Starbucks coffee. Any colour but black.

[Brian Peacock]

I was offered $10,000 back in the mid 70s to marry a Filipino girl, but wasn't allowed to shag her so I didn't do it. Stupid.

My ex's mother offered me £10k to 'study' in the US. I was too shocked, and too young to twig that I should have called her bluff. That woman was a nightmare - the things I could tell you....

[cronus]

Some folks are born between good and bad luck is all I can think.

[Joe]

Lastly, since he's only referring in the statement to the people Mexico is "sending" then he's not referring to Mexicans in general. How can it be racist when he's not even generalizing a nationality...

I've already addressed this multiple times in the past. If you were a business owner and referred to blacks in your employ as lazy, does the fact that you aren't referring to all blacks mean that you can't be being racist?

You can refer to black people in your employ as good, hard working people, and still be a racist.

What the fuck does that have to do with what we are discussing? We not talking about secret racists. We are talking about whether what appears to be a racist statement can be a racist statement despite the fact it doesn't refer to all members of the race/ethnicity/nationality/whatever.

If you are a business owner and refer to some blacks in your employ as lazy, but you refer to other blacks in your employ as rock stars with a grand future at the company, it's not very strong evidence of racism.

He said the (paraphrasing) "there's good people too" thing as an afterthought (probably because he realised how racist the first bit sounded).

To be fair, he did have one good point.

If you say that black people are lazy, then that's better evidence that one is racist. Thinking an entire race of people is lazy is rather racist.

I came a cross a good example of this in a New York Times article

In 1991, a book by John O’Donnell, who had been president of the Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, quoted Trump as criticizing a black accountant and saying: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.” O’Donnell wrote that for months afterward, Trump pressed him to fire the black accountant, until the man resigned of his own accord.

Trump eventually denied making those comments. But in 1997 in a Playboy interview, he conceded “the stuff O’Donnell wrote about me is probably true.”

So, in his own oblique way, is our friend suggesting Trump might be a racist?

[Seabass]

[Forty Two]

Obviously, if what O'Donnell said there is a correct quote, then that's pretty damning that Trump harbors some prejudice or racism against black people. However, even Snopes doesn't credit the account: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump ... in-blacks/ "As the Washington Post noted, it is, at best, a secondhand quote from a private conversation, written down years after the fact, and should be viewed “with some skepticism.”" "There’s a source attributing the statement “Laziness is a trait in blacks” to Donald Trump dating back to the early 1990s. It should be noted, however, that that source is a book written by a disgruntled former employee of Trump Plaza Hotel & Casino, John R. O’Donnell, and neither the statement nor the sentiment behind it has been corroborated elsewhere. "

Neither the statement, nor the sentiment, -- nor the sentiment - was corroborated elsewhere. And, Trump denied it categorically in a 1999 interview with Tim Russert.

Note, the articles I read, and snopes, seem to refer to a 1999 or 1997 interview in Playboy where Donald Trump said "The stuff O'Donnell wrote is probably true." But, I cannot locate that article. I've located other Donald Trump Playboy pieces, but none of them say that.

The most I found was this:

“Nobody has had worse things written about them than me,” Trump says. “And here I am. The stuff O’Donnell wrote about me is probably true. The guy’s a fucking loser. A fucking loser. I brought the guy in to work for me; it turns out he didn’t know that much about what he was doing. I think I met the guy two or three times total. And this guy goes off and writes a book about me, like he knows me!” https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/ ... 55553.html No link by Huffpo to the full article. But, this doesn't make sense. He says nobody has had worse things written about them than me. And, here I am. The stuff O'donnell wrote was probably true. The guy's a fucking loser. ONly met him 2 or 3 times total, and he goes off and writes a book as if he knows me.

I don't know about you, but to me that doesn't sound too persuasive. That's the thing with these Trump's an uber-racist allegations. On close inspection, they don't tend to be all that damning.

[Joe]

And yet, here's Trump giving credence to what O'Donnell wrote on the record, unless you're accusing the Huffington Post of making it up.

[pErvinalia]

Nice sidestep. Is there some reason for why you'd expect illegal immigrants more likely to be rapists?

Well they should be.

Just by excluding convicted rapists, the legals should be less likely to be rapists.
Excluding people convicted of other sexual crimes should also have that effect.

I would have thought that was obvious.

I would expect illegal immigrants that cross on foot or in the back of vans to be more likely criminals of every type, because that's how criminals get into the US. They can't get visas. Yet, a lot of them still want to come to the US. So, you're going to get an uptick in the rates of all types of criminals.

That's the crappest argument I've ever heard. They are more likely to be rapists because they break a US law totally unrelated to rape?? *cough* Bullshit! *cough*.

This was actually the crappest reading comprehension I've ever performed. I'm not sure how I wound up with that interpretation. I can only guess it was late and I was tired as a motherfucker.

[Forty Two]

And yet, here's Trump giving credence to what O'Donnell wrote on the record, unless you're accusing the Huffington Post of making it up.

