Trump- NABJ

[el midgetron]

Even more amusing shit from maga is their total failure to comprehend that Trump went to the black journalists to tout, and grow, his supposed support from black voters. And he shit himself with racist tropes.

How? Pointing out that Kamala identifies as Indian?

Another manufacturerd outrage.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The political left is fully invested in identity politics. You don’t get to categorize people based on the color of their skin and talk about “white privilege”, “white rage”, “white fragility” , and “whiteness” all of which a negative and insulting. But then turn around a faint like a drama queen because Trump remembers Kamala capitalizing on her Indian identity.

Trump never insulted her race. He question how she identifies.

Pointing out their stupidity and lies is the new racism

 

[PredFan]

You'd never see Horizontal Harris, AKA Heals Up Harris, going on a conservative show and taking questions. Trump isn't afraid of facing anyone. Like a true leader should be.

 

[el midgetron]

Pointing out their stupidity and lies is the new racism

That’s the entire platform of the political left. They attack someone based on the color or gender because they disagree with liberalism. If the person disagreeing is white, they call them a racist. If the person disagreeing is black, call them an Uncle Tom. If they are straight, call them a homophobe.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That’s the entire platform of the political left. They attack someone based on the color or gender because they disagree with liberalism. If the person disagreeing is white, they call them a racist. If the person disagreeing is black, call them an Uncle Tom. If they are straight, call them a homophobe.

They they try to gaslight and think they're effective

 

[Robert W]

--------------------------------------------------

"Porch monkeys'??

When MAGAs ain't wallowing in their misogyny.......they will go full-on racist.

Such posts give the GOP and conservatives a bad name. In short, posts like above make 'em all look bad. It is a personality tic that too many in the MAGA movement share and condone.

IMHO

The female in blue immediately picked a fight with Trump. Why did she talk that way?

ABC held up the party for a very long time. Trump would be made of magic clay to not be annoyed.

 

[Robert W]

To show his racist base that he won't pander to blacks. But if he tries this with Harris, he's toast.

Blacks attacked Trump and he did a fine job. He talked about them as they talked about him.

 

[Chillicothe]

'The female in blue immediately picked a fight with Trump. Why did she talk that way?"

The journalist in blue asked legitimate relevant questions seeking context from the fired President on his controversial and denigrating remarks about blacks, specifically, black women.
She, and the others later, rightfully asked him to explain.

And in that venue, speaking to black journalists..... he absolutely needed to explain the remarks.
Instead, he whiffed. Got defensive and pouty in a nano-second.

A less self-centered, a more capable and adroit individual would have been able to rationally explain why he said what he said.

Trump couldn't. Trump didn't.
And we all saw it.

---------------------------

ABC held up the party for a very long time. Trump would be made of magic clay to not be annoyed.

Ummm, no the 'party' got delayed because Trump's team was informed that he would be fact-checked in real time by the Poynter Institute and Politifacts. They didn't want that and they stalled.
Too, it was his campaign-handlers who pulled the plug 30-minutes early. Likely because they saw he was cratering.

-------------------------------------------------------

Blacks attacked Trump and he did a fine job.

There was no 'attack'. That is a silly partisan fantasy
The "blacks".....vetted, experienced, and accomplished journalists.....asked Don Trump to explain his past denigrating remarks about black people, about black journalists. And it was rightful and proper that they did so.

But he failed his opportunity. He whiffed. And did so in a manner that revealed again his racist leanings. Too, neither he nor his staffers did their homework. They should have ....he should have .....been able to adequately explain his denigrating and racist remarks. He and they failed. And we all saw it real-tiime.

IMHO

 

[Robert W]

The journalist in blue asked legitimate relevant questions seeking context from the fired President on his controversial and denigrating remarks about blacks, specifically, black women.
She, and the others later, rightfully asked him to explain.

And in that venue, speaking to black journalists..... he absolutely needed to explain the remarks.
Instead, he whiffed. Got defensive and pouty in a nano-second.

A less self-centered, a more capable and adroit individual would have been able to rationally explain why he said what he said.

Trump couldn't. Trump didn't.
And we all saw it.

---------------------------

Ummm, no the 'party' got delayed because Trump's team was informed that he would be fact-checked in real time by the Poynter Institute and Politifacts. They didn't want that and they stalled.
Too, it was his campaign-handlers who pulled the plug 30-minutes early. Likely because they saw he was cratering.

-------------------------------------------------------



There was no 'attack'. That is a silly partisan fantasy
The "blacks".....vetted, experienced, and accomplished journalists.....asked Don Trump to explain his past denigrating remarks about black people, about black journalists. And it was rightful and proper that they did so.

But he failed his opportunity. He whiffed. And did so in a manner that revealed again his racist leanings. Too, neither he nor his staffers did their homework. They should have ....he should have .....been able to adequately explain his denigrating and racist remarks. He and they failed. And we all saw it real-tiime.

IMHO

I notice you did not support a thing you said. I listened to the first part again where Trump was insulted by her insults. Trump denounced what she said. The truth sets Trump free/

 

[Chillicothe]

"I notice you did not support a thing you said."

Support?
Like this?

Scott asked, “I want to start by addressing the elephant in the room, sir. A lot of people did not think it was appropriate for you to be here today. You have pushed false claims about some of your rivals, from Nikki Haley to former President Barack Obama,

• saying that they were not born in the United States, which is not true.
  
  
  
• You have told four congresswomen of color who were American citizens to go back to where they came from.
  
  
• You have used words like ‘animal’ and ‘rabid’ to describe Black district attorneys.
• 
  
• You've attacked Black journalists, calling them a loser, saying the questions that they ask are, quote, stupid and racist.
  
• You've had dinner with a white supremacist at your Mar-a-Lago resort.

