When Trump warned we were being invaded at our southern boarder, so he took down twenty Latino’s. Twenty four hours later no condemnation of domestic violence, no urgent plea by our leader to cease and desist, just silence and the minimal god bless.

GOP eliminated a domestic terrorist task force comprised of multiple agencies and I don’t need to beat up the assault rifle and common sense gun legislation. Good people on both sides.

Yes, good people on both sides.

Are you saying that Law Abiding Gun Owning Citizens are bad people?

So if Trump hadn't used the word "invaded" this shooting would not have happened?

How about if there were not mass illegal . . . oh what shall I say . . . entries in waves by the thousands, and if there had been proper border security (including the wall that was promised by previous administrations), and if there had not been subtle, even obvious, invitations or encouragements to come by various speeches, articles, legislations, which also made it easier to do so, this shooting would not have happened?

Or if some crazy who saw the attention that mass shooters get from the media . . . or this or that . . . maybe the shooting would not have occurred.

But . . . what the heck . . . let's just say it's Trump's fault. After all he uses words like invaded . . . and infested. THAT'S the problem.

Yes, good people on both sides.

Are you saying that Law Abiding Gun Owning Citizens are bad people?
Absolutely not, but assault weapons in the hands of someone spouting white supremacy and s president using words like an invasion among others is a recipe for what is now the 250th mass shooting this year alone. If that isn’t a signal we need better legislation or better leadership what is?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So if Trump hadn't used the word "invaded" this shooting would not have happened?

How about if there were not mass illegal . . . oh what shall I say . . . entries in waves by the thousands, and if there had been proper border security (including the wall that was promised by previous administrations), and if there had not been subtle, even obvious, invitations or encouragements to come by various speeches, articles, legislations, which also made it easier to do so, this shooting would not have happened?

Or if some crazy who saw the attention that mass shooters get from the media . . . or this or that . . . maybe the shooting would not have occurred.

But . . . what the heck . . . let's just say it's Trump's fault. After all he uses words like invaded . . . and infested. THAT'S the problem.

I’m not stupid, but his words matter and the white supremacy movement has embraced Trump. Takes multiple steps to solve this, but it starts at the top.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When Ronald Reagan was president, conservatives made much of how words can change the world.

Now Trumplicans say it doesn’t matter what Trump says, it’s just words.

I’m not stupid, but his words matter and the white supremacy movement has embraced Trump. Takes multiple steps to solve this, but it starts at the top.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're not stupid, but you're not being reasonable. The "top" has been around since the beginning of this illegal immigration problem, way before Trump. And the top, which is not just the President, has been botching it all along. Much of that failure has not been merely ineptitude, but intentional. Much of it has been political rhetoric which many have "listened" to a la in the title of your thread--including the immigrants who saw legislation and heard words that encouraged, not dissuaded, them to keep coming.

To blame this shooting on the use of a word that honestly described the situation is beyond being merely myopic. It is political disingenuousness--a minor factoid stretched into a big lie.

Not to recognize the real problem with illegal immigration, not to recognize that there has been a concerted effort to avoid a solution to it, and then to jump to the conclusion that Trump's word caused the shooting, is made-up stuff rather than rational thinking. When honest use of language re immigration becomes the supposed cause for a mass shooting, then we have gone too far down the rabbit hole of political opposition to have a rational discussion.

It is obvious that there is political opposition to solving the immigration problem, other than actually continuing the flow. And there is finally one guy who is actually trying to stop it. And it is obvious that this guy is a threat to the greater agenda of his opposition. And it is obvious that Trump is, therefor, being characterized as the most evil being possible, falsely smearing him as a racist, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, Nazi, Fascist, conspirer with the enemy, hater, inspirer of killers, whatever label can be concocted in order to destroy him.

So someone was listening alright, a lot of folks were, millions of them. Millions came here illegally because of what they heard. And millions are hearing about Trump being the devil incarnate. They are hearing that his words which accurately describe situations are actually dog whistles, code, triggers to violence. That his words, not the ineptitude, the lying, the deceit of our political class--that his words like "invasion" and "infested" are the problem--that such words, rightly used, are the cause of violence.

And your characterization that the White Supremacy movement has embraced Trump is a false connection to him. He has condemned them. But that connection is one of the concocted labels used to destroy him. As in his Charlottesville quote in which he said that there were good people on both sides. His opposition falsely, intentionally, twisted it into him saying that the white nationalists were good people. Trump specifically said that he was not referring to them, that very day. But they kept repeating the lie, and they still are, and people, perhaps like you, are listening to that lie And believing it.

You're not stupid, but you're not being reasonable. The "top" has been around since the beginning of this illegal immigration problem, way before Trump. And the top, which is not just the President, has been botching it all along. Much of that failure has not been merely ineptitude, but intentional. Much of it has been political rhetoric which many have "listened" to a la in the title of your thread--including the immigrants who saw legislation and heard words that encouraged, not dissuaded, them to keep coming.

To blame this shooting on the use of a word that honestly described the situation is beyond being merely myopic. It is political disingenuousness--a minor factoid stretched into a big lie.

Not to recognize the real problem with illegal immigration, not to recognize that there has been a concerted effort to avoid a solution to it, and then to jump to the conclusion that Trump's word caused the shooting, is made-up stuff rather than rational thinking. When honest use of language re immigration becomes the supposed cause for a mass shooting, then we have gone too far down the rabbit hole of political opposition to have a rational discussion.

It is obvious that there is political opposition to solving the immigration problem, other than actually continuing the flow. And there is finally one guy who is actually trying to stop it. And it is obvious that this guy is a threat to the greater agenda of his opposition. And it is obvious that Trump is, therefor, being characterized as the most evil being possible, falsely smearing him as a racist, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, Nazi, Fascist, conspirer with the enemy, hater, inspirer of killers, whatever label can be concocted in order to destroy him.

So someone was listening alright, a lot of folks were, millions of them. Millions came here illegally because of what they heard. And millions are hearing about Trump being the devil incarnate. They are hearing that his words which accurately describe situations are actually dog whistles, code, triggers to violence. That his words, not the ineptitude, the lying, the deceit of our political class--that his words like "invasion" and "infested" are the problem--that such words, rightly used, are the cause of violence.

And your characterization that the White Supremacy movement has embraced Trump is a false connection to him. He has condemned them. But that connection is one of the concocted labels used to destroy him. As in his Charlottesville quote in which he said that there were good people on both sides. His opposition falsely, intentionally, twisted it into him saying that the white nationalists were good people. Trump specifically said that he was not referring to them, that very day. But they kept repeating the lie, and they still are, and people, perhaps like you, are listening to that lie And believing it.

The REAL problem is the WRONG people getting weapons that can inflict so much death in so little time, but Trumps words DO matter.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

100 round clips in both, why are those weapons not either better regulated or illegal?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump didn’t create the problem but his behavior is exacerbating it. His near refusal to address these issues as a leader is disturbing to say the least and I think is seen as an endorsement by some.

Quit making excuses, we’re better than glossing over domestic terrorism.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

President Donald Trump warned Saturday that “consideration is being given” to declaring antifacist protesters — Antifa — a “terror” organization. He issued the threat even though Antifa followers haven’t been linked to a single killing, while the death toll of far-right extremists is surging. C@P

many in Tumps base still just sees these shooting's the actions of a single person (aka Crazy) no matter the reason .. even if the shooter themselves tells us why.. or its a false flag operation

but mention Antifa to the Trump faithful and OMG

A few trump lies, cons and yes racism
Let’s start with birtherism
Trump tweets in 2012
Let's take a closer look at that birth certificate. @BarackObama was described in 2003 as being "born in Kenya."
Or maybe Ted Cruz
Feb 24, 2016 06:45:06 PM
Why would Texans vote for "liar" Ted Cruz when he was born in Canada, lived there for 4 years-and remained a Canadian citizen until recently [Twitter for Android]
Maybe you can block blacks from renting your apartments
https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FH-NY-0024-0034.pdf
Just start a fake university
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwi8tOD1xOrjAhWLmeAKHWbmDgEQzPwBCAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalreview.com%2Fcorner% 2Ftrump-university-scam%2F&psig=AOvVaw0FjEbCU_VcsWE0ShBUvs_Q&ust=1565053544613528
Use a false identity to get into Forbes
And here’s a recording
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjVj6K2xerjAhVikuAKHd__AL4QzPwBegQIARAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigg.com%2F2018%2Ftrump-john-barron-recordings&psig=AOvVaw1iogG72ZdfylBkrILLBfaB&ust=1565053679571602
A modeling agency
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjLucuPwOrjAhXllOAKHY15BUAQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Fformer-trump-models-tell-their-story-2017-2&psig=AOvVaw3I4OLWbL_70jroHRdiRH0J&ust=1565052256280687
Jeffrey Epstein modeled his after it, he was so impressed.
Draft dodging
Tax scams
There’s a reason he hides his taxes
He even hid his high school grades
Claims to be top of his class at Wharton, funny he’s not listed as such in the graduation program
His whole life is built on lies
And his Presidency is no different from only the best to I won’t have time for golf
Everything is a facade, a reality tv show and he’s in charge
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A few trump lies, cons and yes racism
Let’s start with birtherism
Trump tweets in 2012
Let's take a closer look at that birth certificate. @BarackObama was described in 2003 as being "born in Kenya."
Or maybe Ted Cruz
Feb 24, 2016 06:45:06 PM
Why would Texans vote for "liar" Ted Cruz when he was born in Canada, lived there for 4 years-and remained a Canadian citizen until recently [Twitter for Android]
Maybe you can block blacks from renting your apartments
https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FH-NY-0024-0034.pdf
Just start a fake university
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwi8tOD1xOrjAhWLmeAKHWbmDgEQzPwBCAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalreview.com%2Fcorner% 2Ftrump-university-scam%2F&psig=AOvVaw0FjEbCU_VcsWE0ShBUvs_Q&ust=1565053544613528
Use a false identity to get into Forbes
And here’s a recording
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjVj6K2xerjAhVikuAKHd__AL4QzPwBegQIARAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigg.com%2F2018%2Ftrump-john-barron-recordings&psig=AOvVaw1iogG72ZdfylBkrILLBfaB&ust=1565053679571602
A modeling agency
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjLucuPwOrjAhXllOAKHY15BUAQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Fformer-trump-models-tell-their-story-2017-2&psig=AOvVaw3I4OLWbL_70jroHRdiRH0J&ust=1565052256280687
Jeffrey Epstein modeled his after it, he was so impressed.
Draft dodging
Tax scams
There’s a reason he hides his taxes
He even hid his high school grades
Claims to be top of his class at Wharton, funny he’s not listed as such in the graduation program
His whole life is built on lies
And his Presidency is no different from only the best to I won’t have time for golf
Everything is a facade, a reality tv show and he’s in charge
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Amazing. You wrapped up his whole life in a few nasty sentences. Nothing about his life is true and good.

