Defiant Trump Doubles Down, Defends "Beautiful" Confederate Statues

President Trump just dropped a brand new tweet storm doubling down on comments he made at an impromptu press conference earlier this week that sparked a media firestorm and left many calling, yet again, for his immediate resignation.

Responding to actions taken around the country to remove confederate statues in the wake of the violence in Charlottesville last weekend, Trump said it's "sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart."

Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments. You can't change history, but you can learn from it. Robert E Lee, Stonewall Jackson - who's next, Washington, Jefferson? So foolish!


Also the beauty that is being taken out of our cities, towns and parks will be greatly missed and never able to be comparably replaced!


We're awaiting confirmation from CNN that these tweets are just the latest evidence of Trump's sympathy for white supremacist groups which prove that he is unfit for office.


two hoots Shitonya Serfs Thu, 08/17/2017 - 10:54 Permalink

No we can't, no we won't.   Sure we can all clearly see this real and present social disorder is not moving in a favorable direction.  We have spent 100's of billions, maybe a trillion on proping up this phoney and abusive idea since 1935 (FDR) and it kept people tied to dependence almost to the point of innateness.   It was a quick fix (depression leftovers) that has lasted too long.   Now it is so imbedded in politics it cannot be easily changed, some of Trump's battle, some of everybody's battle. The elite:  "let the sheeple bicker over monuments and what-nots, keep them focused on the past as we thought them in school for we are the future"  

In reply to by Shitonya Serfs

jbvtme decon Thu, 08/17/2017 - 11:02 Permalink

jackson and lee weren't racists they were true patriots defending states rights. the issue of the succession (and the civil war) was states being compelled to collect excise taxes for the federal government, which south carolina refused to do.  the true issue of racism reverts to the usual forces. for example, slaves were not traded on jewish holidays and the majority of slaves were owed by the entitled rich. the slave trade was run out of newport rhode island where the whiskey breweries were located. whiskey (the currency of the slave trade) was manufactured there by the usual forces. the recent removal of confederate statues has nothing to do with racism, but a warning to any state (california, etc.) thinking of succeding from the union. to destroy "sacred" cultural and religious rights, images and memories is the first line of attack in the art of conquest. 

In reply to by decon

MEFOBILLS two hoots Thu, 08/17/2017 - 11:39 Permalink

Skin color will not change by tearing/taking down monuments It is not skin color, it is race.  There are dark skinned (Asian) Indians, who are darker than many negroes.  There are Malay people's who can get very dark, almost black.It is only in mult-racial countries like Brazil, where you get this fixation on skin color.  A family can have a black kid and a white kid born to the same mother.  Both of the parents are likely Mestizo or Castizo's, perhaps with some negro admixture.Group behavior is more a function of RACE than skin color.  An Albino negro will more likely behave in a fashion similar to his racial group, rather than that of a white caucasian.  That is, if the Albino can survive without being eaten (they are considered to have magical properties).

In reply to by two hoots

813kml Conscious Reviver Thu, 08/17/2017 - 11:55 Permalink

The irony lost on the SJWs is that currently ALL Americans are slave owners courtesy of the dollar as reserve currency.  In fact, the southern slaves probably had much better living conditions than the women and children in third-world sweatshops making 25 cents an hour to glue together the latest Nikes or the burlap sacks that pass for Walmart clothes.

In reply to by Conscious Reviver

cheech_wizard Jim in MN Thu, 08/17/2017 - 10:59 Permalink

In 1898, as the U.S. war in Cuba and the the Philippines began, President William McKinley promoted reconciliation between the North and South by proposing that the federal government assume responsibility for the graves of the Confederate dead. A Confederate section was established at Arlington National Cemetery and President William Howard Taft authorized the placement of a memorial. The United Daughters of the Confederacy raised funds and commissioned a Confederate veteran, Moses Ezekiel, to sculpt the monument. The three-story monument features a large figure representing Peace standing atop a base with life-size figures of Confederate soldiers going off to war,and includes an African-American slave holding a soldier's child. The monument was dedicated on June 4, 1914.Standard Disclaimer: If the Federal government assumed the responsibility, then defacing a grave should be a Federal offense. (and all that entails...)

