R.I.P. DIKEMBE MUTOMBO
HINDSIGHT - WRITE SOMETHING WORTH READING ABOUT OR DO SOMETHING WORTH WRITING ABOUT
Monday, September 30, 2024
12 Trump Election Lies - CNN Fact Check
Fact check: 12 election lies Trump is using to set the stage to dispute a potential 2024 defeat
By Marshall Cohen and Daniel Dale, CNN
Published 12:00 AM EDT, Mon September 30, 2024
WashingtonCNN —
Former President Donald Trump has escalated his
long-running assault on the integrity of US elections as the 2024 presidential
campaign enters its final stretch, using a new series of lies about ballots,
vote-counting and the election process to lay the groundwork to challenge a
potential defeat in November.
Nonpartisan democracy experts say they’re seeing many of
the same warning signs that were blinking
red before Election Day four years ago, when Trump flooded the
zone with election
lies and conspiracy
theories that he amplified after losing to Joe Biden. His
campaign of deception culminated in the attack on the US Capitol on January 6,
2021.
“The threats have not abated; they have only increased,”
said Lindsay Daniels, a senior director at the nonpartisan Democracy Fund,
which works to strengthen US democracy. “We saw a lot of activity in 2020
around peddling false claims and frivolous lawsuits. We are already seeing
signs now, stage-setting, that these things may be attempted again.”
Trump has made at least 12 distinct false claims over the
last two months that raise baseless doubts about the validity of a potential
victory by Vice President Kamala Harris. (Recent polls suggest
the race is very close, and Trump could certainly still win.)
Trump, who wrongly insists the 2020 election was marred by
massive fraud, said at
a debate in June that he will accept the 2024 results regardless of who wins
“if it’s a fair and legal and good election.” A majority of Trump
supporters in battleground states like Michigan, Arizona, and Pennsylvania now
say they’re “not at all confident” or only “just a
little” confident the results will be accurately tallied, according to recent CNN
polling.
Trump has lied about the legitimacy of the vote counts in key
states, the reliability of mail-in and overseas ballots, the size of Harris’
crowds at rallies, and more. Here’s a fact check of these and other claims.
False claim: Harris can
only win through cheating
For months, starting long before any votes were cast in the
2024 general election, Trump repeatedly claimed that he already has enough
votes to win and simply needs to ensure Democrats don’t cheat — insinuating
that the only way he could possibly lose is through fraud.
Trump said at an August rally in Arizona: “The only way
they can do anything is if they cheat like hell, and we’ve been victims of
that. … We don’t need the votes, we just want to make sure that they don’t
cheat.” He said at an August rally in North Carolina: “Our
primary focus is not to get out the vote, it’s to make sure they don’t cheat,
because we have all the votes you need.”
And in a Friday speech in Michigan, he said,
“If I lose - I’ll tell you what, it’s possible. Because they cheat. That’s the
only way we’re gonna lose, because they cheat.”
Facts First: This
is nonsense. It’s obviously entirely possible that Harris could legitimately
win the presidential election. While it’s also entirely possible that Trump
wins legitimately, he could not possibly know for sure at the time of these
comments that he already had “all the votes you need.”
False claim: It was
‘unconstitutional’ for the Democrats to replace Biden with Harris
Trump has repeatedly
claimed the fairness of the 2024 election was tarnished because
Biden dropped out of the race in July and Harris subsequently became the
Democratic presidential nominee. In August, he called Harris’ ascension “an unconstitutional coup”
and claimed Biden’s “Presidency was Unconstitutionally
STOLEN from him” by Harris.
Facts First: Trump’s
claims are false. There was nothing unconstitutional or unlawful about
Biden dropping out and Harris then being chosen by Democratic delegates as the
party’s presidential nominee.
Biden quit the race before he had become the official
Democratic nominee — the party makes the official nomination at its convention,
which hadn’t happened yet. That means Biden dropped out before his name was
placed on any state ballots.
CNN spoke in July with election authorities in 48 states,
and not a single state authority, Republican
or Democratic, said there were any legal issues with Harris getting
on the general election ballot in place of Biden after she was formally
nominated in August. She did not end up facing obstacles getting on the ballot
in any state.
And while Biden certainly faced heavy Democratic pressure
to leave the race after his poor performance in a debate against Trump in June,
the decision to drop out was his alone;
he could have kept running if he had chosen to do so. In other words, the
candidate switch was the product of politics, not a forcible takeover.