The Huffington Post didn't exist when Trump did the Playboy interview in 1999.

I'm reporting what Snopes found, which was that there is no corroboration for either the quote or the sentiment. Are you accusing Snopes of making it up?

[Forty Two]

Don't sell yourself short, pErvin. You've had much crappier performances in the past.

[Brian Peacock]

Two black men arrested in a Philadelphia Starbucks for not ordering anything have settled their complaint with the city for one dollar each, and $200,000 to help high school students get started as entrepreneurs. The company itself has agreed to pay them a "confidential" sum, their attorneys said.

“We thought long and hard about it, and we feel like this is the best way to see that change that we want to see,” Donte Robinson, who was arrested along with Rashon Nelson in the Rittenhouse Starbucks on April 12 in an incident that sparked national controversy, told the Associated Press of their settlement with Philadelphia. “It’s not a right-now thing that’s good for right now, but I feel like we will see the true change over time.”

The city of Philadelphia agreed to allocate $200,000 in funds to a new School District program for young entrepreneurs at public high schools as part of the settlement.

https://www.metro.us/news/local-news/ph ... repreneurs

How refreshing.

[Joe]

And yet, here's Trump giving credence to what O'Donnell wrote on the record, unless you're accusing the Huffington Post of making it up.

The Huffington Post didn't exist when Trump did the Playboy interview in 1999.

I'm reporting what Snopes found, which was that there is no corroboration for either the quote or the sentiment. Are you accusing Snopes of making it up?

Another boatload of irrelevance from you Forty Two. The May, 1997 edition of Playboy existed in many libraries when the Huffington Post quoted it, and unless you dispute the accuracy of their quote, it shows Donald Trump corroborating the sentiment O’Donnell reported, on the record.

You are also on the record, saying

If you say that black people are lazy, then that's better evidence that one is racist. Thinking an entire race of people is lazy is rather racist.

And just to remind you of the corroborated sentiment, Trump is reported to have said,

I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.

Add that to all the other things Trump has said and done, and it sounds persuasive enough that 8 in 10 blacks, three-quarters of Hispanics and nearly half of whites said they think Trump is racist in a recent poll.

[pErvinalia]

He'll now move on to saying that, yes, the Huffington Post probably made it up, as it's a leftist Marxist rag. He could have saved a post or two if he read your comment properly and just went straight for the ad-hom against Huff Post.

[Joe]

That would be fun, though I might not be able to get past the Lynn Thomas centerfold to prove him wrong.

[Scot Dutchy]

Very nice.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

[Forty Two]

And yet, here's Trump giving credence to what O'Donnell wrote on the record, unless you're accusing the Huffington Post of making it up.

The Huffington Post didn't exist when Trump did the Playboy interview in 1999.

I'm reporting what Snopes found, which was that there is no corroboration for either the quote or the sentiment. Are you accusing Snopes of making it up?

Another boatload of irrelevance from you Forty Two. The May, 1997 edition of Playboy existed in many libraries when the Huffington Post quoted it, and unless you dispute the accuracy of their quote, it shows Donald Trump corroborating the sentiment O’Donnell reported, on the record.

That's the thing -- here is the May 1997 article about Trump in Playboy: https://business.highbeam.com/137462/ar ... art-donald It doesn't say what HuffPo says it said. Trump vehemently denied O’Donnell’s account of the conversation when asked about it in a 24 October 1999 interview with Tim Russert on Meet the Press. The wikipedia article refers to a 1999 Article in Playboy where he supposedly said what Huffp said he said https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumped!_(book) - no link to the Playboy article itself.

Oddly, not one source links to the Playboy article in question - was it 1997? Doesn't look like it. Was it 1999? Can't find it. Can you?

The Washington Post has an article about it - they say it was in a May 1997 article in Playboy. They link to a source, the HuffPo article. The Huffpo Article, though, does not say 1997, but refers to a 1999 playboy article, which is apparently quoted, but not linked. And, the paragraph is incoherent. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/ ... 55553.html

Here, this analysis says: "EDITORS NOTE: some articles reference a Playboy interview from 1999; the article was actually from May 1997." But - I found the may 1997 article in full, and it doesn't say that - unless there is another, second, piece involving Trump in that same May, 1997 issue.... but, why can I find one but not the other?

You are also on the record, saying

If you say that black people are lazy, then that's better evidence that one is racist. Thinking an entire race of people is lazy is rather racist.

And just to remind you of the corroborated sentiment, Trump is reported to have said,

I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.

Add that to all the other things Trump has said and done, and it sounds persuasive enough that 8 in 10 blacks, three-quarters of Hispanics and nearly half of whites said they think Trump is racist in a recent poll.

You say it's corroborated - both the Washington Post and Snopes say it's not corroborated, and doubtful. Snopes doesn't lean right, and neither does the Washington Post.

It doesn't matter what a poll says most people think.