So my question, sir, now that you are asking Black supporters to vote for you: Why should Black voters trust you after you have used language like that?”
-------------------------------------------------------------

The seasoned and accomplished journalist, Rachel Scott, the senior congressional correspondent for ABC asked a direct and pertinent question. "Why should they trust......"

And she helpfully offered the context to the interviewee on why she was asking that question.

 

[Robert W]

So my question, sir, now that you are asking Black supporters to vote for you: Why should Black voters trust you after you have used language like that?”

Blacks pay Trump little attention if Democrats polls are trusted. She did not show proof to back up her claims. Nobody will care if you vote for Harris. At least I don't care.

 

[Chillicothe]

"She did not show proof to back up her claims."

------------------------------------------------

?????

And "proof" was needed?
Evidence offered?
You need Video?

As if Trump didn't dine with that racist, Nick Fuentes in Mar A Lago?
As if Trump didn't call black prosecutors animals?
As if Trump didn't tell the American born Congresswomen to go back where they came from?

You seem, good poster Bob, to be in a state of denial about Trump's controversial statements and behaviors. Too, your denial of asking to square his statements and actions with his belief the black population should trust him is not a legitimate journalistic query?


"So my question, sir, now that you are asking Black supporters to vote for you: Why should Black voters trust you after you have used language like that?”

 

[Lakhota]

 

[el midgetron]

Liberals are fake ass snakes.

 

[Plagerist]

Donald Trump is being interviewed by the NABJ. This is the first time he has done it, and given how he's doing, it will be the last. If anyone still believes that Trump will get huge black support after this is mistaken.

WATCH: Trump speaks at National Association of Black Journalists conference in Chicago

Donald Trump falsely suggested Kamala Harris had misled voters about her race as the former president appeared before the National Association of Black Journalists in Chicago Wednesday in an interview that quickly turned hostile.

www.pbs.org

wut is najb?

 

[conserveguy877]

I loved it when the crowd laughed when he called out abc.

 

[Chillicothe]

Let us re-visit that peculiar assertion by BobW up in post #131, where he stated:

"She did not show proof to back up her claims."

Bob is, of course, referencing Scott of ABC who queried DonTrump on why black folks should trust him in light of his past statements and behaviors.

Another poster, (Bulldog) in another thread offered an articulate view that can be used here to address poor Bob's confusion. (I underlined for emphasis)
Bulldog noted:

"Donald trump took offense at the first question asked of him at the National Association of Black Journalists. ABC news Rachel Scott qualified her question with previously well documented examples of Trump’s remarks and asked:

“sir, now that you were asking black supporters to vote for you, why should black voters trust you after you have used language like that?”

My question (Bulldog's question) for trump supporters: -Was asking why black voters should trust him an offensive question, or do you think the qualifying remarks (well documented) were unfair or rude? Trump wants to be president. He should be able to respond to hard questions in a mature and calm manner."
--------------------------------------------
Indeed, poster Bulldog is deadsolid on-point: Scott qualified her query by offering context.

Don Trump could have ----should have ----offered his own context in a rationale explanation for engaging in the offensive behavior.
He didn't.
He pouted and whined and snowflaked.

I saw it. You saw it. Everybody saw it.

 

[Robert W]

“sir, now that you were asking black supporters to vote for you, why should black voters trust you after you have used language like that?”

She blew a lot of time making things up to paint Trump as bad for blacks. Trump told her he had been very good for blacks as president. Many Blacks trust Trump totally.

 

[sealybobo]

Donald Trump is being interviewed by the NABJ. This is the first time he has done it, and given how he's doing, it will be the last. If anyone still believes that Trump will get huge black support after this is mistaken.

WATCH: Trump speaks at National Association of Black Journalists conference in Chicago

Donald Trump falsely suggested Kamala Harris had misled voters about her race as the former president appeared before the National Association of Black Journalists in Chicago Wednesday in an interview that quickly turned hostile.

www.pbs.org

But this attack line against Harris wasn’t a slip of the tongue or a product of an undisciplined politician. Questioning the identity of Black politicians is what made Trump into a Republican darling, and later the party’s standard-bearer.
“There are parallels between this and his attacks on Barack Obama,” said Donald Collins, a critical race, gender and culture studies professor at American University. “It’s about going after voters who have problems with [candidates’] identities.”

During his interview with three prominent Black women journalists Trump relied on his same old talking points, called Scott “rude” and “nasty” for daring to ask him about his past comments.

So why is Trump acting like Harris’ identity is confusing or something she’s lying about?
“What Trump is attempting to say is, ‘She doesn’t meet your litmus test for being truly Black,’” Collins said.

The question of who is Black has ties to America’s long history of racism, from slavery to segregation.

because Harris is mixed-race, highly educated and a woman, he can claim she’s not really Black.”

Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), said Trump was right to question Harris’ race.
“Look, all he said is that Kamala Harris is a chameleon,” Vance told CNN. “She is everything to everybody, and she pretends to be somebody different depending on which audience she is in front of. I think it’s totally reasonable for the president to call that out, and that’s all he did.”
Vance is married to an Indian woman and has biracial children.

It’s unclear if the average voter has an appetite for such naked racism. But Trump isn’t pivoting to birtherism 2.0 because he believes it will sway swing voters. He’s being who he has always been, which won him a strong GOP base — and the White House.

 

[Chillicothe]

She blew a lot of time making things up

Ummm, nope, Bob...nope.
She didn't hafta 'make things up'.
Trump did or said what she offered as support for and context to the query she made to Trump.
I'm mildly surprised that you didn't recognize those incidents she used for support.

Her question was apt, and necessary.

To wit:

“Sir, now that you were asking black supporters to vote for you, why should black voters trust you after you have used language like that?”