Actually, that is why I can't take you seriously.

I knew very little about him before he ran for President. I watched an episode of his "Apprentice" TV program and didn't like it. He annoyed me with his hand gesture when he said your fired. That was it, except for some positive and glowing remarks about him on some talk shows and reviews of his TV program. He was, for me, at that time, a bit annoying along with a bit of self-importance in his TV character who could dismiss someone with a funny hand motion.

When he ran for President, anything that had been positive about him was turned into a nightmare person. He suddenly was transformed from a respected, successful, somewhat philanthropic person into a nightmare filled with everything that is bad.

OK, that's politics. But the continuous and ridiculous and untrue piling on annoyed me far, far, more than his peculiar "your fired" hand thing. The endless cascade and avalanche of outlandish and unfounded labels and characterizations he was pelted with went, for me, from feeling a little sorry for him to actually beginning to like him. Especially after it all caused me to search more information about him. The people and press that once liked and respected him turned about face and bitterly, nastily, despised him. And that grew into actual hatred and fear of him.

The before and after was not only too different, the after was filled with obviously false accusations.

So you can repeat all the negative labels and testimonials, and videos your hating heart desires. Your endless and irrational streams of abuse actually creates the opposite effect on many of us than you intend.

The REAL problem is the WRONG people getting weapons that can inflict so much death in so little time, but Trumps words DO matter.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump has said nothing that would cause a rational person to kill a bunch of people. Censuring legitimate speech under the pretense of not provoking irrational or stupid people is a terrible idea. It is a method of thought and speech control.

Amazing. You wrapped up his whole life in a few nasty sentences. Nothing about his life is true and good.


What of the list I posted is a lie?
The indictments?
The testimonials?
His own tweets?
Keep believing the “Stable Genius”

Trump’s paid for over 2200 adds on Facebook since May 2018 with “Invasion” in them.
No connection there

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Clearly the greatest president of our lifetime.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump has said nothing that would cause a rational person to kill a bunch of people, he has however since he started his 2016 campaign promoted violence (he will pay your legal fees) and empowered the hate filled white supremacy groups to attack those evil invaders.

Fixed it for you. Sure Trump has freedom of speech as we all do, but his words are heard by an entire country and the hate filled speech and the words not spoken matter. In his recent rally a participant yelled out shoot them in response to Trump stating I don’t know how to stop them and in typical Trump fashion he jokes that only in the pan handle can you do that. No condemnation of violence, no insistence chance must be peaceful and thru legislation, just a joke making it clear hey I can’t tell you not to.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

latest meme making the rounds on FB ... I said this yesterday

Tumps base still just sees these shooting's the actions of a single person (aka Crazy) no matter the reason

Violent video games :sleeps:

I wonder if the shooter thought he was helping to stop an "infestation"?

here we go again, the libs blame trump (the dayton shooter appears to have been a democrat), the right pretends that the availability of high capacity magazines and things like that play no role whatsoever. the purist extremes in both sides circle
the wagons.

Guns don’t make people want to kill. but once someone snaps that way, high capacity magazines help many of them maximize the body count. and i’d bet
my life that the appearance of some of these rifles fuels the fantasies of the small number of very sick folks were talking about. Conservatives refuse to concede any of that.

But the gun is only the tool. The root cause is lack
of humanity. Everyone in North Dakota has guns, yet there’s almost no gun crime. There’s a very, very valuable lesson there, and it has to do with family values. Also, why didn’t we see this carnage in the 1950s? is it because our laws were better? or is it because family values were more traditional? Liberals refuse to concede
any of that.

we need to talk about bump sticks and high capacity magazines ( which don’t cause shootings but increase the body count). And we need to ask ourselves if obama calling people
in North Dakota bitter clingers, and Hilary calling them deplorable, is the right way to describe people
who embrace an old fashioned culture that despite whatever flaws come with it, embraces the notion that we view each other with some
humanity, and that we admit a higher purpose to our brief lives than pursuit of what pleases the self.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Leaders never pull the trigger themselves

But your attemp to change the topic isn't working
North Dakota ranks 30th in gun violence

Mass ranks 50th.

When adjusted for the population size, five of the deadliest 10 states are in the South, and six are among the 10 poorest U.S. states.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Violent video games :sleeps:

I wonder if the shooter thought he was helping to stop an "infestation"?
Newsweek had an article stating in the past year or so Trump has bought over 2200 facebook ads mentioning an "invasion" and nearly all about immigration.

But...but...but Clinton said deplorable! Give me a break.

Cesar Sayoc to be sentenced today

Words don't matter and anyways it's the medias fault.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
The Media has a big responsibility to life and safety in our Country. Fake News has contributed greatly to the anger and rage that has built up over many years. News coverage has got to start being fair, balanced and unbiased, or these terrible problems will only get worse!
7:32 AM · Aug 5, 2019·Twitter for iPhone

Does this mean "give me media coverage that I like or my followers will slaughter people?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7cKpwFmBVI

Leaders never pull the trigger themselves

But your attemp to change the topic isn't working
North Dakota ranks 30th in gun violence

Mass ranks 50th.

When adjusted for the population size, five of the deadliest 10 states are in the South, and six are among the 10 poorest U.S. states.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wdmso, and what populations in the south, are committing the violence? is it born again christians with strong nuclear families?

i’m not changing the topic, i’m being honest about the topic. look at gun ownership versus gun crime.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fixed it for you. Sure Trump has freedom of speech as we all do, but his words are heard by an entire country and the hate filled speech and the words not spoken matter. In his recent rally a participant yelled out shoot them in response to Trump stating I don’t know how to stop them and in typical Trump fashion he jokes that only in the pan handle can you do that. No condemnation of violence, no insistence chance must be peaceful and thru legislation, just a joke making it clear hey I can’t tell you not to.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, you didn't fix it for me, you fixed it for yourself. Which is exactly the trick the left is playing when it "fixes" things Trump says by falsely accusing him of saying something other than what he said--in order to fix it for themselves, to make him the evil that they will "fix."

I have actually watched some of his rallies, and, no, his campaign does not "promote" violence. I saw the context of what was said that you object to. The intent and motivation were not what you claim. What you've been fed is a pattern of "fixing."

But his campaign does promote a lot of other things that are good and necessary. And he appears to be one who actually tries to fulfill his promises, unlike the typical pols that preceded him.

Newsweek had an article stating in the past year or so Trump has bought over 2200 facebook ads mentioning an "infestation" and nearly all about immigration.

But...but...but Clinton said deplorable! Give me a break.

Sounds like an attempt to "fix" what Trump said. I have used the word infestation many times. I guess I've been fixed into a racist.

What of the list I posted is a lie?

I didn't read your list. Your lists have reached a point where to me they are worse than crying wolf too much. There doesn't seem to be enough connection between them and reality, so no chance that there will be the sudden surprise that one will finally be something dangerous.

Trump’s paid for over 2200 adds on Facebook since May 2018 with “Invasion” in them.
No connection there


Nope. No connection. Invasion is a very good and useful word. When I have seen Trump use it, it was spot on. So, is there a certain number of times you can use the word "invasion" without becoming a racist?

How many times have you used the word? Bet you don't know.

Newsweek had an article stating in the past year or so Trump has bought over 2200 facebook ads mentioning an "infestation" and nearly all about immigration.

But...but...but Clinton said deplorable! Give me a break.

she did say deplorable. and is she in the oval
office at the moment?

Spence, why didn’t we see this level of carnage (mass shootings and garden variety gang violence) in the 1950s? Is it because we had better laws back then? Were guns not available back then? Did Eisenhower single
handedly suppress violence? Or is it all Trumps fault?

Or is violence correlated with the breakdown of the nuclear family?

Have fun answering that. You can’t, not in a way that doesn’t take a big dump all over your worldview.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nope. No connection. Invasion is a very good and useful word. When I have seen Trump use it, it was spot on. So, is there a certain number of times you can use the word "invasion" without becoming a racist?

How many times have you used the word? Bet you don't know.

In a speech, never.

Perhaps in a discussion about ticks.

