Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Trump, Asked About Filmed Police Murder Of An Innocent Black Man:
"A Very, Sad Event. Very, Very Sad, Sad Event."

A Tale of Two Police

April 30, 2020: Numerous white men armed with actual assault weapons storm into the Michigan's Capitol building and disrupt the day's proceedings. Other protesters hold signs likening Governor Gretchen Whitmer to Adolf Hitler; others signs state "Tyrants Get The Rope" with illustrations of nooses. Michigan police do nothing about the armed men

May 14, 2020: Armed white men (including one man carrying an ax) return to the Michigan Capitol building for another day of protests. Once again, no arrests were made.

May 25, 2020: George Floyd, an unarmed black man, is slowly murdered (by suffocation) in front of a crowd on a public street by four Minneapolis policemen. The original police report claims Floyd resisted arrest and an updated version states Floyd died after a "medical incident" during an "interaction" with police. Later, Minnesota police shot rubber bullets and tear gas at unarmed protesters.

Q: Do you have a comment about the events in Minnesota –?

Donald Trump: A very sad event. Very, very sad, sad event.

[There was an awkward pause before the next question. Clearly, the reporter expected Trump to say a little more.]

Q: Should the police officers be prosecuted, sir?

Trump: We're going to look at it and we're going to get a report tomorrow when we get back. And we're going to get a very full report, but a very sad ... day.
Yes, a very full report, probably the most fullest report anyone has ever seen. No president has ever been given such full reports. Yesterday, a big, strong man, a great friend of mine, came up to me with tears in his eyes, he was crying, can you believe it? – and he said, "Sir, I've seen so many repairs – and reports, so many reports, billions of reports – I won't say he said mine was the best, but look, he told me "yours was the most full". The most full. 

"We are going to look at it" is one of Trump's stock phrases when he can't think of anything else to say. (The Washington Post noticed it way back in July 2016 and cited numerous examples.) By saying "we" are looking into it, he avoids answering the question, but (supposedly) makes it look like he's investigating the issue.

April 7, 2020:
[Q What should happen now to Commander Crozier, who left —] Well, they're going to look at that. I think Secretary of Defense, as you know, is — is — you know ... I think he's looking at that right now.

[Q So say that the funding freeze does not — doesn't —] No, I'm not happy about it. ... So we're just going to take a look at it. ... You know, so I want to look into it.

We're going to put a hold on money spent to the W.H.O. We're going to put a very powerful hold on it ... [17 minutes later] [Q So is the time to freeze funding to the WHO during a pandemic of this magnitude?] I'm not saying I'm going to do it, but we're going to look at it. ... [Q You said you'd put a hold on it.] No, I didn't. I said we're going to look at it. We're going to investigate it. We're going to look at it.
April 17, 2020:
We will end that grant very quickly, but it was granted quite a while ago. They were granted a substantial amount of money. We're going to look at it and take a look ...
May 21, 2020:
[Q: Are you going to wear a mask today at the Ford plant?] Well, I don't know. We're going to look at it. A lot of people have asked me that question. I want to get our country back to normal. I want to normalize.
He wants to normalize!

No comments: