisting on focusing on the Khan incident out of context, ignoring his numerous attacks and hateful policies against Muslims and other minorities. Now your trying to say that because he attacked white people who were his political rivals is proof that he is not racist?? Give me a ******* break!

He treated Khan, a political operative of the left, the same way he treated other political enemies.


Regardless of skin color, race, age, sex, height. ect ect ect.


That you see that as evidence of racism is YOU being the one in denial.

More equine excrement...Don't try to tell me that I'm in denial. I have to wonder about anyone who defends this piece of shit.....what is in your heart

Opinion | Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List

Minorities As Uppity and Ungrateful
Donald Trump has been obsessed with race for the entire time he has been a public figure. He had a history of making racist comments as a New York real-estate developer in the 1970s and ‘80s. More recently, his political rise was built on promulgating the lie that the nation’s first black president was born in Kenya. He then launched his campaign with a speech describing Mexicans as rapists.

T

he media often falls back on euphemisms when describing Trump’s comments about race: racially loaded, racially charged, racially tinged, racially sensitive. And Trump himself has claimed that he is “the least racist person.” But here’s the truth: Donald Trump is a racist. He talks about and treats people differently based on their race. He has done so for years, and he is still doing so....

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal POsts.



Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal Posts.


Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

43 pages now and it's apparent that no amount of evidence of his racism will jolt you out of your delusional stupor, if that is, in fact, what we're dealing with here. More likely, you know what he is, but don't have the integrity to admit it. That makes you an apapologist for a racist and therefore no better.

The fact that he has, on occasion, had harsh words for non minorities-mainly political opponents- does not, in any way, negate the pattern of rhetoric, and behavior leveled at minorities over many years. The end.

YOu challenged me to show that President Trump had had "petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


Because you, for some odd reason, had convinced yourself that that was something he did with minorities and that was thus evidence of him treating minorities differently and worse.


That was a very reasonable level of proof you requested.


But then, I did it.

And you started moving the goal posts and disagreeing with your own standard of proof.



Even more than the refutation of your link's number one point,


your irrational response to that point being refuted, shows that the Left's commitment to the idea of Trump being "Racist"


is completely irrational and not based on anything that Trump actually does.


This is really time for you to consider that you are being a bit crazy here.


And reexamine your assumptions.

 

[Slyhunter]

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

You lie! He said "there were good people on all sides" To him the white nationalists are "good people"

On all sides of the argument going on at the time. The argument going on at the time was whether or not to keep the confederate statues.

Actually, as a liberal I say keep them all in museums along with those dedicated to Columbus and any historical figures who were slave owners or who slaughtered native Americans. Fair??

This isn't something I care about. Let the people decide in each State and community how they'll do things.
I was only concerned with the misunderstanding purposeful or not of Trumps words.

 

[otto105]

Well, well today the orange administration changed the Consumer Protection Agency in one big racist way. He took enforcement of the agency to police financial institutions charging more from minority consumers over white ones and did away with it.


So the question is, why?

 

[Correll]

Well, well today the orange administration changed the Consumer Protection Agency in one big racist way. He took enforcement of the agency to police financial institutions charging more from minority consumers over white ones.


So the question is, why?

What? And link.

 

[otto105]

Well, well today the orange administration changed the Consumer Protection Agency in one big racist way. He took enforcement of the agency to police financial institutions charging more from minority consumers over white ones.


So the question is, why?

What? And link.

This has to be on white man’s Google.


Trump administration strips consumer watchdog office of enforcement powers in lending discrimination cases

 

[Pogo]

How does one know that trump is a racist?

He tells you that he is the least racist person that you have ever met.

He also says he 'never went bankrupt', that he never supported the Iraq war, that "thousands of people were dancing on rooftops", and that "Trump Steaks" still exist.

At least he's consistent.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah But he MEANT it when he said there were good people who are White Supremacists, so he CAN tell the truth sometimes.

He said there were good people fighting for the right to keep the Confederate statues and flags where they were.
You lie.

You lie! He said "there were good people on all sides" To him the white nationalists are "good people"

On all sides of the argument going on at the time. The argument going on at the time was whether or not to keep the confederate statues.

And that had already been decided by the city (Charlottesville), just as it had been decided by the cities of New Orleans, Birmingham, Baltimore, Little Rock, Los Angeles, Wichita, Tampa, Jackson, Kansas City, New York, Dallas and a host of other places, on the question of what to do with their own property, which was never the business of all these interlopers from out of town.

ALL of these artifacts having been put up by the Lost Cause Movement through the UDC on prominent public land serving as propaganda transmitters for that Lost Cause and its ethos of white supremacy.

​

So in short when the James Fieldses and the David Dukes and the Tiki Torchers came to descend on Charlottesville they were meddling in the affairs of a town that were none of their damned business. And when Rump went on his ignorant tirade about Jefferson and Washington he demonstrated only the abject depth of his own ignorance about his own country's history.

​

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You are hopelessly in denial, or playing a sick game. You're insisting on focusing on the Khan incident out of context, ignoring his numerous attacks and hateful policies against Muslims and other minorities. Now your trying to say that because he attacked white people who were his political rivals is proof that he is not racist?? Give me a ******* break!

He treated Khan, a political operative of the left, the same way he treated other political enemies.


Regardless of skin color, race, age, sex, height. ect ect ect.


That you see that as evidence of racism is YOU being the one in denial.