False claim: Voting by
non-citizens is a widespread problem in US elections
Trump and his allies have repeatedly
raised concerns that the 2024 election will be tarnished by
widespread voting by non-citizens and undocumented immigrants.
Republicans put this issue front and center in April, when
Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson unveiled legislation to require all voters
across the country to prove their citizenship. Efforts to pass the bill fizzled
earlier in September amid disunity within the Republican
caucus.
Further fanning the flames, billionaire Trump supporter Elon
Musk has championed the conspiracy theory that Democrats are “importing voters” so they can create a “one-party state.” At the presidential debate earlier
this month, Trump similarly accused Harris and Democrats of plotting to tip the
election with illegal voters.
“Our elections are bad, and a lot of these illegal
immigrants coming in, they’re trying to get them to vote,” Trump said. “They
can’t even speak English. They don’t even know what country they’re in
practically. And these people are trying to get them to vote.”
Facts First: This
specific Trump claim is false, and it’s also generally untrue to claim that
voting by non-citizens is a widespread problem plaguing US elections. There is
simply no evidence to back up that claim; it’s already illegal for non-citizens
to vote in federal elections, and the various safeguards already in place are
working effectively to stop it from happening en masse.
Both liberal and conservative think tanks have found only a
tiny number of examples of non-citizens voting in elections where they are
ineligible. The right-wing Heritage Foundation’s database of confirmed fraud cases lists less than
100 examples of non-citizens voting between 2002 and 2022, amid more than one
billion lawfully cast ballots.
Further, nonpartisan experts on election law say such cases
are almost always caught, thanks to layers of identity verification built into
the registration and voting process.
Here is CNN’s previous
fact-check debunking false claims about non-citizens voting
widely in federal elections. And here is CNN’s breakdown of
the underlying data in key states, showing how Republicans have massively
inflated the size of this problem.
Trump has a long history of blaming electoral losses on
undocumented immigrants. When he won the presidency in 2016, he lost the
popular vote by nearly 3 million — and to explain this away, he concocted the lie that
“millions” of non-citizens had voted illegally.
False claim: The US Postal
Service admitted it is ‘a poorly run mess’
In a social media post in mid-September, Trump claimed that the US
Postal Service “admitted that it is a poorly run mess that is experiencing mail
loss and delays at a level never seen before” and asked “how can we possibly be
expected to allow or trust the U.S. Postal Service to run the 2024 Presidential
Election?”
Facts First: Trump’s
claim is false. There’s no evidence of the USPS ever admitting that it is a
“poorly run mess.” Reacting to Trump’s comments at a September 19 press
conference, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy said, “My response
is like my response to everyone who says we’re not prepared for the election —
it is that they’re wrong.”
DeJoy became postmaster
general in June 2020 after being selected by the bipartisan
USPS Board of Governors, whose members were all appointed by Trump. DeJoy has
touted the fact that in 2020, USPS delivered 99% of all mail ballots within one
week.
The National Association of Secretaries of State, an
umbrella organization that represents election officials from both parties,
started raising alarm bells earlier this month with a sharply worded letter to DeJoy expressing
“ongoing concerns” about the postal service’s “ability to deliver election mail
in a timely and accurate manner.”
In response, DeJoy said the USPS was undertaking
“extraordinary measures” to make sure all mail ballots are delivered on time,
including designated lines at post offices for people with ballots, extra
deliveries and collections by letter-carriers, “after-hours” drop-offs to
election offices, and keeping processing facilities open longer.
Asked by CNN for proof of the supposed USPS admission that
it was a “poorly run mess,” a Trump campaign spokeswoman responded with two
news articles that were not evidence.
The articles were about the recent letter that the election officials sent to
DeJoy — which didn’t originate from USPS and wasn’t an admission of anything.
Trump has continued raising unfounded doubts about mail-in
voting, predicting in a recent interview with a right-wing radio host that USPS
“will lose hundreds of thousands of ballots, maybe purposely.”
There is no evidence of the USPS ever losing ballots on
this scale, though isolated mishaps have occurred and
been remedied in past election cycles. Furthermore, most mail-in ballots
are trackable these days, with tracking tools offered
in almost every state.
False claim: There is no
identity verification for overseas and military voters
Trump rolled out a new lie in late September about military
and overseas voting.
For this tiny slice of the national electorate, voters can
receive and submit ballots over email, because they are civilians who live
abroad or servicemembers that are stationed overseas.
