Haaretz : @realDonaldTrump Reportedly Suggests Wave of anti-Semitic Incidents Could Be False Flags Perpetrated by Jews ....(again)

Reprinted from Haaretz Newspaper 

Similar suggestions have been a theme on right-wing conspiracy theory websites and are being promoted aggressively by white supremacist David Duke on his Twitter account.

U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, February 27, 2017. Evan Vucci/AP

Three Nonsensical Claims Made While U.S. Jewry is Under Attack

Everything you need to know about the wave of threats terrorizing U.S. Jews

Informal Trump adviser implies wave of bomb threats against U.S. Jews linked to Democrats

U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday indicated for the second time that he believes it is possible that the current wave of anti-Semitic incidents could be “false flags” – perpetrated by the left or by Jews themselves in order to make his administration and supporters look bad.

Trump spoke to a gathering of state attorneys general from across the country that included Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro. Shapiro told reporters in a conference call after the meeting that Trump suggested that the attacks could reflect something other than anti-Semitism, saying that “the reverse can be true” and “someone’s doing it to make others look bad,” according to Philly.com.

The suggestion that the wave of attacks are false flags meant to perpetuate the impression that they were being committed by Trump supporters has been a theme on right-wing conspiracy theory websites and is being promoted aggressively by white supremacist David Duke on his Twitter account. Trump supporter and informal adviser Anthony Scaramucci tweeted a similar suggestion on Tuesday.

At a press conference on February 16, Trump suggested a false flag conspiracy was being perpetrated by his “opponents” in order to bolster claims that his election and presidency was fueling racism and anti-Semitism. “You have some of the signs and some of that anger caused by the other side,” charged Trump. “They’ll do signs and drawing that are inappropriate. It won’t be my people. It will be people on the other side to anger people like you,” he said.

Shapiro told reporters in a teleconference call, that Trump promised to explain more in his address to Congress Tuesday night. "Hopefully he'll clarify a bit more about what he means about the reverse possibly being true," said Shapiro, who said that he and his colleagues found the president’s remarks “curious.”

According to another Philadelphia-based news website, a reporter asked Shapiro during the call whether Trump was indicating that he believed his camp was being falsely accused of perpetrating the crimes. The attorney general reportedly answered that he wasn’t exactly sure what Trump meant by his answer but “he used the word ‘reverse’ I would say two to three times in his comments” and “I don’t know why he said that.”

In response to the reports, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League told Buzzfeed: "We are astonished by what the President reportedly said. It is incumbent upon the White House to immediately clarify these remarks."

Playboy Magazine endorses Hillary Clinton .We Have to Suffer Two More Debates, but at Least There’s Alcohol

We Have to Suffer Two More Debates, but at Least There’s Alcohol By Lucy Steigerwald ( Republished with permission of the author and Playboy Magazine. Playboy Magazine has endorsed Hillary Clinton) 

By most measures, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s debate was a tortoise-and-the-hare battle. Trump started strong, but got flustered and tuckered out. Clinton was shaky and trying too hard (which always trips her up), but she finally and settled into her element and, if nothing else, acted presidential. Our first non-politician cum presidential candidate in decades seemed peeved, and the more hot and bothered he got, the more he annoyingly barked “excuse me.” Clinton just smiled. She just doesn’t have to do anything at all, she thinks, and she can still beat him in November. On the other hand, the fact that the race is as close as it is does not reflect well on Clinton as a politician, or on America at large.

The moderator, NBC’s Lester Holt, mostly kept himself out of things, only occasionally putting his foot down as the candidates ignored their time limits. Trump did this more often than Clinton, either because he’s like that, or because a woman being as rude as Trump would never fly in this world. Probably both.

Unfortunately, just because Clinton may have pulled ahead and “won” (whatever that means), doesn’t make her less awful. Yes, Trump lies about everything small and petty, but they’re both arrogant warmongers with dishonest suggestions, specifically when it comes to criminal justice reform.

Trump always lands a good dig, and sometimes at worthy targets like former Vice President Dick Cheney, but for him it’s not about hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis or whether he really opposed the war from the get-go. It’s about Trump being right. He’s neither a pacifist nor a real isolationist, especially when he obsesses over how America should have stayed in Iraq and stolen the Middle East’s oil.

