Trump's Charlottesville Press Conference 6
[6]
Ok, here's the core of the thing:TRUMP: OK, what about the alt-left that came charging them (ph)? Excuse me. What about the alt-left that came charging at the – as you say, the alt-right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?
QUESTION: Mr. Trump...
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Let me ask you this. What about the fact they came charging – that they came charging with clubs in their hands, swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do.
QUESTION: Sir...
TRUMP: As far as I'm concerned, that was a horrible, horrible day.
Wait a minute, I'm not finished.
(CROSSTALK)
I'm not finished, fake news. That was a horrible day...
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
TRUMP: I will tell you something. I watched those very closely, much more closely than you people watched it. And you have – you had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent, and nobody wants to say that, but I'll say it right now. You had a group – you had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit, and they were very, very violent.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Go ahead.
QUESTION: Do you think that the – what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?
TRUMP: Those people – all of those people – excuse me. I've condemned neo-Nazis. I've condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were White Supremacists, by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.
So – excuse me. And you take a look at some of the groups and you see – and you'd know it if you were honest reporters, which in many cases you're not, but many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.
So this week it's Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson's coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?
You know, you all – you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop? But they were there to protest – excuse me. You take a look, the night before, they were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.
[a]
When I re-read this, I came to think that something really bad/unfortunate happens here between the last chunk and this one: the question "What is the alt-right?" gets dropped. I think it was weird (and maybe even an expression of disrespect) to ask the POTUS to define the term in the middle of a press conference--it was probably meant to embarrass him by asking him a question almost nobody knows the answer to. But I do think that it would have been good to have at least gotten out on the table the point that almost nobody seems to know what it is.
[b]
Still, Trump manages to get a really, really important point out on the table: a segment of the American left--the "alt-left" in his terminology--has become extremely violent, and was responsible for part of the violence in Charlottesville. This really is a crucial point. It transcends even the terrible events in C'ville. It's a big problem, it's not addressed with sufficient seriousness by the media, and it seems to be not-entirely-disapproved of by the more mainstream left. The violent left made a bad situation worse in C'ville.
[c]
Question: "Do you think that the...alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?"
A good question. We need clarification on that.
Trump then reiterates his condemnation of Neo-Nazis... (Strange days indeed when this is required, eh?)
He then asserts that not everyone there was a white supremacist...and that's huge. And, though this isn't getting as much attention as some of the crazy points people are making, this is where I think Trump screws up bad. I didn't realize how bad this was when I watched, nor when I first read the transcript. I'd been informed that there were a lot of straight-up conservatives at the rally, and that the racists and white nationalists etc. were a fringe that the core participants had tried to keep out. And that many people were there hoping to peacefully protest the removal of the Lee statue. So far as I can now tell, that's all wrong. I've seen no evidence that there was a core or even a fringe of non-racists there. That's an embarrassing enough mistake when I make it...it's tragic when the President of the United States makes it. It doesn't change the fact that they had a right to protest...bad people have rights, too. But it's a really terrible mistake to make, and it significantly changes my judgment about Trump's comments. You just can't make that kind of mistake. You just can't make it. It doesn't alter the fact that he's just said that the racists suck...he's merely wrong about there being non-racists about... But really, in this context, under these conditions, about this topic...Jesus...
[Aaaand...it turns out that Trump was actually right about this.]
[d]
This week Lee, next week Washington...true, again. Everybody should see this one coming.
So, despite containing a crucially important truth, this is the segment in which things spin out, I'm afraid... He did not say that the two sides were morally equivalent, and he did not defend white supremacists...but he screwed up bigly.
posted by Winston Smith at
10:02 AM
3 Comments:
I've been saying all along (ie since my first comment on your 'anti-Trump hysteria' post on Tuesday) that one of Trump's central falsehoods here was his claim that 'you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists'.
But it's much worse than that. Even if Trump had been right that 'you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists', he would still have been culpably wrong to say that 'you...had people [in that group] that were very fine people. As some commentator said yesterday, even if you're not a white supremacist, but you find yourself in a march with people carrying swastikas and chanting things like 'Jews will not replace us', and you don't get the hell out of there immediately -- then you're not a very fine person.