These are often called “UOCAVA voters,” from the acronym
for the federal law that set up this system: the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act, which passed with bipartisan backing
and was signed by Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1986.
The deadline for states to send out UOCAVA ballots was
September 21. In a social media post two days later, Trump baselessly accused Democrats of using this program “to CHEAT”
in the election. “They are going to use UOCAVA to get ballots, a program that
emails ballots overseas without any citizenship check or verification of
identity, whatsoever,” Trump claimed.
Facts First: It’s
not true that UOCAVA ballots are sent to people with no verification
“whatsoever” of their identity. These special ballots are only sent to
registered voters who request them, and states require people to verify their
identity when registering.
David Becker, founder and executive director of the
nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, who regularly
advises state and local election officials from both parties, blasted Trump on social media for “actively
spreading false information about a bipartisan program.”
“Military and overseas ballots have gone out to registered,
verified voters (as required by law) and they are secure,” Becker wrote the day
after Trump’s claim. “I can tell you election officials of both parties take
great pride in giving military and overseas voters a secure voice in our
election, and it’s unfortunate to see a candidate spread lies about that
process.”
Democrats Abroad, an arm of the Democratic Party, condemned
Trump’s “absurd rant” in a statement to CNN, and said UOCAVA ballots “are only
sent to people whose registration have been confirmed and validated by their
local elections office.”
False claim: Harris spied
on Trump’s campaign
Trump launched a new attack on Harris after news broke over
the summer that Iranian hackers breached some
Trump campaign email accounts and sent some of the stolen materials to
journalists and Democratic campaign operatives.
“THE FBI CAUGHT IRAN SPYING ON MY CAMPAIGN, AND GIVING ALL
OF THE INFORMATION TO THE KAMALA HARRIS CAMPAIGN. THEREFORE SHE AND HER
CAMPAIGN WERE ILLEGALLY SPYING ON ME,” Trump posted on Truth Social in mid-September.
Facts First: Trump’s
claim that the Harris campaign spied on him is baseless. Iran did breach the
Trump campaign, but there’s no evidence anyone from the Harris campaign was
involved in the breach, solicited hacked materials, or weaponized these
materials in any way. The Harris campaign condemned Iran’s “unwelcome and unacceptable” election
interference.
The federal government announced in
August that Iranian hackers successfully targeted the Trump campaign, and that
they also attempted to breach the Biden-Harris campaigns.
US intelligence agencies later disclosed that the Iranian
hackers sent unsolicited messages containing some of stolen Trump materials to
some people associated with the Biden campaign. This included “a few
individuals” who are currently involved with Harris’ campaign, her team told CNN.
Despite Trump’s claims, there is no evidence the Iranian
hackers provided the Harris campaign with “all of the information” they stole.
The US spy agencies said “an excerpt” of some stolen material was provided.
More importantly, the US spy agencies said “there is currently no information
indicating those recipients replied” to the hackers.
The Harris campaign’s condemnation of Iran and refusal to
use the stolen material is a stark contrast to how Trump embraced Russia’s
hack-and-leak against his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton during the 2016
campaign. Even after the US announced that
the leaks were part of a Kremlin plot to interfere with the US election, Trump
and his campaign built a strategy to capitalize off
Russia’s illegal actions and used the emails to attack Clinton
on a near-daily basis.
False claim: California’s
vote counts are dishonest
Trump has wrongly claimed for years that US vote counts are
plagued by major fraud. In the last month, he has even declared that he would
win Democratic-dominated California if there was an “honest” vote count.
(California’s large population means that a candidate’s vote totals there have
a significant influence on the national popular vote — which Trump has baselessly cast
doubt on for years, even when
he won the presidency in 2016.)
Trump said in
September that “if I ran with an honest vote counter in California I would win
California, but the votes are not counted honestly.” In late
August, he said,
“If Jesus came down and was the vote counter, I would win California, okay?”
Facts First: This
is fiction. The votes are counted honestly in California, as they are in every
other state. Trump loses California because it is an overwhelmingly Democratic
state that no Republican presidential candidate has carried since 1988.
Trump lost the state in 2020, fair and square, by more 5 million votes and more than 29 percentage points.
It’s ridiculous to suggest that fraudulent vote-counting was responsible for a
margin that large.
Like several other states, California conducts post-election audits to verify the accuracy of the
vote count. These audits use mathematical models and statistics to access the
accuracy of the overall tally based on random samples of
ballots.
