that's demonstrably untrue. there's plenty of reading in this forum where people have provided examples and they've simply been rejected which all (some) trump supporters seem capable of doing.
Goes both ways. The Trump-haters here refuse to see opposing viewpoints and generally have their minds made up (with their loose and flexible definitions of racism).
"i support him because he's getting stuff done!" so you show them examples of the failure to advance key campaign promises and they just blow it off.
And you are ignoring all the stuff that he has got done. Which is a lot.
In 1975 he was sued by the civil rights division for racial discrimination against black tenants.
trump never, ever, ever, ever, ever settles lawsuits. he settled the case. the settlement included a requirement that the trump firm institute a series of safeguards to ensure that, in future, apartments be rented without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
Except there's more to the story than that, which I have actually gone over with you previously, yet you seem to ignore the evidence and then keep repeating this as proof of Trump being a racist.
So Trump's company counter-sued the government, asking for $100 million in damages for false allegations of discrimination. According to released FBI documents, many of the interviewees said that they had never seen any discrimination against African-Americans or Puerto Ricans. One tenant told FBI investigators that
?it was obvious that she had not been discriminated against since she, in fact, a Negro female, had been rented an apartment? at one of the buildings owned by Trump Management Co., documents say. Many employees stated they had not been instructed to discriminate against applicants based on race and maintained that income became the primary reason that individuals were denied apartments. Other employees and tenants offered up observations of ?Negros, Puerto Ricans and Orientals? living in the buildings. One former building superintendent denied that racial discrimination was encouraged by the company and said that he did not know of any person rejected on the basis of race.
Eventually,
the government and Trump Management entered into a consent decree in June 1975. The Trumps admitted no wrongdoing and were prohibited from ?discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling.? They were also required to take out advertisements notifying minority individuals that they had an equal opportunity to seek housing at Trump properties.
-Shithole countries are shithole countries, nothing to do with race. The issue there should be asking who's responsible for turning these impoverished nations into shitholes.
trump stated that judge curiel was incapable of being impartial because he's 'mexican' (which he's not). that is textbook racism.
Since Mexican isn't a race, then it is literally not textbook racism (which is discrimination by race). If anything it's attacking his Mexican nationalism.
It's nice that you've whittled down the most egregious examples which are a very far cry from proving Trump to be a racist. You could point to the growing conservative movement in the African-American community (try even listening to what they say) for some good insight into how and why Trump is not actually a racist (I'm surprised that some people are still throwing out the "racist" accusation to this day).
if there truly is an emergency's at the southern border why is trump waiting to formally declare it. why not last month? why not last year?
It's been an emergency for a very long time, but if there was a way to solve the problem without declaring it then that would be the best option. Trump tried that by negotiating with the Democrats, attempting to anyway. There are completely unwilling to negotiate on the wall and one of the main reason is politics. It would be a campaign win for Trump which will help him with re-election, which his opponents cannot allow. This is one of the major problems with politics, because there is an issue that needs to be addressed. The justifications for engaging in this behavior doesn't make sense - how is a wall immoral? Because I just heard an ex-Department of Homeland Security agent speak:
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/0...red-about-children-theyd-want-the-wall-719775
Tim Ballard worked for 12 years as a special agent for Homeland Security Investigations in the Child Crimes/Child Trafficking unit: "I can say with certainty that the issue of the border wall should be not about power and partisan politics". He says little girls are trafficked across the porous US-Mexico border every day, where they are smuggled into the United States and exploited as sex slaves.
Not long ago, a 13-year-old girl from Central America ? let?s call her ?Liliana? ? was kidnapped from her village, then trafficked into the U.S. at a location where there is no wall or barrier.
From there, she was taken to New York City, where she was raped by American men 30 to 40 times a day?The wall would have likely saved her. The wall is a law enforcement operation.?
Keep in mind also that countless young girls and women are raped every day as they make the dangerous trek to the US border.
?This is an epidemic hiding right under our noses,? Fox News host Laura Ingraham said. ?Each year, between 14,000 and about 17,500 people are trafficked into the United States.?
So the question is should we care about these cases and listen to these experts? Why did the Democrats previously pledge
$50 billion to southern border security (which was obviously mostly squandered) yet now refuse $5 billion to Trump for a border wall? They wouldn't put the safety of innocent children at risk to gain political power no chance.
