Injecting Disinfectant
The whole "he told people to inject bleach" story is a perfect example. In 2020 Trump, along with some of his medical advisors was having regular press conferences to update the nation on aspects of the Covid-19 pandemic. In April of that year he said this:
"So supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it's ultraviolet or just a very powerful light — and I think you said that hasn't been checked because of the testing...And then supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or some other way, and I think you said you're going to test that, too."
This was a follow up to remarks by Bill Bryan, head of
Homeland Security's Science and Technology Division about the virus not
surviving on surfaces that were exposed to light or cleaned
with disinfectants, like bleach or isopropyl alcohol.
Trump continued with this:
"I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute,
one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection
inside or almost a cleaning? As you see, it gets in the lungs, it does a
tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that."
So no, he didn't tell people to inject bleach, but he did suggest that it was a viable option. It's a distinction without a difference. How is musing that injecting disinfectant in front of the whole country any better than telling people to inject bleach? As usual, Trump cannot admit that he was wrong, or misspoke. He could have apologized for the miscommunication, especially in light of the fact that medical health experts, not to mention Lysol, felt the need to clarify that injecting or ingesting disinfectant was a bad idea and could kill you. What he did do was claim that he was being "sarcastic":
“I was asking a question sarcastically to reporters like you just to see what would happen...a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside.”
What?! - How is that any better? Or any more believable? We're in the early stages of a pandemic that will end up killing a million Americans and he's being sarcastic? The White House spokesperson claimed that the press had taken him out of context.
I once actually encountered a couple of men in person who actually believed that he was joking.
When someone claims, as was done at the Democratic National Convention, that Trump suggested that people inject bleach, the details may be wrong, but not all that different than the specifics.
Suckers and Losers
During a trip to Paris in 2018 Trump passed up an opportunity to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery — which is home to the graves of Americans who fought and died in World War I. He is alleged to have said "Why should I go to that cemetery? It's filled with losers." In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump allegedly referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as "suckers" for getting killed. The media who reported this at the time relied on anonymous sources.
I tend to trust that reporters don't make up quotes by anonymous sources. These are professionals who would not like to get "burned" by publishing inaccurate information. However, the sources themselves might have had an axe to grind - had a personal reason for feeding the press false information. Trump's team denied these allegations and nothing surfaced to either confirm or deny them. One staffer backed up his assertion that Trump did not say that veterans were "suckers and losers" by noting that retired General Kelly was standing with Trump: "I did not hear POTUS call anyone losers when I told him about the weather. Honestly, do you think General Kelly would have stood by and let ANYONE call fallen Marines losers?" As if an aid to the president would publicly remonstrate his boss, whatever his personal feelings.
Which is interesting, because in October 2023 Kelly said this: "What can I add that has not already been said? A person that thinks those who defend their country in uniform, or are shot down or seriously wounded in combat, or spend years being tortured as POWs are all 'suckers' because 'there is nothing in it for them.' A person that did not want to be seen in the presence of military amputees because 'it doesn't look good for me.' A person who demonstrated open contempt for a Gold Star family – for all Gold Star families – on TV during the 2016 campaign, and rants that our most precious heroes who gave their lives in America's defense are 'losers' and wouldn't visit their graves in France."
Trump talks out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to the military and veterans. On one hand he claims to support them, which usually doesn't go beyond saying "I support the military". But I don't have to dig too deep to find Trump's true thoughts about the men and women in the military: he doesn't like people who were captured and the Presidential Medal of Freedom is better than the Medal of honor. "That’s the highest award you can get as a civilian. It’s the equivalent of the Medal of Honor, but civilian version," the former president said during his remarks. "It’s actually much better, because everyone gets the Congressional Medal of Honor — that’s soldiers. They’re either in very bad shape because they’ve been hit so many times by bullets, or they’re dead." Let's not forget his statement at Turning Point USA in 2022 that he wanted to give himself the Congressional Medal of Honor but was talked out of it.
Even without Kelly's statement, Trump's "suckers and losers" remark is extremely believable
Very Fine People
Recently Snopes came out with a report stating that Trump did not call Neo-Nazi and White Supremacists "very fine people". MAGA world jumped on this as somehow debunking his support for the alt right at the August 2017 "Unite the Right" rally. Interesting in that conservatives generally discount anything from Snopes due to its supposed liberal bias. In fact they disdain any fact checkers who question their version of events.
What Trump did say was that there were "very fine people on both sides" and he did also say that he wasn't talking about Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists "who should be condemned totally".
Most people who heard Trump say this, or read about it afterward, concluded that despite his disavowal of the Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists, the people on one of those sides were almost exclusively Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists, therefore he was calling Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists "very fine people". The Snopes article on this subject seems to acknowledge this.
Editors' Note: Some readers have raised the objection that
this fact check appears to assume Trump was correct in stating that there were
"very fine people on both sides" of the Charlottesville incident.
That is not the case. This fact check aimed to confirm what Trump actually
said, not whether what he said was true or false. For the record, virtually
every source that covered the Unite the Right debacle concluded that it was
conceived of, led by and attended by white supremacists, and that therefore
Trump's characterization was wrong.
Trump seems to conclude, whether ignorantly or purposefully, that there were people there to peacefully protest the pulling down of a Confederate statue that had nothing to do with the Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists - and these were the "very fine people". This stretches the bounds of credulity. This was a rally organized by and for Neo-Nazis, the whole purpose was to bring their views out in public. But we're to believe that "very fine people", who were not at all, not even a little bit, sympathetic or supportive of Neo-Nazi or White Supremacist ideology somehow held their noses and participated. If I march with the Nazis the logical conclusion is that I'm a fellow traveler with the Nazis - not among the "very fine people". You can't say "Josef Stalin was a great guy, but I condemn the mass murders that he conducted" - you can't say you're condemning the Nazis while saying what great guys they are.
Russia, Russia, Russia
This one would take more time, but it's worth addressing anyway. Mueller's report did nothing to exonerate Trump. In fact it specifically says that it doesn't exonerate Trump. Here's a few links to things I wrote about the Mueller Report:
https://tjpolitics.blogspot.com/2019/04/i-just-finished-reading-redacted.html
https://tjpolitics.blogspot.com/2019/05/yes-there-was-collusion.html
https://tjpolitics.blogspot.com/2020/10/russia-russia-russia-and-lil-bit-o.html
https://tjpolitics.blogspot.com/2022/07/russia-russia-russia.html
Conclusion
It's important to get our facts straight and not get sucked into our own conspiracy theories regarding Trump that are based on what we wish were true but are simply not. It's equally important to recognize that there is a difference between denying and debunking. A denial is someone simply stating that an allegation is false. A debunking is proof that an allegation is false.
Determining what Trump did or didn't say is not always straightforward. His statements meander and ramble. He contradicts himself. He gaslights us. His supporters want to concentrate on whether we get a word or two wrong when the issue is the context and intent. Is injecting disinfectant actually better than injecting bleach? Is making sarcastic comments to "see what [reporters] will do" better than making ignorant statements? Is calling a crowd comprised mainly of Nazis and their ilk "very fine people" any different than calling Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists "very fine people"?
It's incumbent upon us to know what we're talking about. Don't double down with an inaccurate quote and insist that you heard him say "bleach". You didn't. If they're going to split hairs, be prepared.
No comments:
Post a Comment