Trump Denies “Nasty” Statement Made On Tape Just Days Earlier

Many of us have criticized President Donald Trump when he contradicts himself or calls facts “fake news.” On Sunday, Trump left many scratching their heads when he categorically denied referring to the the American-born Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, as nasty. What is strange is that (unlike many) I was not particularly aggrieved when Trump made the comment. He was responding to a personal attack attributed to Markle. I would prefer the President not to respond to such comments (particularly before a State visit). I also do not consider it appropriate to attack the London mayor as “a stone cold loser” and comment on internal policies on a State visit. However, the Markle comment was actually restrained for this President. What really bothered me was the denial of the comment just days later.

In an interview with the British Sun tabloid, Trump was asked about that statement of Markle that he is a “misogynist: and that “she’d move to Canada if you got elected; turned out she moved here.”

Trump responded “Well, a lot of people are moving here, so what can I say. No, I didn’t know that she was nasty.”

Now, I remain one of those Americans who is hopelessly uninterested in anything royal and I could not care in the slightest what some Duchess thinks about our president, our country, or frankly any subject.

However, I suddenly cared when on Sunday, Trump tweeted the following: “I never called Meghan Markle ‘nasty.’ Made up by the Fake News Media, and they got caught cold! Will @CNN, @nytimes and others apologize? Doubt it!”

What is also curious is that the Sun is not viewed as a liberal newspaper. It is a tabloid owned by Rupert Murdock, the owner of Fox News.

The Sun then released the audiotape.

As often is the case, I tried very hard to understand why Trump would make the denial but also why his associates would encourage people to listen to the tape. The only explanation that I can come up with is that Trump said “she was nasty” which refers to the statement itself. He could argue that saying that someone made a nasty comment is different from saying that they are a nasty person.

Once again, I simply do not understand since I do not see what it is such a towering issue that he referred to an insult toward him as nasty. He could have just left it there. Instead, he is drawing some barely perceptible distinction at best or at worse denying a verifiable fact. I also do not see why churning such controversies has any positive impact for Trump or his soon to be announced campaign for reelection.

147 thoughts on “Trump Denies “Nasty” Statement Made On Tape Just Days Earlier”

  1. “may under-count Blacks by more than 3%, or about 1.7 million people.” and other groups as well.

    It seems that their first problem is the question on the census “Is this person a citizen of the United States?”. In other words Peter wants illegals treated like American citizens while he scr-ws black citizens by giving their jobs to illegals and some of their benefits as well.

    Nice guy you are Peter! Always willing to take from a black American and give to an illegal.

    1. Alan, you’re denying the issue I raised. This census is under-funded and under-tested. Therefore it stands a good chance of under-counting Blacks in addition to Hispanics. Now if Trump is so great for Blacks, why would he allow them to be under-counted?

      The answer is that Republicans know Blacks won’t be voting for them.

      1. Why would this additional question “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” undercount blacks? I want all legal persons counted but I don’t want illegals taking the jobs of blacks and others. That is unfair to American citizens. You wish to take away jobs and money from those American citizens and give it to illegals.

        Trump wants to make sure blacks and other minorities don’t lose their jobs to illegal citizens. He also wants to preserve entitlements and other types of benefits for American citizens not illegal one/s That is not a hard concept to understand but you seem to keep missing it.

        1. Again, Alan, if you read the story, this Census is under-funded and under-tested. According to the Urban Institute, 1.7 million Blacks are likely to be under-counted.

          1. Tabby, that’s based on a study by The Urban Institute which you can find in an NPR liink further down the thread.

          2. We can say that every census is underfunded and undermanned and is inaccurate. Now let us get back to a major point in the article. They seem to focus on the question “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” That might scare away minorities because they are illegal. Not having illegals that can be paid under the table at much lower wages causes American workers to lose their jobs. One group that has benefitted from Trump’s economic plans are blacks. Their employment has increased so why would you want to put black folks back in the unenviable position of not having jobs? To me that is crazy policy if you are concerned with helping minority populations.

            My understanding is that some minorities have sub optimal education and living conditions. Why would you want to spend money on illegals instead of those American citizens lifting the American citizen up so that he can be more productive and offer a better future for their families?