False claim: Election
officials use early voting to commit fraud
Trump has encouraged his supporters this year to make use of
early voting. But at a rally in Pennsylvania last week, he suggested that the lag time between when an early
ballot is cast and Election Day is used by nefarious actors to fraudulently
manipulate the count.
“Now we have this stupid stuff where you can vote 45 days
early. I wonder what the hell happens during that 45 — ‘Let’s move the … see
these votes, we’ve got about a million votes in there, let’s move them, we’re
fixing the air conditioner in the room,’ right? No, it’s terrible. What
happened the last time was disgraceful, including right here. But we’re not
going to let it happen again,” Trump said.
Facts First: This
is another phony narrative. There is no indication that there was any counting
fraud involving early ballots in 2020, in Pennsylvania or anywhere else. Early
ballots are securely stored in election offices until they are counted. People
who interfere with ballots during this period are subject to prosecution.
False claim: Trump won
Minnesota in 2020
Trump declared in March and May that he won Minnesota in the 2020 election.
At a Minnesota rally in July, he claimed,
“If they don’t cheat, we win this state easily, Okay? They cheat.” He added,
“They’re the most crooked. They cheat. They cheated in the last election, and
they’re going to cheat in this election, but we’re going to get them.”
Facts First: Trump’s
claims are false.
He lost Minnesota by more than 7 percentage points in the
2020 election, fair and square, and he can certainly lose the state
legitimately in 2024.
The state hasn’t chosen a Republican for president since
1972, and Trump has consistently trailed in opinion polls against Harris —
whose running mate is the sitting Minnesota governor, Tim Walz.
False claim: A large
percentage of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania are fraudulent
Pennsylvania is one of the most important swing states in
the 2024 election. Trump claimed in a social media post in September that an
“election expert” interviewed by right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson had
suggested a large percentage of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania are fraudulent.
“An interview by Tucker Carlson of an election expert
indicates that 20% of the Mail-In Ballots in Pennsylvania are fraudulent. Here
we go again! Where is the U.S. Attorney General and FBI to INVESTIGATE? Where
is the Pennsylvania Republican Party? We will WIN Pennsylvania by a lot, unless
the Dems are allowed to CHEAT,” he wrote.
Facts First: There
is no valid basis for the claim that 20% of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania —
or any other state — are fraudulent. This claim appears to be based on a flawed
2023 poll by a right-wing pollster, not the discovery of any actual problems
with ballots in Pennsylvania or anywhere else from 2020, 2022 or this year.
The 2020 election was fair and secure in Pennsylvania, as
it was in the rest of the country, according to officials from both parties who
affirmed the results. There was a tiny smattering of voter fraud in the state
in 2020 —– some of it committed by Trump supporters — but not even close to enough to
have affected the outcome.
Pennsylvania’s Department of State said in a September
email to CNN: “Voting by mail is safe and secure, and no evidence exists of
widespread mail voting fraud in Pennsylvania.
Mail ballot fraud has been proven to be exceptionally rare. Claims of systemic
voter fraud are devoid of any supporting evidence and have consistently been
rejected by judges, government agencies, and election experts across the
political spectrum.”
So what was Trump referring to?
Trump and his campaign didn’t specify what interview he was
talking about. But in April,
Carlson interviewed someone who spoke of a 2023 poll conducted by a right-wing firm, Rasmussen
Reports, that has itself promoted false election claims. Among likely
voters in that poll who said they had been absentee or mail-in voters in 2020,
21% claimed to have filled out a ballot for a friend or family member and 17%
claimed they had voted in a state where they were no longer a permanent
resident.
There are lots of reasons not to treat this poll as
evidence of mass fraud in Pennsylvania.
First, this was a national poll, not a Pennsylvania poll.
Second, the pollster is viewed skeptically by many polling experts. Third,
people making claims to a pollster about their past behavior does not prove that they actually did what they
said.
Fourth, as FactCheck.org pointed out earlier this month, it’s legal to fill
out a ballot for a voter with disabilities who has asked for the assistance —
so someone saying they filled out someone else’s ballot isn’t necessarily a
confession of fraud. Fifth, as FactCheck.org also noted, the wording of the
residency question was ambiguous enough that people could have thought it was
asking about legal behavior — such as having voted in 2020 in a different state
from the one they currently lived in three years later.
