So, you don't know what was said, but you know what was meant, because the POTUS's motives are independent of what was said. Got it. At least you got the "why" part correct, because that word carries all the meaning needed to understand the motive. (I'm sure that just went right past you. )
If it wasn't said at all my statement holds true. If it was said, and using the statement as relayed on CNN - then I posted what I think it means. It's pretty clear really. I get it, you hate Trump. He freaks you out big time. It really is sad that is has you making up meaning for statements that just aren't there. You're usually much more objective about things, until it comes to him
The pertinent question is, why did Dick Durbin announce that Trump used the term "shitholes", whether he did or not? When did Democrats morph into Puritans? First it's no more whoopee and now no swearing?
More agenda driven bullshit from the Democrats would be my final answer. They have tried and failed for a year so far to bring him down. That is why I think that what was told to the press could possibly be a very hard spin, out of context interpretation and paraphrasing for effect of what was actually said in the meeting...
The people on the other half of the island, the DR, seem to be doing much better. Same island, far different results. Why is that?
Let's see...Hmmmmm....if your country doesn't have an immigration problem...like debating what to do about all the people that want to come IN TO your country, shithole may be, while somewhat insensitive, a boldly honest way to sum it up the country's overall condition. If he said it, kudos to the Don for his up front honesty. We FINALLY have an honest man in the White House!
I love this. You have divined the true meaning, irrespective of what was said, and I took at face value the presumed quote and drew a line between treating countries as proxy for individuals. Many people would view such a substitution as a clear sign of bigotry, something the POTUS has repeatedly shown a temperament for. Like I said; talking past one another.
“ ... repeatedly shown a temperament for.” - your words. I’m curious ... what examples come to mind when you make this statement?
Not to speak for him, but calling the white supremacists "very fine people" (these were the people protesting taking down statues and chanting "Jews won't replace us") and wanting to ban muslims from entering our country both skew bigoted (IMHO).
Here's a few that come to mind without doing any research: DOJ settlement on housing mid 70's; full page ad on the Central Park Five, no remorse/apology after exoneration; birtherism (if you somehow forgot how far he jumped the shark here, it's all on you); ad hominem attack on the Hispanic judge; The continued focus on immigration as a crime problem despite the fact that both legal and illegal immigrants have criminality rates lower than native born citizens. Look, the list is long and weary. The fact that you ask shows the degree to which we are talking past one another. Its OK. You are in the echo chamber and there will be legions here to bolster your view that Trump is a very fair-minded soul. People chose what they want to see.