You mentioned that if uncharitable interpretations are given free rein and moral authority then we're f*cked. But over-charitable interpretations of Trump are often uncharitable interpretations of commentators. In that connection, why do you say that what Trump said about there being 'many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists' was a 'mistake'? Did anyone else make such a mistake? Do you think his claim that millions of illegal immigrants voted illegally in the election is a mistake? What about the claim, which he pounded away at for years, that Obama wasn't born in the US? Honest mistake? That he signed more bills in his first six months than any president ever? That Obamacare is imploding, dead, gone? That he presided over the all-time biggest increase in the stock market? That 'hundreds of individuals from other countries have been charged with terrorism-related offenses in the United States'? That Flynn was approved by the Obama administration at the highest level of security clearance? That Obama wiretapped him? That nobody's had more Time Magazine covers? That the NSA and FBI told Congress that Russia did not influence electoral process?
As you know, I could go on a long time. The guy lies nearly every time he opens his mouth. But he claims to have researched the Charlottesville events really carefully and then comes out with a blatant falsehood that just happens to appeal to his base and inflame everyone else, and the default assumption is that it's an honest mistake?
Right. And media hysteria is making Trump look good by comparison.
You need to take a deep breath, man.
You're making mistakes that you know better than to make.
None of these arguments against Trump is relevant to anything I've said.
Keep your eye on the ball.
My main point:
What Trump said in the Monday press conference was almost entirely true.
My secondary point:
The response to what Trump said in the Monday press conference, especially by the left and the press, has been hysterical and importantly inaccurate.
My tertiary point:
I actually thought that Trump did alright in his Saturday and Monday statements. (This is a little more opinion-y).
You want to broaden the question to discuss Trump's Presidential obligations and his failures to live up to them. And I acknowledge that that's an important issue--it's a *different* issue, but it's an important one.
But however important it is, it doesn't make questions about truth and falsehood irrelevant. The idea that such issues just evaporate in the face of more pressing, more practical questions about politics and culture is, IMO, one of the most important mistakes of our time. (I'd be surprised if you disagreed a lot with that.)
These points are especially relevant in light of the nature of most of the criticisms of Trump--that he said (literally *said*) that there was a moral equivalence between the protesters and counter-protesters...that he defended white supremacism. These things are false. By pointing this out, I in no way suggest that there aren't other errors he made. But he DID NOT SAY the things he's being accused of saying.
You want to criticize the sonofabitch, be my guest. But enough with the bullshit. If he's so terrible, then it shouldn't be necessary to make shit up about what he said. As I said in the lost comment, I agree with a lot of what you say above--and if everybody were making those criticisms, that'd be fine. I'm merely pointing out that he did not say what he's being accused of.
But now you're completely off-target, shotgunning criticisms of Trump. They have nothing to do with this issue. You seem to be arguing with some theoretical person who thinks Trump is just dandy .
And, as for my claim that stuff like Rothkopf's (not: the media in particular) making Trump look good by comparison: it seems to me that my claim is pretty clearly directed at Trump's press conference comments about C'ville. All of Trump's other idiocy isn't what's at issue. I don't see how you could read me as suggesting that Trump's opponents' errors in this case outweigh all of Trump's other errors.
And, as for practical effects, and stoking fear in our countrymen who are black, Jewish, etc.: in this case, it's not Trump that's mostly responsible. It's his critics who are. They are falsely saying that Trump defended white supremacists, and even saying that he's one of them. Now that is, in fact, a goddamn frightening prospect. But it's false and unjustified. As is so often the case, the media is acting as a terrorist force multiplier.
And, IMO, people are so afraid that someone might think that they're insufficiently anti-Nazi or anti-Klan that everybody is rushing to say more and more outrageous, hysterical things. Thus putting us into a kind of hysteria spiral.
We have some things to worry about. Even if someone not interested in truth and falsehood per se might want to think twice before turning a serious problem into a hysteria-producing catastrophe.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home