> if they show he clearly knew and allowed the policy to continue (i.e. before the point where he "circled the wagons" that I mentioned in my other post) I'd love to see it.
I have addressed this twice. It does not, but since this sceme was across multiple properties, at the highest level, and coordinated through every level of the company.
It would be absolutely absurd to think everyone across multiple properties and every level knew about this but somehow it was managed to be kept from Trump.
If that is the argument you are making then you need to prove that, not the other way around.
@freemo @mk @davidhmccoy @lowqualityfacts Oh so that's it? ok, well, I addressed that already; I guess agree to disagree #rorschachtest
@ech Sure,
You can disagree all you'd like. But to anyone who is being unbiased about this would not doubt for a second Trump is a racist from this evident alone, let alone the mountain of other examples we have.
@ech I mean i literally have run public companies, and been in charge at very large companies. Me being aware of how they are run clearly isnt in question.
You seem to be the one who thinks people at every level can know about something but somehow the guy at the top is the only one who is oblivious.
Yea your bias isnt against racism, sorry, but thats some pretty big bias clearly in favor of Trump here.
I mean sure youc an say the high up wont know certain things at their company, for sure. But we are talking about something shown to be known at every level of the company, these arent the same thing.