            1. Alan, here is an article from The Hill, 4/2/19 that notes this Census is so underfunded it lacks the money to test new data gathering methods. That’s what the Urban Institute was referring to in their belief that Blacks stand to be under-counted by up to 3%. And Republicans ‘want’ Blacks under-counted. An undercount is the whole reason for the citizenship question and underfunding.


              1. Peter, you should read your articles before posting. The first hurdle mentioned in article #1 was the question “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” That leads to you taking the position of a racist being willing to give black jobs to illegal aliens. That position doesn’t look good.

                This newer article deals with funding which comes from the House which is under Democratic control. Earlier Democrats and some Republicans were more interested in shutting down Trump than running government. We just wasted a ton of money on a fraudulent special counsel investigation costing money, human capital and removing resources that could have been spent on the census but at the time you didn’t seem to care.

                Additionally while suddenly you have fear that the census might not be absolutely correct you never gave a dam- whether or not those voting were doing so legally. Guys like you put roadblocks up to prevent the federal government from seeing if there was corruption in the voting process.

                You now are worrying about a correct census so money from the federal government can be properly distributed across the nation along with an appropriate distribution of Congressional seats. Money required by illegals shouldn’t have to be paid by American citizens who you care little about but it is and some states have even permitted illegals to vote at least to some degree in some states. I guess you don’t care about American citizens or their money, vote, safety and their jobs.

                You really have to be more comprehensive when you think about a singular issue before it bites you in the a$$.

                1. Alan, that money was appropriated when Republicans still controlled Congress. And Trump could have asked for more. Your answers are becomes increasingly lame.

                  Republicans ‘want’ Blacks and Hispanics undercounted. That’s the whole idea!

                  1. No Peter. Trump is not a dictator. Spending originates in the House and the Democrats have had control of the House and still have it now. They might have been able to do something if they wanted to work with the administration but they were more interested in wasting time, money and human capital on the special counsel and talking about impeaching Trump.

                    When you talk about being lame limp over to the nearest mirror and look at yourself. You complain about Trump acting like a dictator even though he hasn’t done anything of the sort and then you want him to take even more power. Your dimwit Democrats did nothing to prevent the problem you worry about.

      2. This census is under-funded and under-tested.

        From which talking point mill did you acquire this tidbit?



      Just weeks before the Supreme Court is expected to rule on whether the Trump administration can add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, new evidence emerged Thursday suggesting the question was crafted specifically to give an electoral advantage to white Republicans.

      The evidence was found in the files of the prominent Republican redistricting strategist Thomas Hofeller after his death in August. It reveals that Hofeller “played a significant role in orchestrating the addition of the citizenship question to the 2020 Decennial Census in order to create a structural electoral advantage for, in his own words, ‘Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites,’ ” and that Trump administration officials purposely obscured Hofeller’s role in court proceedings, lawyers for plaintiffs challenging the question wrote in a letter to U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman. Furman was one of three federal judges who ruled against the question this year.

      The letter drew on new information discovered on hard drives belonging to Hofeller, which were found accidentally by Hofeller’s estranged daughter. Stephanie Hofeller Lizon then shared them with the organization Common Cause for a gerrymandering lawsuit it is pursuing in North Carolina.

      The files show that Hofeller concluded in a 2015 study that adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census “would clearly be a disadvantage to the Democrats” and “advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites” in redistricting, and then pushed the idea with the Trump administration in 2017, according to the letter to Furman.

      The evidence contradicts sworn testimony by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s expert adviser A. Mark Neuman and senior Justice Department official John Gore, as well as other testimony by defendants, the letter said.

      The Commerce and Justice departments did not respond to questions about the new information.

      Edited from: “Despite Trump Administration Denials, New Evidence Suggests Census Citizenship Question Was Crafted To Benefit Republicans”

      The Washington Post, 5/30/19



        This used to be part of the questionaire but you and your fellow Democrats want to take jobs and money from America’s most needy citizens and give it to people breaking our laws and have no right to be here.

        If you wish to accuse someone of being a racist (white power) look in a mirror since you are the one that is permitting law breaking that destroys blacks, hispanics and anyone that is poor.

        The Washington Post is unreliable. It didn’t bother to talk about American citizens and the fact that the specific question used to be included and it wasn’t and isn’t racist. The two groups advocating for the illegals today are fools and the richest corporations that want wages held down.