I worry more about the attitudes that Trump promotes with his fear-mongering than any of the racist smokescreen.
Plenty more Trump invasion claims here:
https://factba.se/search#invad

and then you have his tweets

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order. Most children come without parents...
11:02 AM · Jun 24, 2018·
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Many Gang Members and some very bad people are mixed into the Caravan heading to our Southern Border. Please go back, you will not be admitted into the United States unless you go through the legal process. This is an invasion of our Country and our Military is waiting for you!
10:41 AM · Oct 29, 2018·Twitter for iPhone
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
The Mayor of Tijuana, Mexico, just stated that “the City is ill-prepared to handle this many migrants, the backlog could last 6 months.” Likewise, the U.S. is ill-prepared for this invasion, and will not stand for it. They are causing crime and big problems in Mexico. Go home!
1:42 PM · Nov 18, 2018·Twitter for iPhone
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Humanitarian Crisis at our Southern Border. I just got back and it is a far worse situation than almost anyone would understand, an invasion! I have been there numerous times - The Democrats, Cryin’ Chuck and Nancy don’t know how bad and dangerous it is for our ENTIRE COUNTRY....
11:04 AM · Jan 11, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
More troops being sent to the Southern Border to stop the attempted Invasion of Illegals, through large Caravans, into our Country. We have stopped the previous Caravans, and we will stop these also. With a Wall it would be soooo much easier and less expensive. Being Built!
9:52 AM · Jan 31, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Senate Republicans are not voting on constitutionality or precedent, they are voting on desperately needed Border Security & the Wall. Our Country is being invaded with Drugs, Human Traffickers, & Criminals of all shapes and sizes. That’s what this vote is all about. STAY UNITED!
12:54 PM · Mar 6, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
....and renovated, with MUCH MORE to follow shortly. Tens of thousands of illegals are being apprehended (captured) at the Border and NOT allowed into our Country. With another President, millions would be pouring in. I am stopping an invasion as the Wall gets built. #MAGA
5:13 PM · Mar 9, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
...travesty that is taking place in allowing millions of people to easily meander through their country and INVADE the U.S., not to mention the Drugs & Human Trafficking pouring in through Mexico. Are the Drug Lords, Cartels & Coyotes really running Mexico? We will soon find out!
4:37 PM · Jun 1, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
People have been saying for years that we should talk to Mexico. The problem is that Mexico is an “abuser” of the United States, taking but never giving. It has been this way for decades. Either they stop the invasion of our Country by Drug Dealers, Cartels, Human Traffickers....
7:44 AM · Jun 2, 2019·Twitter for iPhone

and his speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMCkzCJHfcU

Trump and his wife Ivanka both condemned wife Nationalism - good for them. finally.

I feel sorry for the police having to rush in w/no body armour and pistols to help protect us when there up against military style weapons.

when a bernie sanders fan shot up a gop softball ira rice and almost killed steve scalise, was that bernie’s fault? after all, bernie has used some pretty harsh language to describe conservatives who like capitalism - only caring about the wealthy, greedy one percenters, etc.

are all presidential
candidates responsible when their fans attack those they criticize? or only when trump does it?

i don’t like trumps language any more than the liberals here. but some
consistency would
be nice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump and his wife Ivanka both condemned wife Nationalism - good for them. finally.

I feel sorry for the police having to rush in w/no body armour and pistols to help protect us when there up against military style weapons.

not “finally”. from two years ago...”racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs”.

Paul, is that not clear? is that not denouncing racism?



https://www-m.cnn.com/2017/08/14/politics/trump-condemns-charlottesville-attackers/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fr.search.yahoo.com%2F_y lt%3DA0geK.G7REhd4JYApABx.9w4%3B_ylu%3DX3oDMTByaWg 0YW05BGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwM4BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--%2FRV%3D2%2FRE%3D1565046076%2FRO%3D10%2FRU%3Dhttps %253a%252f%252fwww.cnn.com%252f2017%252f08%252f14% 252fpolitics%252ftrump-condemns-charlottesville-attackers%252findex.html%2FRK%3D2%2FRS%3DNLKED66fH mmwWqCSkIb3IULCJ2I-
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

See below for how that article started out. Doesn't sound like Pres. Trump did it willingly. This was after calling Neo Nazi's 'fine people". He had to read from a teleprompter bc if he didn't we all know he would have put his foot into his mouth again.

You might also want to read that other thread I bumped up.

Do you know where old DS has been lately?



President Donald Trump, facing mounting pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike, did what he declined to do over the weekend during an event at the White House on Monday when he directly condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis in a brief statement to reporters

See below for how that article started out. Doesn't sound like Pres. Trump did it willingly. This was after calling Neo Nazi's 'fine people". He had to read from a teleprompter bc if he didn't we all know he would have put his foot into his mouth again.

You might also want to read that other thread I bumped up.

Do you know where old DS has been lately?



President Donald Trump, facing mounting pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike, did what he declined to do over the weekend during an event at the White House on Monday when he directly condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis in a brief statement to reporters

however he said it, he said it two years ago. true or false?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Newsweek had an article stating in the past year or so Trump has bought over 2200 facebook ads mentioning an "invasion" and nearly all about immigration.

But...but...but Clinton said deplorable! Give me a break.
Cue the straw talk Jeff.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

See below for how that article started out. Doesn't sound like Pres. Trump did it willingly. This was after calling Neo Nazi's 'fine people". He had to read from a teleprompter bc if he didn't we all know he would have put his foot into his mouth again.

You might also want to read that other thread I bumped up.

Do you know where old DS has been lately?



President Donald Trump, facing mounting pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike, did what he declined to do over the weekend during an event at the White House on Monday when he directly condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis in a brief statement to reporters

He didn't call NeoNazis fine people, he called people supporting their right for free speech fine people. There were people on BOTH sides, protesting to remove and protesting to keep the statues. Those were the people he called "fine people". Not the Neo Nazis or White Supremacist nor the Antifa protestors (also assholios).

I know you are a smart guy but on this one you are intellectually lazy - not sure though if by design or by default.

So Paul, please set aside a little over 4 minutes, watch the following video, the unedited segment when Trump spoke of both sides. Then still tell me that you honestly believe he was calling the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists "Fine People"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

however he said it, he said it two years ago. true or false?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, he did after the majority of the country was in an uproar at his saying neo Nazis where some fine people.

He didn't call NeoNazis fine people, he called people supporting their right for free speech fine people. There were people on BOTH sides, protesting to remove and protesting to keep the statues. Those were the people he called "fine people". Not the Neo Nazis or White Supremacist nor the Antifa protestors (also assholios).

I know you are a smart guy but on this one you are intellectually lazy - not sure though if by design or by default.

So Paul, please set aside a little over 4 minutes, watch the following video, the unedited segment when Trump spoke of both sides. Then still tell me that you honestly believe he was calling the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists "Fine People"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

bingo. it’s a complete media
myth that he was referring to white supremacists as fine people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, he did after the majority of the country was in an uproar at his saying neo Nazis where some fine people.




Watch the video in my reply to you and tell me that is what he said, that the Neo Nazis were fine people.

Yet at LEAST you and Wayne pull this "Fine People" and "Both Sides" stunt repeatedly.

she did say deplorable. and is she in the oval
office at the moment?

Spence, why didn’t we see this level of carnage (mass shootings and garden variety gang violence) in the 1950s? Is it because we had better laws back then? Were guns not available back then? Did Eisenhower single
handedly suppress violence? Or is it all Trumps fault?

Or is violence correlated with the breakdown of the nuclear family?

Have fun answering that. You can’t, not in a way that doesn’t take a big dump all over your worldview.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Safer for who?

The average black man who feared being killed because he looked at a white woman?

A guy who could be picked up at random from a Georgia street and lynched?

Safer for the black driver looking for a gasoline station willing to sell to him? Or a restaurant? Or if he needed a hospital and the only one who admitted blacks was 100 miles away? 300 miles?

Safer for a union organizer who feared being shot down or clubbed to death by the company’s thugs?

Safer for people with polio?

Safer for car drivers who had no safety belts or airbags?

Safer for all those kids sitting around lead paint and asbestos?

Safer for those guys being conscripted and sent off to the hell that was Korea?

Safer for the homosexual who could be chased down and beaten and the police wouldn’t care?

Safer for the women who needed an abortion but could only seek out “back alley” operations?

Safer for the people who had to deal with the Mafia?

The answer is NO. It wasn’t safer.

Was it better for women who had no outlets for their talents except housework, motherhood, and the companionship they offered their husbands?

We did get some things in the 50s, TV, gas guzzling cars, suburbs, malls, the FBI, partisan politics, the Cold War and the Red Scare, consumerism, disposable appliances, the Pill (debuted in 1960, but “birthed” in the Fifties), Playboy, counter-culture, preemptive wars.

But don't worry Trump is the only one who can save you from something that has been improving since the 80s, just like he's saving you from the economy that has been consistently growing for a decade and he claims that nobody else could.

And remember there's always a tweet for that, if only he thought his tweets applied to him.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.

2:01 PM · Nov 8, 2013·Twitter Web Client

Mayor of Dayton Nan Whaley: "I've heard that [President Trump's] coming Wednesday but I have not gotten a call. And you know he might be going to Toledo, I don't know.":hidin:

White-Nationalist Terrorism Must Be Stopped
Conservatives have not been afraid to confront extremism in our world, and we must not be afraid to confront terrorism here at home.

by George P. Bush

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/white-terrorism-must-be-stopped/595471/

Safer for who?

The average black man who feared being killed because he looked at a white woman?

A guy who could be picked up at random from a Georgia street and lynched?

Safer for the black driver looking for a gasoline station willing to sell to him? Or a restaurant? Or if he needed a hospital and the only one who admitted blacks was 100 miles away? 300 miles?

Safer for a union organizer who feared being shot down or clubbed to death by the company’s thugs?

Safer for people with polio?

Safer for car drivers who had no safety belts or airbags?

Safer for all those kids sitting around lead paint and asbestos?

Safer for those guys being conscripted and sent off to the hell that was Korea?

Safer for the homosexual who could be chased down and beaten and the police wouldn’t care?

Safer for the women who needed an abortion but could only seek out “back alley” operations?

Safer for the people who had to deal with the Mafia?

The answer is NO. It wasn’t safer.

Was it better for women who had no outlets for their talents except housework, motherhood, and the companionship they offered their husbands?

We did get some things in the 50s, TV, gas guzzling cars, suburbs, malls, the FBI, partisan politics, the Cold War and the Red Scare, consumerism, disposable appliances, the Pill (debuted in 1960, but “birthed” in the Fifties), Playboy, counter-culture, preemptive wars.

But don't worry Trump is the only one who can save you from something that has been improving since the 80s, just like he's saving you from the economy that has been consistently growing for a decade and he claims that nobody else could.

And remember there's always a tweet for that, if only he thought his tweets applied to him.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.

