Trump is Objectively Bad for the Nation: 'Crook, Liar, Racist': I’m Not Afraid to Call Trump What He Is

[robosmith]

'Crook, Liar, Racist': As a Veteran Reporter, I’m Not Afraid to Call Trump What He Is

Quote

Donald Trump’s corrupt, chaotic presidency has propelled a long-running journalistic debate: how to accurately characterize the threat he poses to America.

Indeed, my opening paragraph itself provides grist for that debate. Can a fair-minded reporter flatly describe the president as corrupt and a threat to America itself? Are those facts?

Many colleagues I respect would answer “no.” When I interviewed the great newspaper editor Marty Baron a couple of weeks ago, he cautioned that such descriptions allow Trump to discredit journalists as partisans and are best left to opinion pages.

But I say, “Yes.” Calling Trump corrupt and a threat to America are not opinions. They are objective statements of fact.

I never expected to reach this point when I became a journalist 47 years ago. I did not pursue opinion journalism for a reason. My model was my father, Richard Harwood, who built his stellar Washington Post career on fearless reporting and news analysis.

Indeed, dad was appointed the Post’s first ombudsman after an earlier Republican president, Richard Nixon, howled about biased journalism the way Trump denounces “fake news.” An orphaned kid from the Midwest on a newspaper stocked with Ivy Leaguers, he found merit in some of those complaints.

So I began my career at the St. Petersburg Times in Florida, well aware of the need to fairly reflect different viewpoints – Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, police officers and college professors, Blacks and whites. My first big political profile was a sympathetic look at a GOP retiree legendary for her success in rounding up votes within her condominium complex.

Crediting the legitimacy of both sides wasn’t difficult then. American politics did not neatly sort the good guys from the bad guys.

Why I’m Not Afraid to Say ‘Lie’

Not until I reported from South Africa in the mid-1980s did I encounter that clear a moral contrast. The uprising against apartheid made election campaigns I covered at home feel trivial and pedestrian.

It’s not as if the core themes that would animate Trump and the MAGA movement weren’t around.

Ronald Reagan played racial politics with his denunciations of what became known as ‘welfare queens’; George H.W. Bush linked his Democratic opponent to a Black murderer named Willie Horton. George W. Bush used his opposition to gay marriage as a weapon in his 2004 re-election race.

But, unsavory tactics did not define those Republican presidents.

They embraced American values, and in important moments showed they could unify the country. During the elder Bush’s term, he did not stop federal regulators from sanctioning his son Neil for poor stewardship of a failed savings-and-loan.

Donald Trump is different. He has gained power by catering to his party’s darkest impulses, and his own.

Political life has amplified his lifelong penchant for racist behavior. Questioning Barack Obama’s legitimacy as president, labeling immigrants dangerous criminals, denouncing “shithole countries” with dark-skinned citizenries, thundering against diversity programs – Trump has painted a crystal-clear self-portrait.

The same goes for his relentless dishonesty. Like many colleagues, I once hesitated using the word “lie.” After all, Trump might be delusional and unable to perceive the truth. But he has long since burned through the benefit of the doubt.

Facts: Grifter, Crook, and Liar

In his first presidency, Trump went through the motions of caring about the integrity of his public service. Now, he openly milks his position for money, inviting ordinary supporters and those who would potentially bribe him to buy Trump-branded Bibles, sneakers, and cryptocurrency assets.

Over the last two months, he has recklessly turned the lives of millions upside down, from civil servants to immigrants. He has encouraged political violence by pardoning participants in the Jan. 6 insurrection he incited and firing prosecutors who obtained their convictions.

He has endangered his own former Cabinet members by removing their security protections. He has damaged the rule of law by pursuing vengeance against those who prosecuted his own crimes.

He has betrayed the free world by pressuring Ukraine to surrender to Russia. Trump’s cries of “hoax” about his mutual-assistance relationship with Vladimir Putin have become a sick joke.

So, I’ve become quite comfortable asserting these facts:

• Donald Trump is a racist, a grifter, and a crook.

• He is a liar – and a cruel one.

• He governs as an authoritarian, not as the leader of a democracy.

• He weakens America and its global standing.

I once could not have dreamed of describing a president this way. But truth remains the highest journalistic value, and those objective realities sit in plain sight.