        1. Alan, whether you want the ‘illegals’ here or not, getting an accurate count is just common sense. The problem for Republicans, however, is that an accurate count could give more political power to Blue states; exactly what Republicans seek to prevent.

          What’s more, Republicans have deliberately underfunded the Census to make sure Blacks will be undercounted.

          And Trump apologists like Alan turn cartwheels trying to explain that Republicans are really sympathetic to Blacks.

          1. If we didn’t have all the illegals here the question of “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” wouldn’t exist which was the first hurdle mentioned in the article you cited but didn’t read.

            If this question didn’t exist and we kept illegals out and only permitted legal immigration we would have a much easier time getting an accurate census even if the extra monwy wasn’t spent and we would have more money in the treasury to spend.

            “And Trump apologists like Alan turn cartwheels trying to explain that Republicans are really sympathetic to Blacks.”

            Right now we can assume a lot of Democrats are potential racists since they don’t care about poor Americans that are losing their jobs to illegals. Trump increased employment for black and hispanic citizens so he doesn’t fit into the mix. You support the importation of low wage illegals so you might qualify for the racist category. You also qualify as a corporatist.

            I’m for American citizens of any color or race that wish to integrate into American society. I’m for legal immigration as long as it benefits the American citizen. We need immigration if our fertility rate remains as low as it is.

            I definitely don’t know where you come from but it sounds like a really bad place filled with a lot of racism and hate.

            1. Alan, your efforts to ‘flip’ the argument to make Democrats the racists is so convoluted and you’re really kidding yourself.

              If you’re honestly concerned about ‘illegal aliens’, you want an accurate census count. You want a clear idea of how many Hispanics are in this country. That way you can put together computer models to estimate how many ‘illegals’ are in every state.

              If the presence of ‘illegals’ threatens America, you want accurate estimates of how many are really here. So you defeat your whole argument by saying we don’t want an accurate count.

              From a Scientific standpoint alone we want to know many people are really living in the U.S. Accurate counts are crucial to the planning of Federal, state and local programs. To sabotage the Census is sabotaging government. Which sounds ‘smart’ to stupid people.

              Corporate America wants to know ‘how many people are really living in each market’ Business should have reliable statistics. Don’t you think so, Alan?

              Why would we deliberately undercount Los Angeles, the nation’s second biggest market. Does that make sense to Madison Avenue?

              Or how about Houston, a major Top 10 market? Do we want to undercount Houston for some reason? I ain’t from Texas but heck, give them folks a break. Let ’em get an accurate count.

              Chicago, Miami and #1 New York, of course would all be deliberately undercounted per Republican sabotage. How stupid that must look to Corporate America.

              1. “Alan, your efforts to ‘flip’ the argument to make Democrats the racists is so convoluted and you’re really kidding yourself.”

                You have to live with your guilt. You are the one who is fine with illegal aliens, illegal drug trafficking and illegal sex trade whichin this case causes great harm to those you say you wish to protect, minorities especially blacks.

                You are the one who is placing his ideology above the needs of these people.

              2. “If the presence of ‘illegals’ threatens America, you want accurate estimates of how many are really here.”

                Peter, are you insane. Counting the numbers of people doesn’t solve any problems. The solution lies in good policy and that means good immigration laws with a successful nation that can help people all over the world like the US has done ever since it became a world power.

                You sound like a bookkeeper from Hell. You don’t care about the suffering. You just want to keep score. What is wrong with you?

              3. PH, you’re wasting your time on Allan. I’m sure you know that. The lilly white party he is defending is racist in it’s policies and it’s voters and politicians reflect that – literally, and it’s almost blinding. If the democratic party is a plantation, a lot of the planters are black as our party looks like the country at conventions, the House, and in voting lines. The GOP looks like a Lawrence Welk audience gone to seed.

                1. “If the presence of ‘illegals’ threatens America, you want accurate estimates of how many are really here.”

                  We know your type Anon. Outward, superficially different. Go put on your hood.

  2. Dershowitz and Dowd discuss Mueller removal of information from Dowd’s statement providing a one sided distorted report. Dershowiztz says this lawyer to lawyer discussion was obligatory.