2:01 PM · Nov 8, 2013·Twitter Web Client

i was talking about gun violence, that was crystal clear. racism was worse then, good to see a kool aid drinker admit that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i was talking about gun violence, that was crystal clear. racism was worse then, good to see a kool aid drinker admit that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It still exists
You don't need to read the El Paso killer’s manifesto. Just turn on Fox News.
Shortly after a gunman murdered 20 people in a Walmart in El Paso, TX, on Saturday, the hashtag “#whitesupremacistterrorism” began trending on Twitter. The “terrorism” portion of that epithet references the alleged shooter’s apparent intent of “coercing and intimidating a civilian population” with the massacre. The suspect is described as a “white supremacist” because of his ideological rationale for carrying out the act, as described in a manifesto posted to the web forum 8chan shortly before the attack.

The alleged killer wrote in the document that he wanted “to exact revenge against ‘the Hispanic invasion of Texas,’ to forestall what he called ‘cultural and ethnic replacement,’ and to ‘reclaim my country from destruction,’” echoing the perpetrators of similar mass shootings, as National Review’s editors noted in denouncing him.

Those ideas, once again drenched in blood, were at one time largely restricted to fringe forums populated by hardcore white supremacists and conspiracy theorists. But in recent years, you could have easily heard them recited while watching a random night of Fox News’ prime-time lineup.

Fox personalities have worked to mainstream the racist conspiracy theory that non-white immigrants threaten to “replace” white American populations. Hosts Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, whose shows regularly revolve around the purported dangers immigration poses to the cultural fabric, have been particularly taken with that argument, and they are not subtle in its promotion.

“Your views on immigration will have zero impact and zero influence on a House dominated by Democrats who want to replace you, the American voters, with newly amnestied citizens and an ever increasing number of chain migrants,” Ingraham told her audience shortly before the 2018 midterms.

“It's not a conspiracy theory, it's happening in public,” Carlson has argued. “[Democrats’] political success does not depend on good policies, but on demographic replacement, and they'll do anything to make sure it happens.”

Carlson is particularly beloved by white nationalists, who believe he “is making the white nationalist talking points better than they have,” as the son of the founder of hate website Stormfront put it in March. The Fox host regularly warns of the dire consequences immigration poses to the country. He has said that immigration “is absolutely destroying America” and will “change this country completely and forever”; argued that “we’re being invaded” by migrants in a way that could trigger a national “collapse”; and claimed that “we are importing people from places whose values are simply antithetical to ours,” putting the nation’s ability to “survive” at risk.

The description of migration across the southern border as an “invasion” has become so common on Fox that it hardly warrants mention at this point. That is simply the language the network’s personalities -- even its purported “straight news” anchors -- use to describe migrants, often as Fox airs B-roll of columns of Hispanic men marching north.

Though the alleged shooter's ideas seem to echo what Fox airs every night, the language in his manifesto differs from the network's in one small way: Its references to race are explicit, while Fox’s commentators often talk around that. But this is largely a distinction between text and subtext. The invaders who Fox hosts keeps warning might destroy the country through demographic replacement are Black and brown, as both the hosts and their audience know.

The network appears deeply committed to airing talking points previously confined to the fever swamps. Their use has continued even as white supremacists enact mass murders, and Fox has defended Carlson and Ingraham from advertiser boycotts triggered by their bigoted language on immigration.

Fox’s use of this rhetoric of demographic replacement and migrant invasion has not occurred in a vacuum. It has been mirrored by Republican politicians, including President Donald Trump, who similarly deploy those racist tropes. That's no coincidence -- both Fox and the GOP depend on riling people up with racist appeals for their success. Their behavior won't change unless their incentives change.

Watch the video in my reply to you and tell me that is what he said, that the Neo Nazis were fine people.

Yet at LEAST you and Wayne pull this "Fine People" and "Both Sides" stunt repeatedly.

If you think he was only defending the people who didn't want the traitor Lee statue to come down - keep believing that and keep defending him. BC I doubt there was anyone there who only thought the march was about the statue - and if there were any that naïve, then when they saw the Neo Nazis they should have left. "Jews will not replace" us should have given them a good indication it wasn't only about a statue. Trump was all over the place in that conference. He repeatedly tried to blame the "alt left" and somehow put them on equal footing w/the Neo Nazis and white supremacists.

Pete, for god’s sake, we have god knows how many millions of illegals
living here, and it's an enormous financial burden. it’s not racist or demanding blood, to point that out. not that there arent those that go too far, on all sides. hilary called tens of
millions of trump supporters deplorable and irredeemable, maxine waters said to let trump supporters know they aren’t welcome
Anywhere. funny i’ve never heard you complain about that. because your outrage is selective, which means it’s also fake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you think he was only defending the people who didn't want the traitor Lee statue to come down - keep believing that and keep defending him. BC I doubt there was anyone there who only thought the march was about the statue - and if there were any that naïve, then when they saw the Neo Nazis they should have left. "Jews will not replace" us should have given them a good indication it wasn't only about a statue. Trump was all over the place in that conference. He repeatedly tried to blame the "alt left" and somehow put them on equal footing w/the Neo Nazis and white supremacists.

He put Antifa in the same category as Neo Nazis and White Supremacists - that is correct, no? They are all people that will use violence to further their means, right?

He said the peacefully protesting people for and against the removals of the statues were fine people, right?

That the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists as well as the Antifa people ARE the bad people, they came looking for a fight. As a result people got hurt and one woman was killed. He is not saying those people are "Fine People", not even close.

Pete, for god’s sake, we have god knows how many millions of illegals
living here, and it's an enormous financial burden. it’s not racist or demanding blood, to point that out. not that there arent those that go too far, on all sides. hilary called tens of
millions of trump supporters deplorable and irredeemable, maxine waters said to let trump supporters know they aren’t welcome
Anywhere. funny i’ve never heard you complain about that. because your outrage is selective, which means it’s also fake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why are you now worried about financial burdens, the current administration is certainly not fiscally conservative. In fact no less of a right wing mouthpiece than Rush Limbaugh said:"Nobody is a fiscal conservative anymore. All this talk about concern for the deficit and the budget has been bogus for as long as it’s been around." So apparently your outrage is fake.

And speaking of selective outrage and fakery.

It seems you are also one of the same group of people that blame the “breakdown in the American family” for the mass shootings and also support a many times divorced President who sleeps with porn stars and sexually assaults women.

He put Antifa in the same category as Neo Nazis and White Supremacists - that is correct, no? They are all people that will use violence to further their means, right?

He said the peacefully protesting people for and against the removals of the statues were fine people, right?

That the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists as well as the Antifa people ARE the bad people, they came looking for a fight. As a result people got hurt and one woman was killed. He is not saying those people are "Fine People", not even close.

How many people have Antifa killed?

And I'm not defending them but compared to Neo Nazis and White supremacist they are in a different class.

Why are you now worried about financial burdens, the current administration is certainly not fiscally conservative. In fact no less of a right wing mouthpiece than Rush Limbaugh said:"Nobody is a fiscal conservative anymore. All this talk about concern for the deficit and the budget has been bogus for as long as it’s been around." So apparently your outrage is fake.

And speaking of selective outrage and fakery.

It seems you are also one of the same group of people that blame the “breakdown in the American family” for the mass shootings and also support a many times divorced President who sleeps with porn stars and sexually assaults women.

you’re beyond dishonest. i’m always concerned about impossible
financial burdens. obama
added too much debt, trump
is making the same
mistake. you’re beyond cowardly, beyond being full of sh*t, you just make up gibberish as you go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How many people have Antifa killed?

And I'm not defending them but compared to Neo Nazis and White supremacist they are in a different class.




No, they are in the same class. They are people willing to resort to violence to move a political agenda. They are dangerous, they deserve zero glorification, and they deserve zero respect or accommodation. They are where actual violent communists and anarchists meet actual violent fascists.

we can disagree on that. Antifa is a response to the neo-nazis and white supremacists. They certainly have been charged with some illegalities but I don't think there have been any people associated with antifa charged with murder
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Watch the video in my reply to you and tell me that is what he said, that the Neo Nazis were fine people.

Yet at LEAST you and Wayne pull this "Fine People" and "Both Sides" stunt repeatedly.

John your the expert when it comes to the line.. both sides do it .. you use it often

but are your suggesting Trumps racist vitriol . In no way shape or form has influenced anyone in acting violently ...?

John your the expert when it comes to the line.. both sides do it .. you use it often

but are your suggesting Trumps racist vitriol . In no way shape or form has influenced anyone in acting violently ...?

so the line here all deny that Al Sharptons rhetoric ever inspires violence ( therefore it’s ok when everyone running for potus in the left calls sharpton a hero), but you’re convinced trump
is responsible.

i think trumps language is potentially dangerous. not to a rational person, not even to a slightly crazy person, but to the very disturbed. i think it’s equally reckless when democrats and the media say the conservatives are all nazis and racists and hate poor people and want to enslave women. you only talk about trumps vitriol, and while
he is in a class by himself in terms of frequency and severity, he’s not the only one saying disgusting things. but the liberals here dismiss all of it from the left.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

we can disagree on that. Antifa is a response to the neo-nazis and white supremacists. They certainly have been charged with some illegalities but I don't think there have been any people associated with antifa charged with murder
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Then we disagree, significantly. A mob, alt-left or alt-right, that uses violence to achieve its means, is dangerous. But because they are merely reacting to assholios on the right, it is OK in your book?

This violence (by Both Sides) will continue to get worse until Good People (from Both Sides) recognize that it is a violent fringe that is growing where the fault lies on bad actors and crappy ideology of Both Sides.

Maybe the Antifa commies are not as competent yet: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/14/man-dies-as-police-shootout-follows-firebomb-attack-on-immigration-centre

Check out Antifa and Soca ili st Rif le As sociat ion on reddit, you'll find plenty of ne're do wells, incels, and Lost Boys (https://thefederalist.com/2015/07/09/the-revenge-of-the-lost-boys/) there too. You just don't have as much an issue with their motivation.