False claim: Harris
fabricated an image to inflate her crowd size
Since 2020, various Trump supporters have claimed that
Biden’s unimpressive crowd sizes are proof that Biden’s 2020 vote total, about
81 million, was fraudulently inflated. (Trump earned about 74 million votes in
2020.)
In August, Trump launched an attack on Harris’ crowd sizes.
He claimed on social media that Harris should be
disqualified from the race because, he claimed, she had faked an image of a
large crowd at her rally at a Michigan airport. He wrote: “There was nobody at
the plane, and she ‘A.I.’d’ it, and showed a massive ‘crowd’ of so-called
followers, BUT THEY DIDN’T EXIST!”
He also wrote, “This is the way the Democrats win
Elections, by CHEATING - And they’re even worse at the Ballot Box. She should
be disqualified because the creation of a fake image is ELECTION INTERFERENCE.
Anyone who does that will cheat at ANYTHING!”
Facts First: Trump’s
claims are false. Harris did not create a fake image of the Michigan
crowd using artificial intelligence or anything else. As genuine photos and
videos showed, and reporters on scene confirmed, she had a real crowd of
thousands of people at the airport event.
The false claim that the Harris campaign was pushing fake
images of this Michigan crowd had been circulated by some far-right influencers before
Trump adopted it.
Asked by
CNN in August why he made the false claim, Trump said he “can’t
say what was there, who was there” and could only speak about his own large
crowds. But he made another false claim about Harris’ crowds at the
presidential debate against Harris in September, wrongly saying, “People don’t go to her rallies.”
False claim: Biden or
Harris orchestrated Trump’s legal cases
Trump has repeatedly claimed this year that “all” of the legal cases
against him, including local and state cases, were all orchestrated by Biden
for the purpose of “election interference,” to help Democrats win the election.
In July, when Biden dropped out of the race and Harris
became the Democratic candidate, Trump began
claiming she was the one behind the cases.
Facts First: These
claims are false. There is no evidence that Biden personally orchestrated any
of these cases. Trump never presented any evidence for that claim, let alone
for suddenly making the vice president the target of the claim after months of
directing it at the president.
There is no sign that either Biden or Harris had any role
in bringing charges against Trump in Manhattan, New York (where Trump was convicted of
34 felony counts of falsifying business records) or Fulton County, Georgia
(where an election subversion case against Trump is on hold over
a battle about whether the district attorney should be disqualified). Those
prosecutions have been led by elected local prosecutors, both Democrats, who do
not even report to the federal government.
Trump’s two federal criminal cases, one about election
subversion and one about Trump’s retention of classified documents after his
presidency, were brought by a special counsel, Jack Smith. A judge dismissed the
classified documents case in July, but Smith is appealing.
Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, a
Biden appointee, but that is far from proof that Biden orchestrated the
prosecutions – and certainly not proof that Harris did. Garland has said he would resign if Biden ever asked him to
take action against Trump, but expressed confidence that Biden would never put
him in that position.
The Mainstream Media Buries Trump’s Outrage
September 30, 2024
Sanewashing
Oops, They Did It Again: The
Mainstream Media Buries Trump’s Outrage
The former president spent the weekend
spewing dangerous nonsense at a rally. The press spent its weekend polishing it
into palatability.
It’s
a pretty sad commentary on the way our mainstream media cover Donald Trump that
if you really want to know what Trump said at a given rally, you would be
wasting your time going to The New York Times or The
Washington Post and you really need to read Aaron Rupar.
Who
is Rupar? He’s a liberal Substacker and prolific
tweeter who prints all the news The New York Times doesn’t
deem fit to print. The latest case in point is Trump’s weekend rally at Prairie
du Chien, Wisconsin—an appropriately named venue for a speech in which Trump
was barking out hatred and bile like a mad dog.
If
you’re the sort of person really steeped in campaign coverage, you may have
read about what went down; if you missed it, spoiler alert: Trump said
something at this rally so insane and offensive that even the Times finally roused itself to cover it.
Trump called Kamala Harris “mentally disabled” and added: “Joe Biden became
mentally impaired; Kamala was born that way.”
That
statement, whatever else we might call it, was obviously news, so the Times couldn’t
help leading with it. Ditto the Post, which decided to produce a
story that emphasized Trump’s violation of politically correct manners.
The Post piece quoted a mental health advocate scolding Trump
for his insensitive language—as if what he said was offensive only to people
struggling with mental illness!
