79

Archived source

Former President Donald J. Trump began his news conference on Thursday in the lobby of Trump Tower, standing in front of seven American flags. He laid a bound folder down on a lectern and declared that he was going to focus on the southern border, where his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris, is headed on Friday.

That lasted about 10 minutes.

Mr. Trump quickly appeared to grow bored with the remarks he read from, and drifted repeatedly toward other topics.

. . . At the beginning of the news conference, Mr. Trump struggled at times to articulate his thoughts or make a point clearly. He stumbled over some words as he read from remarks he had plainly not written. He bootstrapped one thought onto another based on whether the words associated with something else, as opposed to having a clear through line.

After he accused Ms. Harris of ruining San Francisco while she was the district attorney, a recent favorite line of attack, Mr. Trump followed it up with tangents that related loosely to the city of San Francisco as opposed to the reason he was at the lectern.

. . . Then he dodged several questions about whether Ukraine should cede its land to Russia in order to end the bloody incursion that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia first began in 2022. Ms. Harris earlier in the day made a jab at Mr. Trump, arguing that people who would propose Ukraine cede some of its territory to Russia were asking the country to surrender.

“It would have been a lot easier to work out prior to the start,” said Mr. Trump, who has praised Mr. Putin over the years and described the invasion as “smart” when it first occurred.

He answered a question about whether he would rescind his endorsement of Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson of North Carolina, who’s running for governor and who has been linked in a CNN report to making homophobic, racist and antisemitic statements on a pornographic website before he was a candidate. Mr. Trump responded, “I don’t know the situation.”

As he left the lobby, he stopped when someone asked if Ukraine should give up territory.

“We’ll see what happens,” Mr. Trump said.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

This is kind of fascinating, given that they’re this close to saying the truth - that he’s a demented blabbering idiot and, secondly, that it was co-written by Maggie Haberman.

I don’t know what it means, but the first part is very welcome.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

He bootstrapped one thought onto another based on whether the words associated with something else, as opposed to having a clear through line.

I know he has gotten worse, but this is so accurate of a description of how he has always spoken. Just a rambling word salad of bullshit.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Exactly. And now (checks watch) at ten minutes before armageddon they’re starting to say that in a news article. Not an opinion piece.

It’s . . . kinda weird? Good. But weird.

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Highly paid and trained investigative reporters discover that an idiot says idiotic things ..... again

Great work guys

[-] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 23 points 3 months ago

I mean, it’s important that it keeps getting called out. Too many journalists have been sanitizing his appearances and not making it clear he’s literally off his rocker

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 months ago

The fact that it continually has to be called out is not the fault of the journalists .... its the fault of the general population of the United States that has accepted this level of stupidity in their national politics.

[-] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago

Oh, there’s definitely blame to go around, but not holding Trump to at least some standard would be compounding the mistakes of the past.

No one can argue someone else out of being a Trump supporter, but I still believe there’s a chance to justifiably mock him enough to maybe change some minds. If more coverage focused on how laughably batshit insane he was instead of “ooh, look, he’s not following convention and he’s breaking the rules” it would help a lot. His lot can’t abide weaknesses and he’s definitely weak.

[-] Orbituary@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Why do people expect more from the NYT after the last 5 years?

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Well I don’t. Which is why this was surprising.

Maybe it’s just a one-off.

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for New York Times:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/26/us/politics/trump-speech-harris-border.html
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
79 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19248 readers
2198 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS