Connect with us

Trump Says He’ll ‘Speak Out Against Oppression of Women, Gays’ in Foreign Policy Speech. He’s Lying.

Published

on

Misogynistic Anti-Gay Anti-Islam Republican Nominee Claims He Is a Better Advocate for Equality Than Hillary Clinton

Donald Trump delivered what was billed as a major foreign policy speech Monday afternoon and promised to be a better advocate for equality for women, gay people, and people of different faiths than his Democratic opponent. Less than one day after The New York Times published a bombshell report accusing Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort of possibly receiving 22 payments totaling $12.7 million from the political party of the Ukraine despot who was backed by Russian president Vladimir Putin, Trump ignored his own personal and business dealings in countries where being gay is either illegal or extremely difficult.

“While my opponent accepted millions of dollars in Foundation donations from countries where being gay is an offense punishable by prison or death, my Administration will speak out against the oppression of women, gays and people of different faith.”

He’s lying.

You don’t have to be president to “speak out against the oppression of women, gays and people of different faith.” You just have to do it.

And if Donald Trump actually meant it, he would have done it already, like Hillary Clinton has, for decades, time and time and time again, even when she wasn’t an elected official or Cabinet Secretary. Like in 1995, when she went to China and did the unthinkable at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, telling delegates from 180 countries, “it is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights.”

“If there is one message that echoes forth from this conference, let it be that human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, once and for all,” Clinton said, much to the chagrin and embarrassment of China, which has a horrible record on human rights and women’s rights.

Donald Trump is opposed to same-sex marriage and same-sex couples raising children. He has flip-flopped on the rights of transgender people, and  however, has had many opportunities to speak out for equaity of women and LGBT people, and people of different faiths, and he never, ever has. Trump has made millions of dollars in countries where it is illegal to be LGBT, and made millions in countries where being LGBT may not be “illegal,” but not only can gay people not marry, they have few if any legal protections.

Trump’s empire spans the globe, including to at least four countries (likely more) where it is illegal to be gay: United Arab Emirates, India, Egypt and Indonesia. He also does business in countries where it can seem like it’s illegal to be gay, like Turkey, Panama, and Azerbaijan, which is “identified as the worst place to be gay in Europe by the ILGA-Europe Rainbow Index,” according to a report last month on Trump’s businesses by CNN. That report also notes one of Trump’s deals with just one developer “gave it the right to use the Trump brand in 19 Middle Eastern countries.” Why didn’t he speak out for gays, women, and people of different faiths then?

RELATED: Donald Trump: 10 Comments On Same-Sex Marriage

That CNN report states Trump “also has business ties to Indonesia — where gay sex is punishable by public caning, a fine of $37,400 and more than eight years of prison time.”

Trump reportedly also does business in the U.S. with Saudi Arabia and Libya, some of the countries the real estate magnate accuses Hillary Clinton of accepting donations from on behalf of the Clinton Foundation, even though Clinton has little of any say over its dealings.

CNN Money has also detailed a portion of Trump’s business dealings with countries that have made it illegal to be gay. The Wall Street Journals reports “Mr. Trump lists 515 companies in which he is a trustee, president, chairman or member. Many are limited liability corporations attached to Mr. Trump’s real estate holdings, including properties in Panama, Istanbul, Mumbai, Puerto Rico and Dubai. Of the 515 entities, at least 391 bear his name.” And Quartz has compiled a “list of everything Donald Trump runs that has his name on it.”

The website 76 Crimes lists the nearly 80 nations which have made being LGBT illegal.

President Donald Trump will not “speak out against the oppression of women, gays and people of different faith,” because if it actually were important for him to do so, he would have done it a long time ago.

