CNN News Night: Getting Trump Precisely Backwards … Again

Half of the Black students [at Cornell in my day there] were on academic probation … Something like one-fourth of all the Black students going to MIT do not graduate. [There is] a pool of people whom you are artificially turning into failures by mismatching them with the school. … If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules … that would have gotten you labelled a radical 50 years ago, a liberal 25 years ago, and a racist today.

Black economist Thomas Sowell (University of Chicago Ph.D., former Cornell, Brandeis, UCLA, Rutgers, Howard Stanford University professor, one of the undoubted geniuses of our time, 1/22/21

The [Air Traffic Control] system has been under attack due to DEI and the FAA bowing to wokeness since 2010 [in] the Obama administration. The lack of staffing directly attributable to the Obama administration terminating the lists of eligible, well-trained air traffic control statements in 36 universities across the country in 2013 because they were too white. … The FAA at the same time implemented an immunity program.  You think you’re seeing legitimate statistics [about incompetency]? You’re not. … If somebody [repeatedly displays] … [in]competency, the FAA … basically allow [them] to remain in the same position.

Former Air Traffic Controller Michael Pearson, 1/31/25 

I feel like I am alone in this group and afraid to be alone in this group [boldface added].  I have focused on this group [of voters that you are calling racist] and they are really tired of being accused of racism or sexism because they voted for Trump.  And it’s one of the reasons so many of them did. …  Americans just want to be Americans, not hyphenated Americans, not black Americans, not white Americans.

Frank Luntz (Moderate anti-Trump Republican Pollster) commenting on CNN News Night panel, 1/31/25

A recent panel on Abby Phillip’s CNN News Night was deeply critical of Donald Trump’s recent statement about the possible role of DEI in the crash between American Eagle 5342 and a military helicopter near Reagan National Airport killing 67 people.  The panel composed of Mondaire Jones (J.D. Harvard), Pete Seat (former Deputy Assistant Press Secretary to President G.W. Bush), Melik Abdul (Bachelor of Arts in English, worked in Bush administration), Catherine Rampell (B.A. Princeton, writer Washington Post), Van Lathan (TMZ producer), Frank Luntz (Republican Pollster, Oxford DPhil) and Abby Phillip (Harvard B.A.) somehow manage to get Trump’s recent remarks about the role of DEI in the Potomac River plane crash completely backwards.  The 3 “Republicans” on the panel, Luntz, Seat and Abdul, are anti-Trump Republicans.

Trump’s offending statement is that “we need to get talented people” into Air Traffic Control because “this [crash] was caused … because we don’t have qualified people there,” which Abby reformulates as the “villainizing and politicizing of diversity” and adds that “You cannot get beyond race when you have the highest person in the land [Trump] saying that because we have diversity there is a lack of merit, quality, or experience.  That’s a racist view.”  Later in the discussion she says, “The person who injected race into this is Donald Trump.  We could be having a normal investigation but this is the only thing they talk about”. 

Neither of Abby’s statements are true.  First, Trump did not “villainize or politicize diversity.”  Abby here confuses between a program called “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” and actual real-world diversity.  The real question should be, does that program, DEI, advance real diversity, for, as Time, Harvard Business Review and the New York Times, none bastions of right-wing wackos, explain, there is empirical evidence that it does not.  Something does not automatically promote diversity just because it is named “Diversity”.  This is why DEI appears to be “dying everywhere”.

Further, Trump did not “inject race into this [discussion]”.  Obviously, the “liberals” did that.  Brittanica explains: “The term [DEI] refers … to an intellectual framework for understanding how various aspects of individual identity—including race, gender, social class, and sexuality—interact to create unique experiences of privilege or oppression.”  Thus, when Trump implicitly criticizes DEI, he is criticizing a program that, by definition, “injects race” into the discussion.  In a deceptive move that would make George Orwell’s head spin, Trump, for arguing that race should not be injected into the discussion, is accused of injecting race into the discussion!  Nice try! 

Mondaire Jones also immediately plays the race card by advancing Ad Hominem and Tu Quoque fallacies Trump’s arguments are “bad faith” because the “white people [boldface added]” that Trump is nominating, like Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard and RFK, Jr., do not have appropriate qualifications.  Who is injecting race into the discussion again?  And Mondaire did not, apparently, notice that Tulsi is a Hindu “woman of colour”, that Pete Hegseth has a Princeton B.A., a Harvard MPP, served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, was awarded two bronze stars, 2 Army Commendation Medals, a Combat Infantry Badge and an Expert Infantry Badge.  How many Bronze Stars does Mondaire have?  Mondaire says RFK, Jr. does “not believe in science,” which is a tad odd because over 300 scientists and physicians have signed a letter supporting him for Health Secretary. 

Abby and Rampell, both, apparently, in possession of crystal balls that enable them to read peoples minds, opine that Trump won the election because white males fear that minorities and women are “taking things that belong to them” and want to “scapegoat black and brown people and women who [they see as] robbing them of their opportunities.”  The first obvious problem with that is Trump won last November because of increased support from all communities, including blacks, Hispanics, women, Jews and Muslims.  That is, of course what really terrifies “liberals”.  Second, one should watch the video very carefully when Luntz tries to introduce some actual empirical evidence into the discussion, pointing out that he is merely relating what “the voters said to him, I am a pollster, that my job.  You all want to jump on me, that’s fine.”

The panel will not have it (empirical evidence, that is).  Abby quickly interrupts Luntz with pointed questions. Mondaire immediately accuses him of “bad faith [dishonesty]” because he is “pivoting” to “how terrible it is that some people who voted for Trump are called racist.”  That was not what Luntz said.  Luntz was responding to the “liberal” panellist’s claims, based on the “data” they saw in their crystal balls, about the motives people allegedly had for voting for Trump.   Presenting empirical evidence from his polls of voters is “bad faith” now?  Thou shalt not contradict “liberal” talking points!   When are “liberals” going to learn that disagreeing with somebody does not justify blatant “hit pieces”.   Perhaps when they become actual liberals, as opposed to blind ideologues, again. 

Luntz eventually resignedly states that he obviously cannot convince anyone on the panel.  That is, what the panel of Trump-haters actually proves is that, protected by a wall of sophistries, one cannot talk rationally or empirically to them.  Trump’s argument that race should not be introduced into the discussion gets portrayed as an Orwellian argument that race should be introduced into the discussion.  Of course, Trump’s real sin is that opposes the race-obsessed DEI programs from which many members of the panel personally benefit.  

Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!