I still hesitate to assert some descriptors. Is the sitting president of the United States a traitor to his country?

I’ll need more evidence before reaching that conclusion; Trump 2.0 is less than two months old.

John Harwood is the former chief Washington correspondent for CNBC and White House correspondent for CNN. He has interviewed every president from George H.W. Bush to Joe Biden. Sign up for ‘The Stakes with John Harwood’ to get all of his columns in your inbox.

 

 

[August1991]

Robosmith,

You are an AI robot. And you hate Trump.

======

Tell me something new. 

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

Pretty much everybody has a moral position, just as they have clothes. 

 

They're not usually that interesting. It's not why we have a discussion board. 

What's interesting is thoughts, analysis, perspective on events and on other thoughts, analysis, perspective.

[Nationalist]

Boys... politics has gone from a debate over best policy, to a contest to see who can scream the loudest.

[gatomontes99]

If we have a vote for worst thread of the year, I choose this one. 

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, August1991 said:

Robosmith,

You are an AI robot. And you hate Trump.

Nothing artificial here. But you're right, I hate dishonest CRIMINALS and POTUS who put themselves FIRST.

6 hours ago, August1991 said:

======

Tell me something new. 

Gotta keep telling until the message get through.

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Boys... politics has gone from a debate over best policy, to a contest to see who can scream the loudest.

That's what happens when YOU reflexively deny/defend EVERY CRIME.

[User]

More spam. 

No opinions, no commentary, nothing... just spamming with a link. 

 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, User said:

More spam. 

No opinions, no commentary, nothing... just spamming with a link. 

Apparently you don't know how to read.

[CdnFox]

14 hours ago, robosmith said:

'Crook, Liar, Racist': As a Veteran Reporter, I’m Not Afraid to Call Trump What He Is

 

 

You're also not afraid to call him what he isn't. 

you WERE afraid to call biden what he is. 

Which is why you lost the last election. 

[gatomontes99]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You're also not afraid to call him what he isn't. 

you WERE afraid to call biden what he is. 

Which is why you lost the last election. 

Well, that and Kamala was an objectively bad candidate.

[robosmith]

3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Well, that and Kamala was an objectively bad candidate.

Who came within 1.5 points of beating Trump in the pop vote.

That makes Trump NOT MUCH BETTER.

Not to mention he needed almost $300M of Muskrat's money to get there.

Clearly the candidate of the oligarchs. 🤮

[gatomontes99]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Who came within 1.5 points of beating Trump in the pop vote.

That makes Trump NOT MUCH BETTER.

Not to mention he needed almost $300M of Muskrat's money to get there.

Clearly the candidate of the oligarchs. 🤮

Lmao...and how many Chinese DL's did it take to get her that close? 

 

[User]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Apparently you don't know how to read.

I can read just fine. 

[User]

12 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Who came within 1.5 points of beating Trump in the pop vote.

That makes Trump NOT MUCH BETTER.

Not to mention he needed almost $300M of Muskrat's money to get there.

Clearly the candidate of the oligarchs. 🤮

The President is not elected by popular vote. I can show you how many counties Trump won and it dwarfs what Harris won. So what?

So... you don't think Harris was backed by wealthy billionaires dumping hundreds of millions to support her?

I swear, you post the most ignorant crap on here and NEVER own up to it. You run away and hide. 

Kamala Harris Has More Billionaires Prominently Backing Her Than Trump—Bezos And Griffin Weigh In (Updated)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/10/30/kamala-harris-has-more-billionaires-prominently-backing-her-than-trump-bezos-and-griffin-weigh-in-updated/

[CdnFox]

24 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Well, that and Kamala was an objectively bad candidate.

That is entirely true, but in fairness even a good candidate would have struggled having been dropped into the soup at the last second like that and in that kind of horrible way without even a proper selection process

[gatomontes99]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That is entirely true, but in fairness even a good candidate would have struggled having been dropped into the soup at the last second like that and in that kind of horrible way without even a proper selection process

Would they? I don't know that I could be that confident of your statement. We can't prove a counter factual. But Trump is very polarizing. It kind of took an equally polarizing politician for him to win. And thank God he did. Can you imagine Kamala cackling at the Ayatollah of Iran as she told him "Don't nuke. Don't nuke."