EARLIER:

Trump’s Shameless Pandering to – and Ignoring of – LGBT and Hispanic Communities Reaches New Heights

Trump Announces His New Evangelical Executive Advisory Board, List Includes Michele Bachmann

Trump On Anti-Gay ‘Religious Liberty’ Bill: ‘I Will Do All I Can To Make Sure It Comes To My Desk’

Here’s ‘Friend of the Gays’ Donald Trump Pallin’ Around With One of America’s Most Anti-Gay Pastors

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Republicans Are Using a Secret Super PAC to Pour $1 Million Into Democratic Primaries

Published

on

Super PACs with ties to Republicans are spending money to promote weaker, left-wing candidates in Democratic primaries, in an apparent effort to help Republicans retain control of the House, The New York Times reports.

“They’re going into Democratic primaries and literally trying to boost the most extreme candidates and oppose the Blue Dog-endorsed candidates that, if they win, are going to beat the Republicans in the general,” U.S. Rep. Adam Gray (D-CA) said in an interview with the Times. The Blue Dogs are more centrist Democrats.

One “new mystery super PAC with ties to Republicans has spent more than $1 million meddling in at least three Democratic congressional primaries to select preferred opponents,” the Times reports. That group is spending money to promote “a left-wing sex therapist in Texas who has been accused of bigotry and antisemitism by leaders in both parties.”

It is also running ads in Democratic primaries in Pennsylvania and Nebraska.

In some of these races the spending is an effort to disrupt Democratic candidates “who are part of the Democratic Party’s ‘red to blue’ program, a special designation for top recruits in key races that could determine control of the House.”

READ MORE: Republicans Moving to Give Trump Something He’s Wanted Since 2019

The Times calls these “interventions in the opposing party’s primaries,” and reports that they are “apparently to elevate Democrats viewed as weaker candidates,” suggesting that “the race for control of the House has entered an intensive new phase in which both parties are vying for every imaginable edge.”

“Some Republicans privately believe the party’s best chance to hold power this year is to cast Democrats as extremists,” the Times reports.

Another super PAC formally aligned with Republicans is promoting a progressive Democrat in California.

Maureen Galindo is running for a Democratic seat from Texas. Party leaders are backing Johnny Garcia, who has worked in the local sheriff’s office. Despite having raised less than $10,000, Galindo finished first in the primary, advancing to a May runoff.

“In a text message,” the Times reports, “Ms. Galindo suggested the money for the mailer had come from ‘a billionaire zionist who made the pac to sabotage candidates,’ using the type of language that has previously prompted charges of antisemitism, including from Senator Jacky Rosen, Democrat of Nevada, and Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, who called her ‘openly bigoted.'”

Galindo told the Times, “Dems and Republicans uniting against me in the same week with the same message is evidence that theyre [sic] working together for the zionist billionaires that control our government and tax money.”

There are more races that Democratic strategists expect Republicans to meddle in, including in California, Michigan and Colorado.

READ MORE: ‘Bad All Around’: Republicans Privately Fear Backing Trump Request Sends Tone-Deaf Message

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Fetterman Says He ‘Fully’ Understands Why a Pennsylvania Judge Left the Democratic Party

Published

on

A longtime Pennsylvania judge who ran as a Democrat is dropping his affiliation with the Democratic Party over what he sees as antisemitism, and U.S. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) is weighing in.

Justice David Wecht “said in a statement he is switching his party affiliation to independent due to an ‘acquiescence to Jew-hatred’ becoming ‘disturbingly common among activists, leaders and even many elected officials in the Democratic Party,'” Politico reported.

“I can no longer abide this. So, I won’t,” said Wecht, who once served as vice chair of the state Democratic Party. “I am no longer registered within any political party.”

Judge Wecht said that antisemitism used to be found more often on the far right, but since the Pittsburgh Tree of Life synagogue shooting in 2018, he said, “that same hatred has grown on the left.”

“Increasingly, it has moved from the fringe to the mainstream. It is the duty of all good people to fight this virus, and to do so before it is too late,” he said.