PS - read the link on the Lost Boys - 4 years old but still seems plenty of evidence to support it (and written by one of the OG Never Trumpers) https://thefederalist.com/2015/07/09/the-revenge-of-the-lost-boys/




John your the expert when it comes to the line.. both sides do it .. you use it often

but are your suggesting Trumps racist vitriol . In no way shape or form has influenced anyone in acting violently ...?

Ahhh, the difference in my "Both Sides" is I point out the bad and good comes from "Both Sides" whereas you draw a strong demarcation between the sides. And when you want to trash Trump you use this his "Both Sides are Good People" to sat he is providing cover from right wing extremism.

Words matter on BOTH sides, but those coming from the president always can do more harm or more good.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’re beyond dishonest. i’m always concerned about impossible
financial burdens. obama
added too much debt, trump
is making the same
mistake. you’re beyond cowardly, beyond being full of sh*t, you just make up gibberish as you go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How am i dishonest when I cite things you've said.

Now you've, once again, fallen back on but Obama.

Limbaugh said that and he is a right wing mouthpiece, has been for years. He ranted about fiscal conservatism when it suited his rhetoric and now claims it is bogus.

Financial burdens in your mind are only those things you and Tucker judge to be unaffordable.

Remember, the great negotiator, Trump, threw away his border wall, immigration reform and more because some on the right and particularly some of his advisors will never accept any amnesty for any illegal immigration. Politics is the art of making compromise a win, and fails if the other side consistently loses.

Just keep defending Trump as usual, using false equivalents.


The market is interesting today, Trump will deny responsibility for that also.

How am i dishonest when I cite things you've said.

o.

wrong.

you claimed that “now” i’m worried
about financial burden. either show
me where i said i wasn’t previously concerned about financial burdens, or kindly say you made it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, they are in the same class. They are people willing to resort to violence to move a political agenda. They are dangerous, they deserve zero glorification, and they deserve zero respect or accommodation. They are where actual violent communists and anarchists meet actual violent fascists.
Seems like right reason wrong action vs wrong reason wrong action = not the same.

Or more simply, Antifa is going to tap into a small fragment of the population who think they want to be dogooders and get a rise out of it. The white nationalist thing is pulling on the ugly roots of our broader society and is much, much more serious.

Some in the GOP have called for Antifa to be labeled a terror group. To terrorize the American people to not be Fascists? Do the math.

Some in the GOP have called for Antifa to be labeled a terror group. To terrorize the American people to not be Fascists? Do the math.

that’s all antifa does, speak out against fascism? tell that to
this guy, beaten by antifa not because he supports fascism, but because he tried to stop antifa from beating a transgender. only the left would say “we’re opposed to fascism, now do as we say or we’ll beat you to a pulp.”

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/1/two-more-oregon-men-left-bloody-antifa-attack-port/

“do the math”.

here’s some math.

80 > your IQ.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How many people have Antifa killed?

And I'm not defending them but compared to Neo Nazis and White supremacist they are in a different class.

Ignorance on display
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems like right reason wrong action vs wrong reason wrong action = not the same.

Or more simply, Antifa is going to tap into a small fragment of the population who think they want to be dogooders and get a rise out of it. The white nationalist thing is pulling on the ugly roots of our broader society and is much, much more serious.

Some in the GOP have called for Antifa to be labeled a terror group. To terrorize the American people to not be Fascists? Do the math.
This is the Robin Hood syndrome for snowflakes apparently.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems like right reason wrong action vs wrong reason wrong action = not the same.

So when Antifa kills someone, because people thinking like you think there is some nobility in their actions, that will be OK ?


Or more simply, Antifa is going to tap into a small fragment of the population who think they want to be dogooders and get a rise out of it. The white nationalist thing is pulling on the ugly roots of our broader society and is much, much more serious.

Antifa = DoGooders? Am I getting this right?



I am Gobsmacked, that you think there is some honorable ground here.


Some in the GOP have called for Antifa to be labeled a terror group. To terrorize the American people to not be Fascists? Do the math.

Antifa = Terrorist Group
Neo Nazis = Terrorist Group
White Supremacists = Terrorist Group

Once they get violent and exceed any Constitutionally granted protection, they should go to jail. You'd probably let them out, and at least vote while in the klink.

that’s all antifa does, speak out against fascism? tell that to
this guy, beaten by antifa not because he supports fascism, but because he tried to stop antifa from beating a transgender. only the left would say “we’re opposed to fascism, now do as we say or we’ll beat you to a pulp.”

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/1/two-more-oregon-men-left-bloody-antifa-attack-port/

“do the math”.

here’s some math.

80 > your IQ.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Homework up Jim. The guy you posted was there for action.

As for my IQ, it's probably closer to 60 :humpty:

Ignorance on display
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

funny coming from the person who knows nothing and says nothing other than childish insults. As I said I'd be embarrassed to post like you do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Dayton shooter with the rounds he had if not for the police that close would have likely killed far more than the Texas shooter, yet Moscow Mitch is sitting on legislation that certainly doesn’t address everything wrong, but does beaf up background checks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Dayton shooter with the rounds he had if not for the police that close would have likely killed far more than the Texas shooter, yet Moscow Mitch is sitting on legislation that certainly doesn’t address everything wrong, but does beaf up background checks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Right, what did he do, kill 9 and wound 20+ in 30 goddamn #^&#^&#^&#^&ing seconds....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Homework up Jim. The guy you posted was there for action.

As for my IQ, it's probably closer to 60 :humpty:
Ive got a photo same guy nose to nose with antifa protester.. hes no innocent
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Then we disagree, significantly. A mob, alt-left or alt-right, that uses violence to achieve its means, is dangerous. But because they are merely reacting to assholios on the right, it is OK in your book?

This violence (by Both Sides) will continue to get worse until Good People (from Both Sides) recognize that it is a violent fringe that is growing where the fault lies on bad actors and crappy ideology of Both Sides.

Maybe the Antifa commies are not as competent yet: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/14/man-dies-as-police-shootout-follows-firebomb-attack-on-immigration-centre

Check out Antifa and Soca ili st Rif le As sociat ion on reddit, you'll find plenty of ne're do wells, incels, and Lost Boys (https://thefederalist.com/2015/07/09/the-revenge-of-the-lost-boys/) there too. You just don't have as much an issue with their motivation.

PS - read the link on the Lost Boys - 4 years old but still seems plenty of evidence to support it (and written by one of the OG Never Trumpers) https://thefederalist.com/2015/07/09/the-revenge-of-the-lost-boys/






Ahhh, the difference in my "Both Sides" is I point out the bad and good comes from "Both Sides" whereas you draw a strong demarcation between the sides. And when you want to trash Trump you use this his "Both Sides are Good People" to sat he is providing cover from right wing extremism.

So is that a yes or no that Trumps words have motivated some people to violence . Or is it another both sides do it.. because its clear that neither side has ever done or doing what trumps doing .. and even the suggestion he is treating the office he holds with honor or he has no culpability. in what he says and what others do in his name is a travesty.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So is that a yes or no that Trumps words have motivated some people to violence . Or is it another both sides do it.. because its clear that neither side has ever done or doing what trumps doing .. and even the suggestion he is treating the office he holds with honor or he has no culpability. in what he says and what others do in his name is a travesty.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


And clearly none of this ever happened before Trump.

Both sides do it. Some is intentional, some is not. Most assisted by various echo chambers. When those echo chambers fuel lost boys (Adam Lanza, Dylan Roof, Nikolas Cruz) that have serious mental issues, who's fault is it?

Would Joe Biden be at fault if someone took a shot at Mitt Romney when he said Mitt was gonna put y'all back in chains? Was Bernie at fault when whatshisface shot up the Congressional Baseball Practice?

Did Trump incite the violence when Micah Johnson shot 5 Dallas Cops at the height of BLM? Lee Boyd Malvo? Tim McVeigh? The Facebook Girl? Omar Mateen? All the instances that happened before 2017 were Trump's fault too? Or is there something else at play? Tell me how this problem started in January 2017 - I'm waiting.

Does it only matter to you when it's Trump's fault?

Most of these instances are kids with serious issues. Not white supremacists going out killing people but these people with serious issues being attracted to them. When these kids start gravitating to Antifa and Hard Core Anarchists, will Spence give them a pass because they are just reacting to this that or the other?

Ive got a photo same guy nose to nose with antifa protester.. hes no innocent
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

right he had it coming. antifa doesn’t engage in unprovoked
violence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Keep believing

After he screwed up reading the teleprompter & said “Toledo” when it said “Texas & Ohio” and had his tongue coming out again which is a classic dementia symptom, I once again remind everyone this is a man with conspicuous mental deterioration & numerous obvious signs of dementia.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Keep dancing around the main issue, there are a lot of f*ckec up white supremacy nuts, neo nazi, or just some young adult the was bullied at home or school, with so much social media influence and so many weapons of mass destruction.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Keep believing

After he screwed up reading the teleprompter & said “Toledo” when it said “Texas & Ohio” and had his tongue coming out again which is a classic dementia symptom, I once again remind everyone this is a man with conspicuous mental deterioration & numerous obvious signs of dementia.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your stuff is getting extremely, even psychotically, hilarious.

Keep dancing around the main issue, there are a lot of f*ckec up white supremacy nuts, neo nazi, or just some young adult the was bullied at home or school, with so much social media influence and so many weapons of mass destruction.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What if the Dayton Shooter turned out to be a Socialist, and a Bernie and Warren Fan? Would Trump's "invasion" or "infestation" words be responsible? Would any Trump words be responsible? Would Trump, in any way, be responsible? Would Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren be responsible?

I think the subject of this thread was about someone listening to some words, not about guns.

Who's responsible, what words are responsible for all the violence that occurs daily in this country? Trump?

