DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump Calls Some Unauthorized Immigrants ‘Animals’ in Rant

This headline is exactly what infuriates me about places like the New York Times and Washington Post. They purposefully take things out of context for headlines, knowing damn well 1/10th of the people who see these headlines will look into it.

Calling MS-13 gang members animals is hardly a stretch. Not Presidential, sure I can concede that, lumping MS-13 gang members and "unauthorized immigrants" is blatantly and purposefully misleading. Had he lumped them together as they have here they would call him a racist for labeling all immigrants as gang members exactly like they ALREADY DID during the election.





https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/us/po...smid=tw-nytimes

its once again the epitome of "fake news"

I agree that the title should reflect the content.
But it's only 'fake news' if the details are incorrect or made up.

For the record, I didn't bother reading the article.
It's yet another rehash of the same kind of stuff he says all the time.

Would you consider it fake news if it's willfully misleading?

It's a fairly obvious dogwhistle.

Visit the Stormfront or Breitbart message board, and you'll see the same trope in 5 minutes.

Trump has a pretty lengthy history of this. Remember in 2002 when he didn't "believe in" DNA and The Central Park 5 were "subhuman, a step above animal"?

To my knowledge he's never referred to a white person as an animal.

That said, I don't really see the point in parsing the guy's statements when his actual racism is on display in policy.

It's kind of like the "s-hole countries, I like Finland" comments- what's the point of parsing through an elderly racist man's train-of-thought blathering?

It does drive me nuts when things have to get so misleading.

I have absolutely no use for Gang Members. Especially those here Illegally. They offer nothing to this country. No benefit at all.

Many of these members are Animals.


I don't like our President for various reasons. I'd never vote for him, and I think he's all sorts of words. But in this case, I have no problem with what he said. I have absolutely no use for Undocumented Gang Members. None. If you want to come to this country and live here without being a US Citizen, you ought to be on your best behavior.

Are you too biased or too oblivious to right facing "places" doing the same? Those of us in the middle are infuriated by both sides doing that crap.

Fake news and Fake outrage they,re such a joke as most libs are.

The guy who said last week that he thought Obama may have been born in Africa is here to discuss "Fake news and Fake outrage".

Yes, this title is terrible but both sides do it. This reflects the downward spiral that is credible journalism. It's sad and ridiculous.

Agreed.

It really delegitimizes arguments and makes anything you hear questionable

Here's a pretty old example of this dogwhistle in action:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-new...-has-gang-ties/

The U.S. government must stop asserting without evidence that a Mexican man it’s trying to deport has gang ties, a federal judge in Seattle ruled Tuesday.

Pending a final ruling in the man’s case, U.S. District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez also forbid U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services from revoking Daniel Ramirez Medina’s work authorization or his enrollment in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

DACA was launched under former President Barack Obama to allow those brought to the country illegally as children to remain for work or study.

Ramirez, 25, came to the U.S. at age 10. He drew international attention when the government revoked his DACA status early last year and placed him in deportation proceedings, even though he has no criminal record and three times passed background checks to participate in the program.

His arrest signaled an erosion of the program’s protections under President Donald Trump, and courts have since blocked the administration’s efforts to end it.

In response to one of those rulings, authorities in April restored Ramirez’s DACA status — only to immediately notify him that they planned to revoke it again, effective Tuesday. The reason, they said, was his gang ties — allegations of which an immigration judge had already determined to be unfounded.

That bothered Martinez.

“Most troubling to the court, is the continued assertion that Mr. Ramirez is gang-affiliated, despite providing no evidence,” the judge wrote. “For these reasons, the court finds that defendants’ continued assertion that plaintiff is a gang member or gang-affiliated is arbitrary and capricious.”

He ordered the government to cease “asserting, adopting, or relying in any proceedings on any statement or record made as of this date purporting to allege or establish that Mr. Ramirez is a gang member, gang affiliated, or a threat to public safety.”

Citizenship and Immigration Services did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

Nathaniel Bach, one of Ramirez’s attorneys, said the ruling means the government has to stop lying about his client and continue to grant him DACA status — both of which greatly improve his chances of remaining in the country.

Ramirez was taken into custody at a Des Moines home when agents went to arrest his father, a previously deported felon. Agents insisted he had a gang tattoo — in reality, it merely had the name of his hometown in Mexico — and that he admitted having gang ties, which he denies.

The government has offered no corroborating evidence of his purported gang involvement. At one hearing in immigration court, a government lawyer acknowledged having no indication that Ramirez posed a public-safety risk.

