WATCH: Internet Explodes Over Trump’s Literacy After Interview Resurfaces

Summary

A resurfaced interview has reignited questions about Donald Trump's literacy, with some suggesting he may be illiterate. The clip shows Trump struggling to discuss books and authors, making contradictory statements about reading. Critics online have pointed out these inconsistencies, questioning his ability to read fluently. The discussion also touches on his disinterest in traditional reading, his history of controversial statements, and how these contradictions align with his public persona. The transcript highlights his perceived lack of literacy, the debate over his education, and the ironic twists in his rhetoric over time.

Takeaways

• 😀 Trump’s literacy is questioned after a viral 1987 interview where he contradicted himself about reading books.
• 😀 Trump claimed Tom Wolfe was one of his favorite authors but admitted he didn’t read *Bonfire of the Vanities*.
• 😀 The moment sparked speculation that Trump may not be fully literate or fluent in reading despite his position and access.
• 😀 Trump’s repeated contradictions, such as mispronouncing 'Two Corinthians,' have led people to question his reading abilities.
• 😀 Some critics have pointed out that Trump's difficulty with reading might be linked to a lack of fluency, but not necessarily illiteracy.
• 😀 Trump's intelligence briefings were reportedly altered to include pictures and graphics, possibly to suit his preference for visual learning.
• 😀 A user on Instagram sarcastically claimed Trump 'has never read a book,' reflecting public skepticism about his reading skills.
• 😀 Trump’s history of praising books and authors without fully reading them adds to the narrative that he may not engage deeply with written material.
• 😀 The controversy around Trump’s literacy parallels other public gaffes, including his infamous Bible misquote and his reluctance to take responsibility for his actions.
• 😀 Columbia University agreed to pay $220 million to settle a case related to anti-Semitism and free speech, igniting further criticism of powerful institutions undermining student rights.

Q & A

What was the main claim about Donald Trump's literacy in the script?

The script suggests that there may be doubts about Donald Trump's literacy, with evidence pointing to him possibly struggling with reading or being unable to read fluently, based on his past statements and actions in public interviews.

How did the 1987 interview with Donald Trump contribute to the literacy claims?

In the interview, Trump mentioned Tom Wolfe as one of his favorite authors but admitted to not having read 'Bonfire of the Vanities.' This contradiction raised questions about his actual reading habits and literacy.

What was the significance of Trump confusing 'two Corinthians' instead of 'Second Corinthians'?

This moment was used as further evidence of Trump's possible lack of literacy, suggesting that he either didn’t know the proper term or hadn’t read certain texts properly, which fed into the narrative of his questionable understanding of basic concepts.

How did online users respond to the resurfaced video about Trump's literacy?

Online users mocked Trump for seemingly not reading books and even joked about his inability to read. One user sarcastically remarked that Trump 'doesn’t read ever, even the crappy signs,' while others criticized him for lying comfortably about his reading habits.

What did Trump's intelligence briefings reveal about his approach to information?

Trump's intelligence briefings were allegedly tailored to suit his preferences, with discussions about incorporating images, graphics, and visual aids to help him understand information, as he reportedly had difficulties reading and processing textual information.

What role did Columbia University play in the political narrative discussed in the script?

Columbia University was involved in a controversy where it agreed to pay $220 million to settle allegations of anti-Semitism and civil rights violations related to a 2023 Hamas attack. The situation sparked further criticism of political influences on educational institutions.

What historical context was referenced regarding Columbia University’s actions?

The script mentions that Columbia University has a history of cracking down on student protests, including incidents from the past, such as those during the Vietnam War and in 1917, suggesting a long-standing trend of siding with administrations over students.

How did the script reflect on Trump’s persona as a public figure?

The script highlights how Trump’s public persona, especially in relation to his literacy, seemed to conflict with the image of a knowledgeable leader. His contradictory statements and reliance on simplistic formats for understanding information were viewed as problematic.

What does the script suggest about Trump’s relationship with education?

The script suggests that Trump’s questionable literacy, combined with his attacks on educational institutions and negative experiences in school, paints a picture of a leader with limited intellectual engagement or academic depth.

What is the broader societal implication of the claims about Trump's literacy?

The script raises concerns about the broader societal implications of having a leader who may not be fully literate or well-read. It suggests that despite his lack of intellectual engagement, Trump has still maintained political power, which raises questions about the value placed on literacy and education in leadership.