READ MORE: Republicans Moving to Give Trump Something He’s Wanted Since 2019

Lamenting that the Democratic Party has “changed,” Wecht said that “hateful anti-Jewish invective and actions are minimized, ignored, and even coddled.”

Senator Fetterman, whose own intention to stay affiliated with the Democratic Party has been questioned, knows Judge Wecht, according to Fox News.

“I know David and his legendary father, Cyril,” Fetterman wrote in a post on X. “As I’ve affirmed, I’m not changing my party — but I fully understand David’s personal choice.”

Fetterman also appeared to agree with Wecht, saying that the “Democratic Party must confront its own rising antisemitism problem.”

Pittsburgh’s NPR station WESA reports that Fetterman, “like Wecht a Pennsylvania Democrat, has also criticized the party, particularly in recent days as Democrats in Maine seem all but certain to nominate Graham Platner, who had a Nazi tattoo, as their candidate to challenge Republican Susan Collins for her Senate seat.”

READ MORE: ‘Bad All Around’: Republicans Privately Fear Backing Trump Request Sends Tone-Deaf Message

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

America’s ‘Winner-Take-Everything’ War Has Already Begun: Columnist

Published

on

Republican efforts to wipe Democrats off the face of their states’ congressional maps — the redistricting wars — are not the end of a “winner-take-everything” political “cold civil war,” but merely the beginning, argues Jonathan V. Last at The Bulwark.

President Donald Trump started the redistricting war when he demanded Texas redistrict mid-decade to gain five Republican seats in the House of Representatives. GOP-led states have followed suit, but in some, like America just saw in Louisiana, Republicans are now pushing to send only Republicans to the House. They are redrawing their maps to get rid of districts that voted for Democrats.

Pointing to journalists and analysts, Last argues that that will become a problem some day for Republican states that have no Democratic members of Congress. Because one day there will be a Democrat in the White House, and it will be disadvantageous for there to be no Democrats for those red states to help get their voice out to the new administration.

Last also notes that in this “winner-take-everything” political world that America may be entering, what President Joe Biden did for red states proved to be unhelpful for Democrats, and helped voters push him out.

READ MORE: Republicans Moving to Give Trump Something He’s Wanted Since 2019

“Joe Biden was, famously, a president for all of America,” Last writes. “He pumped hundreds of billions of dollars in federal credits and investments into red states. Biden didn’t just give red states their fair share—he gave them much more.”

Biden’s theory, Last argues, was that “the way to leach the poison of Trumpism out of America was to forgive Republicans and shower them with goodies to prove that he was on their side, too.”

“The notion was that, in exchange, they would reward him politically, or at least be less hostile in their overall political outlook.”

That did not work.

“Instead of conveying to Republicans that the cycle of recriminations could be broken, Biden inadvertently conveyed a different message: That Democrats did not believe in recriminations,” he writes. In other words, the message was that for all of the GOP’s bad faith actions, there would be no political price to pay.

“What message would it send to Republicans if, in 2029, President Raphael Warnock passed an infrastructure package that, just to pick an example, shoveled money for battery factories into Tennessee, after Tennessee gerrymandered its lone Democratic district out of existence?” he posits.

“Democratic deterrence didn’t work,” Last writes.

He points to Democratic states that moved to redistrict after Texas, and notes that the two sides were coming up about even.

But then, Florida moved to redistrict, with Republican Governor Ron DeSantis “doing an end run around the law” to get more GOP seats.

And then, the Supreme Court “rushed to insert itself into the fight by pushing out the Callais decision in time for Southern states to get rid of a bunch of black congressional districts.”

At this point, for Democrats to take back majority control of the House, they will need to “win the national popular vote by more than 4 percentage points.”

This status quo, says Last, is “not sustainable.”

READ MORE: ‘Bad All Around’: Republicans Privately Fear Backing Trump Request Sends Tone-Deaf Message

 

Image: Public Domain by Architect of the Capitol via Flickr

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.