  3. As I like to say: Trump fibs, the media lies.

    Did Trump contradict himself on a matter of verifiable fact? Sure.
    Is this a matter that any adult should give a crap about? No.

    Did CNN and the WaPo lie, or uncritically retail other people’s lies, in the matters of Covington kids or Jussie Smollett hoaxes? Yes.
    Were these things important? CNN and the WaPo certainly thought so.

    1. Jay, we see no examples here.

      Furthermore, CNN and WaPo are two different companies with two different formats. In fact, I first read about Smollet’s lies in the Washington Post. So I don’t know ‘what’ you’re even talking about.

      1. Alan, these clips of Ms Owns are so brief they amount to nothing whatsoever. It’s like taking a half-sip of coffee.

        You can find 10 second clips of Jennifer Lopez where she too sounds like a great leader. I don’t know why you bothered posting these.

        1. let’s see some of those clips. hopefully they will show her nalgas

        2. There are more clips Peter and you can probably find the entire speech on the net. She has plenty of net presence. Take note the clips are in context something you and the Washington Post don’t seem to care about. Her name is real, not anonymous.

          The two points she is making: 1 Blacks should leave the Democratic Party for the Democratic Party is trying to use race as a single issue for blacks to vote Democratic. She has explained elsewhere how Democrats have done nothing for blacks and many of their policies are hurting black families. 2 She was talking about black only safe spaces on college campuses. Is that wise? Isn’t that what racism is all about?

          You think what she has to say is worthless because she is black and is not a Democrat. She is off the plantation so you pretend that what she says doesn’t exist. In a fashion that type of attitude is racist though I don’t think you intend to be.

          1. Alan, one can’t form any opinion based on these clips. They’re too brief to mean anything. They’re only for ‘you’, the elderly Trumper who wants desperately to think Blacks are unhappy with Democrats. But even in that capacity these clips are too brief to mean anything.

            1. From today’s NPR, an Urban Institute study find that the 2020 Census may under-count Blacks by more than 3%, or about 1.7 million people. The Institute bases these findings on new procedures the Trump Administration intends to use. Said procedures have not been sufficiently tested due to budget restraints. However the Institute believes this next Census actually ‘wants’ to under-count Blacks (in addition to Hispanics whom they definitely want to under-count).

              But ‘hey’, guys like Alan keep telling us how Trump cares so much for Blacks. And 10 second clips of Candice Owens are ‘evidence’ of that.


            2. Peter, of course the clips mean nothing to you. Yo want blacks to remain on the Democratic plantation and believe safe spaces excluding whites is appropriate but on the other hand you might say we should be colorblind.

              You have said the same about the most inciteful articles and posts so it doesn’t surprise me that you can find no value in a black woman who doesn’t agree with the Democratic line. Some might consider that racist or sexist but I don’t think that is your problem at least in this case.

              1. Alan, those Blacks only exist in the minds of Trumpers.

                1. Peter, your statement sounds like you “find no value in a black” person. That is quite an admission.

        3. “You can find 10 second clips of Jennifer Lopez where she too sounds like a great leader.”

          The real challenge would be to find a clip of any length that makes J. Lopez seem like a competent actress.

          1. her best movie was the one where Jane Fonda was the obnoxious mother in law

            She was very funny in that one. Lopez that is. Hanoi Jane is never funny except in a pathetic way, which is precisely how they cast her

    1. the farm murders that were happening in fka Rhodesia now Zimbabwe and that are happening in the RSA are definitely race related murders. Of course the mass media will explain that away and blame it on apartheid and the evils of racism. Which was exactly “blaming the victim”

      Well, apartheid must have worked for agricultural production, because when the black “war veterans” of Zimbabwe hacked up the white former owners and took over the white-owned and managed farms in Rhodesia, agricultural production plummeted. and lo, the victorious black zimbabweans went hungry under their new master Robert Mugabe, a communist, with a sorry record of failure like so many of his comrades

      Was that because of racism too?

      read between the lines. “commercial’ really means, “White”

      1. Kurtz, Enigma holds onto a lot of that type of animus that doesn’t help the people but temporarily soothes the rage until the rage destroys everything and the people are left with nothing or less than they had before. I believe in the opposite approach which seems to work for many groups of people.

Comments are closed.