Meanwhile,
here are some other things Trump said at the rally, which you had to read Rupar’s X feed to know about.
“These
people are animals,” (referring to migrants).
“I
will liberate Wisconsin from this mass migrant invasion of murderers, rapists,
hoodlums, drug dealers, thugs, and vicious gang members. We’re going to
liberate our country.”
“You
gotta get these people back where they came from. You have no choice. You’re
gonna lose your culture.”
And,
finally, this gem: “They will walk into your kitchen, they’ll cut your throat.”
Let’s
tarry over that last one for a bit. Here’s a man who wants to be the president
of the United States saying of immigrants—all immigrants: women, children, old
people, everyone—that they will invade your home and attack you in one of the
most violent and painful (and terrifying) ways possible. They will cut
your throat.
Maybe
it’s just me, but I find that shocking, even coming from Trump. It’s one thing
to say that Mexico is “sending rapists,” as he infamously did in 2015. Even
making a general statement about how these people come here and commit crimes,
while bad enough, isn’t nearly as bad as this. This is saying directly to every
American that they will break into your house
and cut your throat.
That
sure seems like news to me. Yet it didn’t appear in either the Times or
the Post account. The Times piece did have a sentence noting
that Trump “continued to vilify” migrants and called them “stone-cold killers,”
so let’s give them that, at least. But the plain implication of Trump’s
statement here is that migrants are an imminent threat to one’s safety. This is
an unambiguous incitement to pre-emptive violence. How can such a vicious
statement not be thought of as news?
Here’s
how. If your definition of “news” is simply that which is new, then okay,
maybe. Calling his opponent who happens to be the sitting vice president of the
United States “mentally disabled” was new, and ergo it was news. That I get.
But
Trump attacking migrants isn’t new. Obviously, I would argue that a candidate
for president raising the specter of people breaking into people’s homes and
cutting their throats is new. Perhaps reasonable minds can differ on that, I
guess. And if it isn’t new, it isn’t news.
But
what if your definition of “news” is a little broader than that? What if, say,
“news” is any meaningful piece of information that might be relevant to voters
as they prepare to make their decision about whom to vote for? This is a
reasonable and in fact better definition of news than simply that which is new,
because it’s reality. Trump constantly saying extreme, racist, violent stuff
can’t always be new. But it is always reality. Is the press justified in
ignoring reality just because it isn’t new? Are we not allowed to consider his
escalations as dangerous, novel developments in and of themselves? And should
we not note the coincidence that his remarks seem more escalatory as the
pressures of the campaign mount?
I know
the mainstream media really doesn’t want to go here, but whether Trump is
mentally fit to serve four years in the world’s toughest job is a very real and
pressing question. But the press won’t raise it. That is to say, they have
lately lost their taste for it. Not long ago, the press was perfectly
comfortable talking about Joe Biden’s age. That seemed like a pretty urgent
matter. But they absolutely will not talk about Trump’s mental fitness. Say
what you want about Biden’s struggles with age, he never once threatened an
entire group of human beings with political violence.
Why
is age fair game for discussion but mental infirmity taboo? Is it because of
basic human emotional responses to each matter—that is, we all see people age,
it’s familiar, we’re comfortable talking about it—whereas with respect to
mental health, talking about it makes us uncomfortable? If so that’s a pretty
lousy excuse. It’s journalism’s job to raise uncomfortable questions.
Another
quote from Prairie du Chien that’s getting around on the internet is this one, referring to
Customs and Border Patrol: “They have a phone app so that people can come into
our country… these are smart immigrants, I guess, because most people don’t
have any idea what the hell a phone app is.”
Ummm
… what? Okay. Thinking in 2024 that most people don’t know what phone apps are
does not, I suppose, disqualify a person from being president. But if someone—The
New York Times, say!—were to do a big story stringing together the many
remarks like this Trump has made over the last two or three years, then we
might have the conversation the electorate needs and deserves to hear about
whether this man is competent to know the world’s deepest intelligence secrets
and have his finger on the nuclear button.
I
admit—the Times deciding to do such a piece would constitute a
conscious decision to inject the issue of his mental well-being into the
campaign. That’s not a decision editors should make lightly. On the other hand,
not doing such a piece is a conscious decision too. It benefits Trump, but even
more importantly, it keeps buried a question that is obviously relevant in this
campaign and that voters should be asked to think about.
The
sane-washing continues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)