The words spoken by you and PeteF over and over on this political forum are far more incendiary than words like "invasion" or "infestation." And don't point out that you are not the President. People hear these words spoken across the country by people like you and by various media. And they are heard, EVERY DAY, by millions of people--many of those people who have not heard Trump's speeches or read about them, but who daily hear about what a Nazi, traitor, White Nationalist, racist, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, Fascist, hater, inspirer of killers, Trump is. Should you and Pete F and the media and the millions like you, be restricted from saying the things you say because, for certain, they are heard by a whole lot of people some of whom are crazies?

So is that a yes or no that Trumps words have motivated some people to violence . Or is it another both sides do it.. because its clear that neither side has ever done or doing what trumps doing .. and even the suggestion he is treating the office he holds with honor or he has no culpability. in what he says and what others do in his name is a travesty.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Now you know how god must feel,think of the crimes committed in his name.

What a great president.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What if the Dayton Shooter turned out to be a Socialist, and a Bernie and Warren Fan? Would Trump's "invasion" or "infestation" words be responsible? Would any Trump words be responsible? Would Trump, in any way, be responsible? Would Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren be responsible?

I think the subject of this thread was about someone listening to some words, not about guns.

Who's responsible, what words are responsible for all the violence that occurs daily in this country? Trump?

The words spoken by you and PeteF over and over on this political forum are far more incendiary than words like "invasion" or "infestation." And don't point out that you are not the President. People hear these words spoken across the country by people like you and by various media. And they are heard, EVERY DAY, by millions of people--many of those people who have not heard Trump's speeches or read about them, but who daily hear about what a Nazi, traitor, White Nationalist, racist, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, Fascist, hater, inspirer of killers, Trump is. Should you and Pete F and the media and the millions like you, be restricted from saying the things you say because, for certain, they are heard by a whole lot of people some of whom are crazies?

Calling BS, I never talk politics outside of this forum, so no my words aren’t being heard by more than a small handful. BUT millions heard Trumps words and they do matter and while he finally came out (wonder what pressure was brought to bear to make that happen, family or party), they were a bit late IMHO. You defend the clown at every turn no surprise, no less than Jim on the market and economy (long term vision be damned), or Dangles best president ever.

God forbid I tried to change the discussion from partisan BS into something constructive, but where might that go. Do we want to talk about gun legislation or why or how someone with a screw loose can buy an assault weapon and put a 100 round magazine on it. Can you imagine the death toll had officers not been right there?

If nothing changes it will only increase, but if the NRA and lobbying keeps buying our policies we are doomed to repeat these over and over.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Calling BS, I never talk politics outside of this forum, so no my words aren’t being heard by more than a small handful. BUT millions heard Trumps words and they do matter and while he finally came out (wonder what pressure was brought to bear to make that happen, family or party), they were a bit late IMHO. You defend the clown at every turn no surprise, no less than Jim on the market and economy (long term vision be damned), or Dangles best president ever.

God forbid I tried to change the discussion from partisan BS into something constructive, but where might that go. Do we want to talk about gun legislation or why or how someone with a screw loose can buy an assault weapon and put a 100 round magazine on it. Can you imagine the death toll had officers not been right there?

If nothing changes it will only increase, but if the NRA and lobbying keeps buying our policies we are doomed to repeat these over and over.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


I'm willing to talk meaningful changes, let's talk about someone with a screw loose being able to buy a semi-automatic rifle. Versus, why should someone without a loose screw be told they can't?

Calling BS, I never talk politics outside of this forum, so no my words aren’t being heard by more than a small handful.

It's not just you. You are not naïve. You must know that the words you and PeteF speak on this forum are spoken by millions of others. INCLUDING THE MEDIA which blasts the electronic and print networks with the same words and labels and characterizations that you and PeteF spout here. Where do you get your notions? Most of your anti-Trump posts sound like regurgitations picked up from media sources. Your message is the mantra spoken by millions who didn't create it but speak it puppet like to anyone who will listen.

BUT millions heard Trumps words and they do matter and while he finally came out (wonder what pressure was brought to bear to make that happen, family or party), they were a bit late IMHO.

Too late for what? And he has made similar condemnations several times before. Was it always too late in your IMHO? Did those words not matter then? It has been clear that he is not Alt right, not a Nazi, not a misogynist, not a collaborator, not a White Nationalist, not a homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, Fascist. And that has been clear for a long time to anyone with an objective view. It has been clear that, because of the strength of the economy, and that the disasters that were predicted because he was President have not happened, and that immigration was not a winning policy for the left, and that nothing policy wise seemed to destroy Trump, that the Dems had to concoct an incessant message of Trump being the anti-American evil traitor who hated everybody except radical right white men.

You defend the clown at every turn no surprise, no less than Jim on the market and economy (long term vision be damned), or Dangles best president ever.

No, I just point out the unreal, unjust accusations and characterization made about Trump. And you participate in those at every turn no surprise.

He is the President, like it or not. And if he had the full support of the people he would have more clout against China and NK, for instance. Instead, those enemies are encouraged by the words from the left and the rest of the anti-Trump puppets to resist giving up anything for the betterment of world economic and political security. We would all be better off on the big issues if we all supported him instead of trying to destroy him.

So, yeah, words matter. And yours are not helpful. They hurt the country. China has been eating our lunch for decades. And no President, or party, has done anything about that. They have enabled it, and made it worse. China is the big threat to Western Democracy and our American way of life, not Russia. Without China, Russia would be a political pimple.

And no President or party has fulfilled the promise to stop illegal immigration. They all made pretend moves that temporarily stanched public opinion, then moved on. It would help to support this President in his far more concerted attention and effort to resolve the problem if we all backed him instead of trying to stop everything he does and lying about him being a racist and against immigration, blah, blah.

And it would help if we all would admit that his tax and regulatory policies were good for the economy instead of constantly claiming that they had nothing to do with it and only benefited the rich and threatening to change everything back to the stagnant new normal.

Yeah, words matter.

God forbid I tried to change the discussion from partisan BS into something constructive, but where might that go. Do we want to talk about gun legislation or why or how someone with a screw loose can buy an assault weapon and put a 100 round magazine on it. Can you imagine the death toll had officers not been right there?

If nothing changes it will only increase, but if the NRA and lobbying keeps buying our policies we are doomed to repeat these over and over.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, wouldn't that be the proper discussion in another thread? You didn't start this thread about gun control. Your title suggested it was about someone listening to and being motivated by Trump's words.

But if you want to change the subject, JohnR said he is willing to go at it with you. I would be interested in hearing that discussion.

What if the Dayton Shooter turned out to be a Socialist, and a Bernie and Warren Fan? Would Trump's "invasion" or "infestation" words be responsible? Would any Trump words be responsible? Would Trump, in any way, be responsible? Would Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren be responsible?

I think the subject of this thread was about someone listening to some words, not about guns.

Who's responsible, what words are responsible for all the violence that occurs daily in this country? Trump?

The words spoken by you and PeteF over and over on this political forum are far more incendiary than words like "invasion" or "infestation." And don't point out that you are not the President. People hear these words spoken across the country by people like you and by various media. And they are heard, EVERY DAY, by millions of people--many of those people who have not heard Trump's speeches or read about them, but who daily hear about what a Nazi, traitor, White Nationalist, racist, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, Fascist, hater, inspirer of killers, Trump is. Should you and Pete F and the media and the millions like you, be restricted from saying the things you say because, for certain, they are heard by a whole lot of people some of whom are crazies?
Trump started the day he came down the escalator and demonized Mexicans.
He consistently labels groups as evil in his political speech and spreads lies.
The immigration lottery system is done by us not foreign governments choosing whom to send. Watch his rallies and think.
All his life he has been a con man, that’s as close to conservative as he’ll ever get.
Just look at his cabinet with all the “best” people, the best people want nothing to do with him.
Bannon, Miller, Kushner, Kudlow, Devos, Mullaney, Hicks, Craft, Carson, Ross comprise his ship of fools with Ivanka as mascot.
We are heading into a storm of trump’s own making now with the world economy and no capable leader is to be seen.
Putin is grinning.
Don’t worry though, Trump has no deals in Russia.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

right he had it coming. antifa doesn’t engage in unprovoked
violence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

thats funny you still think he was an just innocent bystander minding his business trying to rescue a gay person must be a The Washington Times or Washington Examiner storie tell you that

Now you know how god must feel,think of the crimes committed in his name.

What a great president.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

exactly the base thinks Trump was a gift from god so what he say is scripture to some

I'm willing to talk meaningful changes, let's talk about someone with a screw loose being able to buy a semi-automatic rifle. Versus, why should someone without a loose screw be told they can't?

that's the issue with Gun control .. you all have ready drawn a conclusion why hasn't worked .. why should someone without a loose screw be told they can't?

the Gun lobby has convinced gun owners its about taking their guns
and you just validated that argument ..

its always been about stopping the guy with the screwloose

My stance is unacceptable to gun people have has many guns as you want .. my only requirements are there registered and the types of guns should be on a tier based license.. we do it with driving :deadhorse:

And clearly none of this ever happened before Trump.

Both sides do it. Some is intentional, some is not. Most assisted by various echo chambers. When those echo chambers fuel lost boys (Adam Lanza, Dylan Roof, Nikolas Cruz) that have serious mental issues, who's fault is it?

Would Joe Biden be at fault if someone took a shot at Mitt Romney when he said Mitt was gonna put y'all back in chains? Was Bernie at fault when whatshisface shot up the Congressional Baseball Practice?

Did Trump incite the violence when Micah Johnson shot 5 Dallas Cops at the height of BLM? Lee Boyd Malvo? Tim McVeigh? The Facebook Girl? Omar Mateen? All the instances that happened before 2017 were Trump's fault too? Or is there something else at play? Tell me how this problem started in January 2017 - I'm waiting.

Does it only matter to you when it's Trump's fault?

Most of these instances are kids with serious issues. Not white supremacists going out killing people but these people with serious issues being attracted to them. When these kids start gravitating to Antifa and Hard Core Anarchists, will Spence give them a pass because they are just reacting to this that or the other?