An immigration judge in January found that Ramirez did not have gang ties, but ordered him deported anyway because he was in the country illegally and lacked DACA status, since it had been revoked. Ramirez has appealed that decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals.


Martinez’s ruling has no direct effect on the immigration case, but it gives his lawyers ammunition to argue that he should not be deported, Bach said.

“We’re very grateful,” he said. “It’s an unqualified win for Daniel and the rule of law.”

Ramirez, who has a 4-year-old son who is a U.S. citizen, told The Associated Press after a hearing this month that he has been working as a field hand in California vineyards since regaining his DACA status and work authorization.

In my thinking, one should feel the same about this comment as they feel about Hillary's "Deplorables" comment..

Obviously not all Mexican immigrants deserve to be called animals, but some segment of them do.

Not all people who voted for Trump are deplorable racists, but some are.

So if you were ok with what Hillary said, then be ok with this... if you didn't like what Hillary said, then don't like this... just be consistent.

Agreed. I didn't like that comment at all. There's good republicans and bad ones. And bad democrats and good ones.

That's something I feel like liberal folks have a bigger problem accepting than conservative folks.

The same way people get with police officers. We've just become so divisive as a country. It's like this message board in that folks dig their heals in, pick a side, and ride or die with it till the end. I wish there was something that could get everyone to settle down and come together

I didn't like her comment either, she seemed to be lowering herself for some cheap applause.. and the second I heard, I knew it would become a rallying cry... and it did.


I think that might have to do with the fact that the "bad republicans" have been much more vocal and out in the spotlight as of late... so decent republicans have tried to distance themselves...

That and the fact that the president and de facto leader of the party is inarguably a "bad" one.

I think there might be at least some credit or leeway given if they'd just open up and say "yeah, he's a scumbag, but he's a useful idiot for a great deal of our purposes" rather than hedging with these parsing games.

And the same goes for the flip side with these "he said Finland" or "he said animal" games. The guy is clearly a racist who likes to dogwhistle to other racists. All this nitpicking gives credence to a notion he isn't.

I knew this was going to be said.....but look they do it too as some cop out excuse. Not once did I ever say anything of the sort. Or are you too biased or oblivious to read?

Depends.
If the title is misleading but the actual content is factual, I'll easily be able to discern that the header was provocative 'click bait.' So in that instance, not fake news.

If however, the actual content of the report was false, you bet I would.

This entire concept has been my problem with politics for quite a while.. people get so wrapped around the axle on stupid stuff that doesn't matter while really important stuff gets pushed aside...

Headline: Donald Trump farts on a crowded elevator while robbing the building

Comments: OMG, he farted on the elevator? Gross

I think it would help a great deal if Republicans who opposed Trump were more vocal. As you can see by some posters on this very board, Trump can do no wrong even when he's wrong.

The latest is lying that he didn't pay his lawyer back for the Stormy Daniels payment. It just goes on and on.

People say I'm biased and to some degree they may be right. But at least I've been impartial enough to say that Hillary and Trump were both unfit to be president and couldn't support either.

That's more than I can say for most of this board.

Consistency would not group racists with murdering drug dealers.

Yeah racism is bad and it's to be universally frowned upon and fought against, but it's not the same as murder, torture, drug dealing, racketeering, human trafficking and everything MS-13 is involved in.

Trump consistently works to blur these lines, and often tries to make it sound like his immigration initiatives are aimed at violent gang members. I'm not sure why the media should be inclined to charitably resconstruct or reframe what is obviously an elderly racist man's meandering stream-of-consciousness dogwhistles.

Ah gotcha, so they have the liberty to just assume what he means to fir their narative. Cool story.

Maybe Trump is a racist old man, I can't say he isn't, but what you're talking about is blatant partisanship from global news organizations. For people who want to scream about Russian trolls skewing an election you're sure willing to give into whatever faulty rhetoric suits your partisanship.

There is something...but it will be extremely unpleasant for everyone.

I'm afraid that this nation has become so fractured, segmented and divided that the only thing that will bring us together is another shared national tragedy- like 9/11.

So... we should all be careful of what we wish.

No, people should pay much less attention to his ramblings and his tweets and his treats and far more attention to his policies and his legislation and his executive orders....

There is a good little paperback book out there called "Behavior Never Lies"... He can say whatever he wants, it's what he's doing that is important... and if he is good at anything, it's this....

He knows that he can get the media and social media so wrapped in circles with what he SAYS, that they will lose focus on what he DOES.... He also uses this to create confusion and misdirection, he said one thing to appease his base, he proposed something else so how can we say that what he said is so bad?