Clinton may have been more polished (and as stiff as wood), but she also made staggeringly daft decisions, such as hitting Trump on his continued refusal to release his tax returns, because “probably he’s not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are, because it must be something really important, even terrible, that he’s trying to hide.” Considering her on-going email scandal, her refusal to release transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs and her general attitude of privacy for “me” but not for thee, it’s dense of Clinton to go on about Trump’s financial documents.

A debate full of bickering is always more fun than fake politeness; however, their incoherent stances and pandering on war, transparency, crime and the economy are growing tiresome. Trump spent his time going for the jugular and reminding America what Clinton wants to forget—that she once called black men “superpredators” in the 1990s when she was backing her husband’s now disfavored crime bill. Clinton, on the other hand, is on the reform bandwagon. She cares a lot about racial disparities in the system, damn it, and bad things like New York City’s stop and frisk are no cure.

They’re both arrogant. America knows this, but is unable to stop it. Trump has the bombast of an empty-headed know-nothing who is sure he can do everything better than you. And Clinton is indeed the Platonic ideal of the politician. She changes when it suits her and when it’s safe to do so. They both want power way too much. Clinton wants the presidency so badly she’s starting to salivate. Trump, somehow, still comes off as if he’d be happy losing just enough to be able to forever claim that “they” took the Oval Office from him because “they” were corrupt and scared. Altogether, the first debate made it clear that these candidates are fighting not for national gains, but for personal ones. Cheers, America.

Tags

• 
  

Playboy Magazine endorses Hillary Clinton .We Have to Suffer Two More Debates, but at Least There’s Alcohol

We Have to Suffer Two More Debates, but at Least There’s Alcohol By Lucy Steigerwald ( Republished with permission of the author and Playboy Magazine. Playboy Magazine has endorsed Hillary Clinton) 

By most measures, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s debate was a tortoise-and-the-hare battle. Trump started strong, but got flustered and tuckered out. Clinton was shaky and trying too hard (which always trips her up), but she finally and settled into her element and, if nothing else, acted presidential. Our first non-politician cum presidential candidate in decades seemed peeved, and the more hot and bothered he got, the more he annoyingly barked “excuse me.” Clinton just smiled. She just doesn’t have to do anything at all, she thinks, and she can still beat him in November. On the other hand, the fact that the race is as close as it is does not reflect well on Clinton as a politician, or on America at large.

The moderator, NBC’s Lester Holt, mostly kept himself out of things, only occasionally putting his foot down as the candidates ignored their time limits. Trump did this more often than Clinton, either because he’s like that, or because a woman being as rude as Trump would never fly in this world. Probably both.

Unfortunately, just because Clinton may have pulled ahead and “won” (whatever that means), doesn’t make her less awful. Yes, Trump lies about everything small and petty, but they’re both arrogant warmongers with dishonest suggestions, specifically when it comes to criminal justice reform.

Trump always lands a good dig, and sometimes at worthy targets like former Vice President Dick Cheney, but for him it’s not about hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis or whether he really opposed the war from the get-go. It’s about Trump being right. He’s neither a pacifist nor a real isolationist, especially when he obsesses over how America should have stayed in Iraq and stolen the Middle East’s oil.

Clinton may have been more polished (and as stiff as wood), but she also made staggeringly daft decisions, such as hitting Trump on his continued refusal to release his tax returns, because “probably he’s not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are, because it must be something really important, even terrible, that he’s trying to hide.” Considering her on-going email scandal, her refusal to release transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs and her general attitude of privacy for “me” but not for thee, it’s dense of Clinton to go on about Trump’s financial documents.

A debate full of bickering is always more fun than fake politeness; however, their incoherent stances and pandering on war, transparency, crime and the economy are growing tiresome. Trump spent his time going for the jugular and reminding America what Clinton wants to forget—that she once called black men “superpredators” in the 1990s when she was backing her husband’s now disfavored crime bill. Clinton, on the other hand, is on the reform bandwagon. She cares a lot about racial disparities in the system, damn it, and bad things like New York City’s stop and frisk are no cure.

They’re both arrogant. America knows this, but is unable to stop it. Trump has the bombast of an empty-headed know-nothing who is sure he can do everything better than you. And Clinton is indeed the Platonic ideal of the politician. She changes when it suits her and when it’s safe to do so. They both want power way too much. Clinton wants the presidency so badly she’s starting to salivate. Trump, somehow, still comes off as if he’d be happy losing just enough to be able to forever claim that “they” took the Oval Office from him because “they” were corrupt and scared. Altogether, the first debate made it clear that these candidates are fighting not for national gains, but for personal ones. Cheers, America.

Tags

•