In reply to by Jim in MN

MsCreant ejmoosa Thu, 08/17/2017 - 12:36 Permalink

They had a right to secede from the Union, it was written into the original deal when they joined the Union. When I learned this it was like a punch in the gut, one of the things that turned me against much of my so called history education.I don't like slavery or support it, but the issue of State's rights has been buried under the whole slave meme. If you question any of this, you must like slavery. It really sucks that any move you make to point out these other issues transforms you into a racist monster that no one will listen to any more.That is what is pissing the "right" off. 

In reply to by ejmoosa

scraping_by jimmy12345 Thu, 08/17/2017 - 12:38 Permalink

The common people of the South were used by the planter oligarchy in a bid to create a nation under their complete control. The Confederate soldiers were conscripts, given the choice of the barracks or the gallows. The civilians were taxed to starvation. The war was a bid for complete control by an elite rather than race.

In reply to by jimmy12345

chiaroscuro jimmy12345 Thu, 08/17/2017 - 20:21 Permalink

Let's try an analogy to help you understand this situation a little better. The North was bullying and economically abusing the South. Imagine the North and the South were a man and woman who married at our nation's founding. They were happy at first and had an agreement they hoped would work. They planned to spend the rest of their lives together. But there was a legal way out of the marriage in case it didn't work out.Overtime, the romance subsided. Then the husband began trying to control his wife. He wouldn't let her keep the money she made. He wouldn't let her freely associate with her friends. He tried to dictate every facet of her life. Then he began threatening her physically. So she told him she wanted a divorce. But he said no. He told her if she tried to leave he'd kill her.  Then he pulls out a gun and she shoots back. Does that make her a traitor? Does her attempt to defend herself and leave the abusive relationship make her a terrorist or even a rebel? Of course not. She acted as any rational, self-respecting human would, in self defense, which is what the South did. Even the Latin motto of the Confederacy was Deo vindice (God will defend us). 

In reply to by jimmy12345

The Ram HenryKissinger… (not verified) Thu, 08/17/2017 - 10:26 Permalink

Yes, what we have here is the beginning of Marxist 're-education' camps.  I know Trump is vastly outnumbered, but he does need to stand up to protect the national battlefield parks which he CAN protect because they are on Federal property.  At this point, it seems like the slide to a marxist state is happening very rapidly, but Trump must do his part to arrest this process or at least slow it down.  Trump needs to forget about polls, procedures, whatever, and take strong and bold action.  Ladies and Gents, we don't have much to lose at this point.  Letting Americas historical heritage slip away will only accelerate the move to a marxist state,  I see the writing on the wall, and if sensical Americans are not frightened at this point, they do not know what's happening to them!  The real sad thing is that the people who could make the most difference (like protecting historic monuments) are working extremely hard to support their families and keep a 'real' economy going.    

In reply to by HenryKissinger… (not verified)

doctor10 BaBaBouy Thu, 08/17/2017 - 10:15 Permalink

152 years later and is still scared of Bobby E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson- and the implications of limited, decentralized Federal control!!!

THE reason for all the monuments to the War is to remind people of that history. Those unaware of their history are bound to repeat it.

The forces desiring war with Russia...war with Syria..war with the Ukraine..war with Iran...war with China etc etc are relentless. If they don't get their war over there, well by God, they're bound and determined to have a punitive war here for our having refused their bidding.

Hoepfully we are all bigger and smarter than that

In reply to by BaBaBouy

Itinerant Harnar Thu, 08/17/2017 - 20:39 Permalink

Recent archeological excavations show that those working on the Great Pyramids lived quite well, certainly not slaves, who were used to do routine work elsewhere in the Kingdom. As a rule, important monuments were never built by slave labour, whether you are talking pyramids, cathedrals, temples, or modern bank buildings. Prestige objects with cultural significance do not lend themselves to the efforts of conscripted slaves.

In reply to by Harnar