Except, of course, that impeachment and removal from office is supposed to be for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (as well as treason and bribery, neither of which we are discussing). There have been PLENTY of irresponsible, unprofessional Presidents in our past. None of them were impeached. And we really do not want impeachment to become a tool of simple political attack, which the Bill Clinton impeachment certainly came very close to being if it was not actually so.
Several attendees including both D’s and R’s have confirmed the phrase.
Also not in dispute is that Trump and many Trumpists prevaricate with great enthusiasm. Just as denying evolution or denying climate science will lead you to inferior conclusions, so denying that Trump is a liar will make your analyses less valid and useful.
HTH.
Tim Scott said that Lindsey Graham told him Trump said it. How do you explain that?
And when Lindsey Graham said that he basically scolded the President right after the remark that you imply was fabricated, how do you think that came about?
No, it isn’t.
It is part of a sonnet called “The New Colossus,” written in 1883, by Emma Lazarus, donated to an auction intended to help raise funds for a pedestal for the Statue of Liberty on Bedloe’s Island.
It’s certainly an aspirational and uplifting piece of poetry, but we are a nation of laws and representative democracy, which means that we don’t adopt a mission statement because of a poem on a statute, even a really really nice poem.
So if you want the mission statement of the United States to be, “We want people from ‘shithole’ countries,” urge your chosen candidates to run on that theme. Best of luck!
On the side, this person defended Trumps comments, has denied white privilige while complaining about racism againts whites(is silent when racism occurs to black and has even denounced Black Lives Matter), says those who bring race into everything are the real racist and yet claims they are not racist. I was wondering, what are your thoughts?
Oh, and on the Sunday shows there was a theory floated that Trump actually said “shithouse countries.” Maybe Senator Purdue thinks saying shithole country is a… what did he say? A major misrepresentation?
I guess that’s one… but it certainly came at a cost, didn’t it? Other Presidents have walked a tightrope between Israel and Palestine… Trump seems to have burned the whole thing down. I guess we’ll see how that works out in the long run.
Sounds like the definition of hearsay.
I’m not trying to imply it was fabricated. I’m trying to clarify that the precise statement is still very much in dispute. Some people say he said “shithole”, some people say he did not. Neither you nor I were there, and we don’t have video or audio recordings so we don’t know exactly what was said. We’re relying on recollections and statements of the people involved, or people that heard from those people, none of whom I’d consider having perfectly unblemished records of exactness, precision, or honesty.
To the extent that yours, or septimus’ arguments rely on the exact quote, they’re on shaky, unproven ground.
Not in a vacuum is putting it mildly. Here is the list of Trump’s racist statements, compiled by Dave Leonhardt.
Yeah, I don’t know if it’s going to work out well or not. You’d asked the question “Has he improved US relations with anyone?” That was an answer that came to mind that seemed fairly straightforward and clear. Whether ultimately that will be worth the downsides, we probably won’t know for a while. I’m not blind to the possibility that it’s not.
I know he has made some antagonistic statements towards NATO. Your link says “the U.S. continues to be very supportive where it counts: on the ground” and I suspect NATO will continue to be as supportive of us as they have been in the past where it counts.
And several have denied it. Perhaps you’re operating from some non-standard definition of “in dispute”?
Do you apply this same reasoning to the dozens of women who have accused Trump of sexual assault? “We don’t have a video or transcript, so we will never know with metaphysical certitude what happened?”
I’d say it’s an accurate statement that “we will never know with metaphysical certitude what happened”. I don’t know if “certitude” is a terribly useful standard for anything beyond refuting absolutist statements on the SDMB like ‘That Trump’s sentence contained the phrase “shithole countries” is no longer in dispute.’
Look, if you, or septimus, or anyone else said "hey, I looked over the available evidence, and it seems plausible to me that Trump said ‘shithole’, I’d shrug and get on with life. You’re certainly entitled to hold any opinion you want on the matter, and that’s not an unreasonable one given the available evidence. But if you tried to tell me that the exact quote is “not in dispute” I’d say, as I did, that that’s incorrect.
ETA: In case you’d like my opinion on the broader matter: I think it’s plausible Trump said something disparaging about Haiti / Africa, possibly even using the phrase “shithole countries”, and he probably shouldn’t do that, even in private meetings. His nature is a bit direct and brash, so it’s wouldn’t be entirely unsurprising or out of character for him. It’s not the sort of thing that strikes me as a “big f***ing deal”, to borrow a phrase from Biden, or something that rises to the level of an impeachable offense, but YMMV.
I find you to be a very direct poster. Let’s say the accusations are proven to be true. What is your level of concern of the President advocating a racist position that immigrants from various counties are worth less than white immigrants?
Like maybe on a 1-10 scale, 1 being no concern and 10 being extreme concern.
Probably about a 6, although I admit to having some difficulty disentangling my understanding of his desired merit-based immigration system from my feelings on him possibly calling Haiti / Africa a shithole.
Again, the charge is that he wasn’t speaking sponeteously on which countries he doesn’t want to take a vacation in. The charge is that he said that people from those countries are worth less to the US than people from Norway.
So I take it that it that you have sympathy for this view - that white Norwegians are generally better people to take into this country than black Africans? In terms of merit-based immigration, that is.
No. It was a work meeting, and therefore he was engaged in public business. It wasn’t published, i.e. broadcast, and it wasn’t recorded. And you’re correct that it is hearsay. Still, I have no reason to doubt that it occurred, and more importantly there is a mountain of evidence of unprofessional behaviour which has been published. No single incident is that big a deal, but the unrelenting stream is.
I do think that egregious unprofessional behaviour ought to be a high crime, but DSYoungEsq’s point about such things being used in political attacks is quite valid. If only there were a culture of honor and people whose patriotism overrode their self interest…
and I’d like a pony.
Here is a CNN article describing a proposed merit-based system. It seems to me like a reasonable way to award immigration (it even says “The plan mimics systems used by Australia and Canada, which Trump has often praised …”) and I’d like to see something along those lines adopted.
Let’s imagine that under such a system a Hatian immigration applicant received 19 points and a Norwegian immigration applicant received 18 points. I believe we should admit the Hatian first.
Knowing the little bit I do about Haiti and Norway, I could make a semi-educated guess that the average Norwegian immigration applicant will score higher than the average Hatian immigration applicant. Does that make the system “racist”? I don’t think so, but I wouldn’t be surprised if some people said it does. Does that mean I have “sympathy for this view - that white Norwegians are generally better people to take into this country than black Africans”? Again, I’d say that’s not really an accurate representation of my views, but it wouldn’t surprise me if someone accused me of racism for supporting a system whose likely outcome would be admitting relatively fewer Africans and more Norwegians.
Thank you for your answers.
Trump did not say that for public consumption (assuming he actually said it). He was in a closed door meeting with congressional leaders attempting to negotiate a compromise bill on DACA. If such comments hurt our station in the world, perhaps Dick Durbin should not release them in order to score cheap political points.
Again, if we have a closed door discussion on something and I go out and tell the world what you told me, there won’t be anymore frank discussions, and that is bad. Durbin is like a 14 year old middle school girl spreading gossip.