So thats a NO Trumps word have in no way shape or form influenced people to conduct violent acts .. their just deranged which I agree .. every fuse gets lit some how... seeing Trumps the number 1 match thrower ....... its hard to dodge the correlation

If many of the folks who watch Fox News turned it off and played video games instead, we would likely see a reduction in the rise of white nationalism.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, wouldn't that be the proper discussion in another thread? You didn't start this thread about gun control. Your title suggested it was about someone listening to and being motivated by Trump's words.

But if you want to change the subject, JohnR said he is willing to go at it with you. I would be interested in hearing that discussion.

My opinions on Trump come from listening to him, watching the steps he has taken and the executive action an inactions taken, I’m not brainwashed by the media reporting. You however may be, because while you state he has clearly proven not to be deserving of the long list of labels you have listed, he fits the description by action on most.

You defend him vehemently and will always win (in your mind) the argument. You don’t believe his campaign seeker help from the Russians, you don’t believe he obstructed the investigation, you don’t believe he has this weird love of some of our most dangerous enemies, or that he has caused in part the dramatic increase of border crossings by words and policies. You are our boards resident AG, your new nickname should be D-Barr.

Respond if you like, I rarely get a third thru your long winded posts, because it’s like seeing the same movie for the tenth time, it just old.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Love this defense of Trump
No one blamed' Obama for 'anti-police rhetoric' when cops were shot during his term they said that after the synagogue shooting and saying it now..

I think there's a problem with police abuse in this country.'
Obama"

Wow thats a call to violence if i ever heard one
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Liz Warren will fix it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Respond if you like, I rarely get a third thru your long winded posts, because it’s like seeing the same movie for the tenth time, it just old.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

his posts are actually interesting and informative if you don't have your fingers in your ears muttering the same words over and over trying to convince yourself that what you believe is true :kewl:

that's the issue with Gun control .. you all have ready drawn a conclusion why hasn't worked .. why should someone without a loose screw be told they can't?

the Gun lobby has convinced gun owners its about taking their guns
and you just validated that argument ..

its always been about stopping the guy with the screwloose

My stance is unacceptable to gun people have has many guns as you want .. my only requirements are there registered and the types of guns should be on a tier based license.. we do it with driving :deadhorse:

Overall Gun related deaths are down near 40% since the mid 90s. The outliers of this are mass shootings and increased inner city violence. Mental Health and Gangs, yet we mostly gloss over this and go for the vast majority of law abiding Citizens. How The Bleep does this make sense Wayne?

The issue is the people with the screw loose yet you and the left continue to say take all the guns. Because the left says we're gonna take the guns.

We have a tier based system, actual automatic rifles and machine guns and such require a heavy price / tax / cause.

Kamala Harris is willing to send Cops to confiscate guns.
Eric Slawell is willing to nuke ya if you don't.
Vox wants complete confiscation.
All of the Dems want some vastly increased level of registration or confiscation type legislation.

I don't effing care. This is my Constitutional Right to have something that can adequately protect my home and family if I need to.





If many of the folks who watch Fox News turned it off and played video games instead, we would likely see a reduction in the rise of white nationalism.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You really have snapped?

My opinions on Trump come from listening to him, watching the steps he has taken and the executive action an inactions taken, I’m not brainwashed by the media reporting. You however may be, because while you state he has clearly proven not to be deserving of the long list of labels you have listed, he fits the description by action on most.

You defend him vehemently and will always win (in your mind) the argument. You don’t believe his campaign seeker help from the Russians, you don’t believe he obstructed the investigation, you don’t believe he has this weird love of some of our most dangerous enemies, or that he has caused in part the dramatic increase of border crossings by words and policies. You are our boards resident AG, your new nickname should be D-Barr.

Respond if you like, I rarely get a third thru your long winded posts, because it’s like seeing the same movie for the tenth time, it just old.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Overall Gun related deaths are down near 40% since the mid 90s. The outliers of this are mass shootings and increased inner city violence. Mental Health and Gangs, yet we mostly gloss over this and go for the vast majority of law abiding Citizens. How The Bleep does this make sense Wayne?

The issue is the people with the screw loose yet you and the left continue to say take all the guns. Because the left says we're gonna take the guns.

We have a tier based system, actual automatic rifles and machine guns and such require a heavy price / tax / cause.

Kamala Harris is willing to send Cops to confiscate guns.
Eric Slawell is willing to nuke ya if you don't.
Vox wants complete confiscation.
All of the Dems want some vastly increased level of registration or confiscation type legislation.

I don't effing care. This is my Constitutional Right to have something that can adequately protect my home and family if I need to.

That's fine, but blocking studies and data collection by the CDC in the name of gun rights is absurd. We will see if the current revision to the #^&#^&#^&#^&ey amendment actually changes anything.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
If many of the folks who watch Fox News turned it off and played video games instead, we would likely see a reduction in the rise of white nationalism.


You really have snapped?

I thought that was pretty funny

Trump started the day he came down the escalator and demonized Mexicans.

Another one of your verbal tricks. You use the inflammatory words "demonized" (you know, words like "invasion" that just shouldn't be used because it might trigger a crazy) then you falsely expand SOME Mexicans into Mexicans which of course, is the lying verbal trick of painting Trump as "demonizing" all Mexicans which, of course can slide into the phony notion that Trump is a racist (even though Mexican is not a race), and voila Trump is verbally transformed into the bad man. Words matter.

He consistently labels groups as evil in his political speech and spreads lies.

Some groups are evil. But if you're trying to slide the word "groups" to mean entire races, then you're lying. He has not labeled any race as evil.

The immigration lottery system is done by us not foreign governments choosing whom to send. Watch his rallies and think.

Don't know what you're point is.

All his life he has been a con man, that’s as close to conservative as he’ll ever get.

Another one of your exaggerated lies. "All his life" is beyond your ability to know. "Con man" does not accurately apply to everything he has done.

Just look at his cabinet with all the “best” people, the best people want nothing to do with him.
Bannon, Miller, Kushner, Kudlow, Devos, Mullaney, Hicks, Craft, Carson, Ross comprise his ship of fools with Ivanka as mascot.

Typical of your hateful rhetoric.

We are heading into a storm of trump’s own making now with the world economy and no capable leader is to be seen.
Putin is grinning.
Don’t worry though, Trump has no deals in Russia.


Still resort to innuendo and opinion when you don't have solid facts.

My opinions on Trump come from listening to him, watching the steps he has taken and the executive action an inactions taken, I’m not brainwashed by the media reporting. You however may be, because while you state he has clearly proven not to be deserving of the long list of labels you have listed, he fits the description by action on most.

Yeah, you can describe his actions to make them look the way you want. That's what has been done. And whether you invented your own opinions or not, they fit the descriptions made by the media that has not brainwashed you.

You defend him vehemently and will always win (in your mind) the argument. You don’t believe his campaign seeker help from the Russians, you don’t believe he obstructed the investigation, you don’t believe he has this weird love of some of our most dangerous enemies, or that he has caused in part the dramatic increase of border crossings by words and policies. You are our boards resident AG, your new nickname should be D-Barr.

Thanks, but I don't want the job. And I don't just willy nilly believe what you said. Nor do I actually know, but there is just no solid evidence of those things. Mostly circumstantial stuff that can be "described" as those things.

Respond if you like, I rarely get a third thru your long winded posts, because it’s like seeing the same movie for the tenth time, it just old.


Yeah, I'm pretty consistent. Your old stuff is too.

Still resort to innuendo and opinion when you don't have solid facts.

You do little other than resort to innuendo and opinion.
Here's Trumps statement from his announcement
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Here is a riff of his on the immigration lottery, it is all a big lie. The only true thing he says is that it exists.
How about the lottery system? How about lotteries? This was Chuck Schumer. You put the name in a basket. The country puts the name in the basket, and you pick people out of the lottery. Well, let's see this one's a murderer. This one robbed four banks. This one I'd better not say. This one, another murderer. Ladies and gentlemen, another murderer.
Think of this, do you think they are going to put their great citizens, they have great citizens, they have great people like we have great people. Do you think those people are going into a lottery? No. And then we get these people coming in, and we hold it against the country. The country isn’t based on that, the country, you just take a look, look at the people they put into these lotteries.

Here's how the lottery which is run by OUR government works:

What is the Green Card Lottery?
The Green Card Lottery, officially, the Diversity Immigrant Visa program is enacted in section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and codified in title 8 section 1153 of the United States Code. President H. W. Bush signed it into law back in 1990. It came after a series of temporary diversity programs, as an attempt to broaden the range of admitted immigrants. At the time, it especially helped the Irish fleeing their country due to unrest.

Although Diversity Immigrant Visa program is the official name, it is often referred to as the Diversity Visa Lottery or the Green Card Lottery, or some mixture of these terms. Immigrant visas awarded are often called diversity visas.

To summarize the process, applicants apply; applicants are selected at random using a computer; selected applicants are then screened through an interview process; those that pass the screening process are awarded immigrant visas; upon entry into the U.S., they are awarded their green card.

So, it is called both a visa lottery as well as Green Card lottery because winners are first given a visa which is then upgraded to a Green Card upon entry into the U.S.

Officially, 55,000 visas are awarded, however, each year 5,000 goes to the NACARA program, dropping the available number down to 50,000. The Green Card Lottery is one of several peripheral immigration programs that exist outside the more common route of family or employer sponsorship.

The largest generator of disinformation in this political arena is Donald Trump.
He finds truth inconvenient.

So when Antifa kills someone, because people thinking like you think there is some nobility in their actions, that will be OK ?
I don't condone violence on any side under most circumstances, violent protesters should be prosecuted.

Antifa = DoGooders? Am I getting this right?
I think they believe they are.

I am Gobsmacked, that you think there is some honorable ground here.
Countering right-wing extremism is a good thing within reasonable boundaries.