More equine excrement...Don't try to tell me that I'm in denial. I have to wonder about anyone who defends this piece of shit.....what is in your heart

Opinion | Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List

Minorities As Uppity and Ungrateful
Donald Trump has been obsessed with race for the entire time he has been a public figure. He had a history of making racist comments as a New York real-estate developer in the 1970s and ‘80s. More recently, his political rise was built on promulgating the lie that the nation’s first black president was born in Kenya. He then launched his campaign with a speech describing Mexicans as rapists.

T

he media often falls back on euphemisms when describing Trump’s comments about race: racially loaded, racially charged, racially tinged, racially sensitive. And Trump himself has claimed that he is “the least racist person.” But here’s the truth: Donald Trump is a racist. He talks about and treats people differently based on their race. He has done so for years, and he is still doing so....

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal POsts.



Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal Posts.


Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

43 pages now and it's apparent that no amount of evidence of his racism will jolt you out of your delusional stupor, if that is, in fact, what we're dealing with here. More likely, you know what he is, but don't have the integrity to admit it. That makes you an apapologist for a racist and therefore no better.

The fact that he has, on occasion, had harsh words for non minorities-mainly political opponents- does not, in any way, negate the pattern of rhetoric, and behavior leveled at minorities over many years. The end.

YOu challenged me to show that President Trump had had "petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


Because you, for some odd reason, had convinced yourself that that was something he did with minorities and that was thus evidence of him treating minorities differently and worse.


That was a very reasonable level of proof you requested.


But then, I did it.

And you started moving the goal posts and disagreeing with your own standard of proof.



Even more than the refutation of your link's number one point,


your irrational response to that point being refuted, shows that the Left's commitment to the idea of Trump being "Racist"


is completely irrational and not based on anything that Trump actually does.


This is really time for you to consider that you are being a bit crazy here.


And reexamine your assumptions.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You are hopelessly in denial, or playing a sick game. You're insisting on focusing on the Khan incident out of context, ignoring his numerous attacks and hateful policies against Muslims and other minorities. Now your trying to say that because he attacked white people who were his political rivals is proof that he is not racist?? Give me a ******* break!

He treated Khan, a political operative of the left, the same way he treated other political enemies.


Regardless of skin color, race, age, sex, height. ect ect ect.


That you see that as evidence of racism is YOU being the one in denial.

More equine excrement...Don't try to tell me that I'm in denial. I have to wonder about anyone who defends this piece of shit.....what is in your heart

Opinion | Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List

Minorities As Uppity and Ungrateful
Donald Trump has been obsessed with race for the entire time he has been a public figure. He had a history of making racist comments as a New York real-estate developer in the 1970s and ‘80s. More recently, his political rise was built on promulgating the lie that the nation’s first black president was born in Kenya. He then launched his campaign with a speech describing Mexicans as rapists.

T

he media often falls back on euphemisms when describing Trump’s comments about race: racially loaded, racially charged, racially tinged, racially sensitive. And Trump himself has claimed that he is “the least racist person.” But here’s the truth: Donald Trump is a racist. He talks about and treats people differently based on their race. He has done so for years, and he is still doing so....

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal POsts.



Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

A standard lib response when their point is utterly refuted,


instead of admitting that their point was bullshit, they just throw up more bullshit.



You claimed he treated Khan bad based on race.


You demanded to "Let me ask you, how many times has Trump engaged in these petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


When I gave you a huge example, ie the Republican Primaries,



you admitted that he was "relentless and merciless" with them, but then started talking about how we have to look at the Khan incident "in context".


That was the Logical Fallacy of Moving the Goal Posts.


Now, you are trying to change the subject, without admitting that your first point was refuted.


I will be happy to move on to discuss your other points, once we resolve this one.


Because otherwise you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Shotgun Argument,


which is a form of lying.


And you finish by claiming that he treats people differently based on race, but the first example off you list, has already been disproved.


That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.


Page 42 and counting and no lib can meet the challenge of the op.

43 pages now and it's apparent that no amount of evidence of his racism will jolt you out of your delusional stupor, if that is, in fact, what we're dealing with here. More likely, you know what he is, but don't have the integrity to admit it. That makes you an apapologist for a racist and therefore no better.

The fact that he has, on occasion, had harsh words for non minorities-mainly political opponents- does not, in any way, negate the pattern of rhetoric, and behavior leveled at minorities over many years. The end.

YOu challenged me to show that President Trump had had "petty feuds with people who are not a racial, ethnic or religious minority? "


Because you, for some odd reason, had convinced yourself that that was something he did with minorities and that was thus evidence of him treating minorities differently and worse.


That was a very reasonable level of proof you requested.


But then, I did it.

And you started moving the goal posts and disagreeing with your own standard of proof.



Even more than the refutation of your link's number one point,


your irrational response to that point being refuted, shows that the Left's commitment to the idea of Trump being "Racist"


is completely irrational and not based on anything that Trump actually does.


This is really time for you to consider that you are being a bit crazy here.


And reexamine your assumptions.

Trump administration strips consumer watchdog office of enforcement powers in lending discrimination cases

The Trump administration has stripped enforcement powers from a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unit responsible for pursuing discrimination cases, part of a broader effort to reshape an agency it criticized as acting too aggressively.

The move to sharply restrict the responsibilities of the Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity comes about two months after President Trump installed his budget chief, Mick Mulvaney, at the head of the bureau. The office previously used its powers to force payouts in several prominent cases, including settlements from lenders it alleged had systematically charged minorities higher interest rates than they had for whites.