I can't even stand in the middle. Joe Banner literally retweeted me today calling me...and this is a direct quote...."You are Trump of the left". Because I tweeted him noting hypocrisy in the media for the dead hamas protesters while not seeing their own hypocrisy that hamas kills innocent people regularly while they demand rights for Palestine.


If I say abortion is a personal decision I'm a snowflake, but when I say American Blacks have better lives than any black population in the entire world (not saying we can't make strides), I'm a nazi.

I agree, but I can't tell if he's smart using the media like this, or if he is just really incapable of controlling himself and it's just dumb luck that it works out in his benefit to distract.

Ive never said "Russian trolls skewed an election", maybe you're mistaking me for someone else?

And it's not faulty rhetoric. Trump seeks to punitively punish immigrants because of his petulant racism. He often tries to frame it as if what he's doing is a tactical strike on gang members. 40% of ICe deportations under Trump are non-criminals. 13% are violent criminals. A federal judge just slammed ICE for repeatedly and indiscriminately calling immigrants members of MS-13 with zero evidence.

Trump knows to invoke MS-13 because it's a topical boogeyman for the type of frightened racists that read Breitbart.

Whether or not he's talking about MS-13 when he says "animals" is a pointless debate and largely irrelevant to the fact that he's an angry racist crank for whom cruelty is the only club in his reactionary emotional bag.

But when you have a long history of being a racist imbecile prone to rambling conflation who has a long history of calling minorities "animals", don't expect a press you whine about everyday to charitably reconstruct your words to sound less racist.

All of that is fair, but will disagree on Trump being definitively racist. The proof is anecdotal to his presidency and rental properties. Maybe, probably but knowing what's in a mans heart, nah, not unless he tell you and leaves no doubt. I would add is that a lot of not racist everyday Americans think illegal immigration is a serious issue. It is definitely not an entirely race related issue that people want to make it to be.

I don't disagree, but what his administration does goes above and beyond "illegal immigration is a serious issue".

Look at the whole "we should separate the kids from their parents and house them in concentration camps on military bases" gimmick he's been fighting with his staff to implement.

That's not a reasonable address to a pertinent issue. It's punitive cruelty fueled by racism.

If one doesn't want their immigration concerns to be painted as racist, maybe avoid defending the racist crank who has become the face of the issue.

I haven't seen that but I will assume what you're saying is factual for the sake of debate. Is that a rational, well derived plan of a man who has any semblance of decorum? It is definitely not, but to call it racist is conjecture at best.

See. The thing is you're assuming that the majority of people read much more than a headline. I think that's false. Unfortunate, but false.

Even if just passing through it and you see a fake headline, you might say, "God i hate that guy!" without even reading it. The headline reinforces your feelings, even though the article might paint a far different picture.

It's all fake news.





I sure hope we can get a better solution than that.



Twitter battles with Joe Banner are so difficult because the guy is smart, and you're battling him with a limited number of characters. It's hard to get your point across with facts to support it. (I've been in a couple)

I give the guy credit though. He takes folks on, just like Chris Christie, lol.

Chris Christie used to go on Carton and Boomer and would take on all callers so long as they gave him a chance to speak instead of using their time to just go on a rant.

And I gotta give the Michelin Man some credit. He'd take on everyone

It was said because it is true. Both sides (and many other media and "media") use clickbait titles.

Yes I am aware, the biased and oblivious part is not helpful, snarky, unnecessary and does nothing to further the conversation.

I won't disagree with you on that, apologies. I may just need to take a break from the politics board for a while, because what is being spewed from both sides has me much more frustrated than I should be. (and I should type, wait, think, then post as opposed to just type and post - a lot of us should do that )

I don't think it's luck. I think it is legitimately one thing he is good at, manipulating the media and the conversation as a form of self-promotion. He has done it for decades in his development business.

If he's that smart it's going to be a tough few years for hard lefties. Leading them around like show dogs onto whatever topic he wants will not bode well for them. Personally I think it's at best 50/50, sometimes he does on purpose and the other times he can't help himself. No way he acted retarded on stage as a ploy, and if it was it was a horrible one.

Probably true. The one thing he does, that no other politician I can think of has ever done in this country... when he does screw up and do it by accident, instead of saying he was misunderstood or apologizing, he just doubles down and goes after it even harder. I think that is the one thing that drives the left the most nuts, they desperately want him to admit he was wrong or say he was sorry... and he never does.

It's immature as hell but it definitely makes me laugh.