If the Democrats could have run a Mayor Adams or someone like him, they'd have had a pretty good chance. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

Who came within 1.5 points of beating Trump in the pop vote.

That makes Trump NOT MUCH BETTER.

Not to mention he needed almost $300M of Muskrat's money to get there.

Clearly the candidate of the oligarchs. 🤮

Lost badly and slipped in every single demographic and in every single district. She literally failed across the board which is almost unheard of.

Literally one of the worst showings in ages. The democratic party is really failing these days

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Would they? I don't know that I could be that confident of your statement. We can't prove a counter factual. But Trump is very polarizing. It kind of took an equally polarizing politician for him to win. And thank God he did. Can you imagine Kamala cackling at the Ayatollah of Iran as she told him "Don't nuke. Don't nuke."

If the Democrats could have run a Mayor Adams or someone like him, they'd have had a pretty good chance. 

Political campaigns aren't super easy. And normally, a candidate has almost a year's workup before they have to actually begin the campaign. She got like 15 minutes. It also makes a huge difference if you've picked your own team and done all the work to tail or something to your strengths and weaknesses, and normally there would be months and months of practicing with advisors so that you had your talking points down to a science and everything have been tested by focus groups.

To go without all of that stuff is not easy. I'll put it to you this way, any candidate in those circumstances is going to underperform substantially. Now I don't think she'd have won either way, I really do believe she is a terrible candidate. But a poor candidate might still have won if they had the running start that one would normally have if they were elected properly to lead the party

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

Nothing artificial here. But you're right, I hate dishonest CRIMINALS and POTUS who put themselves FIRST.

Gotta keep telling until the message get through.

That's what happens when YOU reflexively deny/defend EVERY CRIME.

As for you...

You divorced yourself from truth and several other virtues years ago. All that's left is a bot...robo-bot.

[gatomontes99]

13 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Political campaigns aren't super easy. And normally, a candidate has almost a year's workup before they have to actually begin the campaign. She got like 15 minutes. It also makes a huge difference if you've picked your own team and done all the work to tail or something to your strengths and weaknesses, and normally there would be months and months of practicing with advisors so that you had your talking points down to a science and everything have been tested by focus groups.

To go without all of that stuff is not easy. I'll put it to you this way, any candidate in those circumstances is going to underperform substantially. Now I don't think she'd have won either way, I really do believe she is a terrible candidate. But a poor candidate might still have won if they had the running start that one would normally have if they were elected properly to lead the party

Well, she had a "successful" four years as VP where she would change nothing about what Joe did. But she wasn't Joe. And she was from a middle class neighborhood, the kind where everyone mowed their yards and took pride in their yards, so she really understood us and that's why healthcare. 

In theory (and what I am joking about above) she had a 4 year track record to run on. She didnt need to form a new plan or campaign. She could have sped in with the same talking points as the dude that beat up Corn Pop and had a better result. As it was, she lost ground in every single county in the US. 

[robosmith]

19 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

As for you...

You divorced yourself from truth and several other virtues years ago. All that's left is a bot...robo-bot.

Says the ^pu$$y who defends ALL OF Trump's CRIMES, mostly out of complete IGNORANCE of the law and history.

[User]

4 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Says the ^pu$$y who defends ALL OF Trump's CRIMES, mostly out of complete IGNORANCE of the law and history.

You have no room to call anyone on this forum ever a pu$$y when you cowardly hide from me and run from almost every thread you have ever been in when you are called out for the BS you post. 

 

[Nationalist]

6 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Says the ^pu$$y who defends ALL OF Trump's CRIMES, mostly out of complete IGNORANCE of the law and history.

Yet...you're wrong again.

Fancy that...

Edited June 22, 2025 by Nationalist

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Says the ^pu$$y who defends ALL OF Trump's CRIMES, mostly out of complete IGNORANCE of the law and history.

You're a democrat. It's no wonder you mistake a man for a ****    (this is why you can't get a date)

Edited June 22, 2025 by CdnFox

[West]

18 hours ago, robosmith said:

'Crook, Liar, Racist': As a Veteran Reporter, I’m Not Afraid to Call Trump What He Is

 

 

Yet you support a party who gave Iran nukes. Pathetic