Antifa = Terrorist Group
Neo Nazis = Terrorist Group
White Supremacists = Terrorist Group

Once they get violent and exceed any Constitutionally granted protection, they should go to jail. You'd probably let them out, and at least vote while in the klink.
Seems like Antifa is targeting groups or people pushing radical right-wing ideas, they're not trying to scare me into not supporting those ideas. Right-wing extremists on the other hand have been the biggest source of domestic terrorism. There is a difference.

I read that both of the recent shooters were registered democrats and one was a big Liz Warren supporter

I read that both of the recent shooters were registered democrats and one was a big Liz Warren supporter

Nothing to see, move along
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is an interesting look at some research about terrorists of all flavors and the common threads in the cases. Of course it is not a definitive answer to all the problems of the world, but it is some relevant information. Don't let your TDS get in the way, it's only the first sentence. That stands for Trump Devotion Syndrome doesn't it?

“How do we stop these people?” the president says, referring to immigrants and refugees crossing the southern U.S. border. “Shoot them,” a voice calls from the crowd. And the president chuckles.

Elsewhere, a man watches as a website he built becomes a bastion of fringe movements with violent rhetoric — a cheering section for mass shootings, where murderers are lionized as heroes.

And in Texas, a lone-wolf shooter posts an anti-immigrant screed online before opening fire at a Walmart.

Did the first two things directly lead to the third? It’s impossible to say. But social scientists say there is evidence to suggest that they’re all linked. As research into terrorism and rare types of violent crimes has become more data-driven, it’s begun to show that the people we call “lone wolves” aren’t. Like the El Paso shooter, they may be isolated in their schools or physical communities, and they don’t have networks of co-conspirators helping to plan attacks. But behind these apparent loners is a sense of community and of participating in a movement. They’ve adopted new norms. They’ve had those norms reinforced. And then they act.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-terrorist-is-a-lone-wolf/

I don't condone violence on any side under most circumstances, violent protesters should be prosecuted. And when someone goes violent they should be prosecuted.


I think they believe they are. The Neo Nazis think they are right too. Unacceptable regardless of hard left or hard right. You are beginning to concern me.


Countering right-wing extremism is a good thing within reasonable boundaries.

Countering all extremism, by legal authority, is a good thing within reasonable boundaries.


Seems like Antifa is targeting groups or people pushing radical right-wing ideas, they're not trying to scare me into not supporting those ideas. Right-wing extremists on the other hand have been the biggest source of domestic terrorism. There is a difference.

I cannot believe you are unable to see the difference, I am concerned that you are willing to allow for the difference.

The bad and horrible ideas by NeoNazis, White Supremacists, and Antifa should be countered - by the people of this country - with better ideas, ideals, and debate. Anything beyond that should be by competent legal authority.

You are beginning to concern me.





I've been worried about him for a LONG time :btu:

You do little other than resort to innuendo and opinion.
Here's Trumps statement from his announcement
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."



How is that "demonizing" all Mexicans?

How is that "demonizing" all Mexicans?

Does this demonize all Republicans?
Republicans are running for office, they are white supremacists, neo nazis, holocaust deniers, anti Semitic and some, I assume, are good people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

man overboard

Does this demonize all Republicans?
Republicans are running for office, they are white supremacists, neo nazis, holocaust deniers, anti Semitic and some, I assume, are good people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if some of the leading republican politicians fit your descriptions in any way, i’d agree with you. They don’t, so you have no point.

the trump administration has approved a record number of applications for citizenship. Please explain to me, why a racist or xenophobe would do such a thing? because to my simple mind, it doesn’t seem like the kind of thing a racist or xenophobe would do.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/number-of-new-citizens-year-high-trump


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this is true....seems like all the anti-semitism in on the democrat side

if some of the leading republican politicians fit your descriptions in any way, i’d agree with you. They don’t, so you have no point.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you think the leading or most or even a significant portion of Mexicans fit Trump’s description?
They no more fit that than the equivalent Republicans.
Those things exist in both groups to some extent as they do in all people.
When you tar a group with the worst behavior in that group, that is demonizing them.
Show me any analysis based on actual data that says large numbers of any population fit Trump’s claims.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this is true....seems like all the anti-semitism in on the democrat side

You're wrong. The Trumplican claim that Dems or anyone is anti-Semitic if they criticize Israel is wrong. Talking foreign policy is not anti-semitism.

Anti-semitic behavior is far more dangerous than political speech.

Corey Stewart, Virginia’s Republican Senate candidate, has built his political career around defending Confederate monuments#^&—#^&despite being born and raised in Minnesota. In 2017, Stewart met publicly with the man who would later organize the “Unite the Right” white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia; after a neo-Nazi allegedly killed Heather Heyer there, Stewart blamed “half the violence” on anti-racist counter#^&protesters. He also endorsed Paul Nehlen, an anti-#^&Semite and self-#^&described “pro-white” candidate who ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan’s seat.

After Kelli Ward announced her candidacy against Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake (who has since decided not to run again), President Donald Trump tweeted, “Great to see that Dr. Kelli Ward is running against Flake Jeff Flake.” Before she was knocked out in the August primary, Ward got a reputation for hanging out with right-wing cranks and conspiracy theorists. She posted a photo of herself with Milo Yiannopoulos, met up with Pizzagate promoter Mike Cernovich, and spoke to a fringe medical group that claims abortion causes cancer.

In March, a 70-year-old neo-Nazi named Arthur Jones ran unopposed to become the Republican candidate for Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District. The state GOP distanced itself from Jones, a Holocaust denier who said he was running against the “two-party, Jew-party, queer-party system.”

Illinois Republicans also disavowed Bill Fawell, their candidate for the 17th District, in August after he was found to have posted conspiracy theories on Facebook. Fawell had claimed the Sandy Hook shooting was a “false flag” operation, that Israel was behind 9/11, and that Beyoncé and Jay-Z have links to “the godless Illuminati.”

John Fitzgerald, the Republican candidate in California’s 11th District, is running on a platform that includes promoting anti-#^&fluoridation and questioning “the official 9/11 story.” Fitzgerald, a painter, has offered a $5,000 reward to anyone who can prove the Holocaust really happened and has written blog posts like “Why Are Powerful Jews Pushing Mass Immigration and Forced Multiculturalism Throughout the U.S. and Europe?”

In North Carolina, for example, GOP officials are stuck with Russell Walker, a white supremacist running for the state House of Representatives. According to his personal website (littered with the n-word), he believes that “the jews are NOT semitic they are satanic as they all descend from Satan.”

Nelson Diaz, the county chairman of the Miami-Dade Republican Party was filmed alongside members of The Proud Boys, pounding a door at a rowdy protest against House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi as she visited a Democratic campaign headquarters in South Florida. Law enforcement found the crowd to be so threatening that officers locked down the building.

On his campaign website, Kansas gubernatorial candidate Kris Kobach cites a made-up anti-immigrant statistic by white nationalist writer Peter Gemma, who worked for a group that opposes “all efforts to mix the races of mankind.” Gemma has also been involved in the Holocaust denial movement and reportedly praised a leading Holocaust denier for “uncovering documents and evidence some historians don't like to admit.”

Does this demonize all Republicans?
Republicans are running for office, they are white supremacists, neo nazis, holocaust deniers, anti Semitic and some, I assume, are good people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I asked you how Trump's statement demonized all Mexicans. You could not tell me how because it doesn't. You tried one of your lying slight of hand verbal tricks that somehow was supposed to be parallel to Trump's remark, but it isn't. They are not similar or like statements. You're stretching the comparison to get a desired result.

Actually, one piece of Trump's statement is enough to disprove that he was referring to all Mexicans: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best." As for the rest of it, it was obvious that he was referring to some of the illegal immigrants. But I understand why you refuse to see that.

Do you think the leading or most or even a significant portion of Mexicans fit Trump’s description?
They no more fit that than the equivalent Republicans.
Those things exist in both groups to some extent as they do in all people.
When you tar a group with the worst behavior in that group, that is demonizing them.
Show me any analysis based on actual data that says large numbers of any population fit Trump’s claims.

That's because he was always referring to a specific portion of any population, and the ethnicity or race was not the critical factor. But I understand why you want it always to be about the "population," not about specific people.

And because "those things exist . . . in all people," then we should point out when some of the people do those things if those things are not right.

The Trumplican claim that Dems or anyone is anti-Semitic if they criticize Israel is wrong. Talking foreign policy is not anti-semitism.



And Securing our borders is not racism. just saying

I asked you how Trump's statement demonized all Mexicans. You could not tell me how because it doesn't. You tried one of your lying slight of hand verbal tricks that somehow was supposed to be parallel to Trump's remark, but it isn't. They are not similar or like statements. You're stretching the comparison to get a desired result.

Actually, one piece of Trump's statement is enough to disprove that he was referring to all Mexicans: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best." As for the rest of it, it was obvious that he was referring to some of the illegal immigrants. But I understand why you refuse to see that.

Unfortunately, there’s no trick.
The verbal tricks or innuendoes are consistent in Trump’s speech.
He’s very good at it.
And he has scared many people with his rhetoric.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's because he was always referring to a specific portion of any population, and the ethnicity or race was not the critical factor. But I understand why you want it always to be about the "population," not about specific people.

And because "those things exist . . . in all people," then we should point out when some of the people do those things if those things are not right.

You can’t show me this, the only data that exists is in Trump and Faux rhetoric, but Trump claims it again and again.
Show me any analysis based on actual data that says large numbers of any population fit Trump’s claims.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Over on state news fox. Found this telling about their non biased stance
Kacey Musgraves gave a speech at Lollapalooza after the country was hit by two tragic mass shootings, and urged the crowd to yell “somebody #^&#^&#^&#^&ing do something!” in regards to the current state of America that allows for massacres like this to happen.

The thousands of people at Lollapalooza — and even more watching from home — seemed to be on the same side of Kacey, but not surprisingly, Fox & Friends took issue with what she said. Host Ainsley Earhardt, who seems to be more offended by the word “#^&#^&#^&#^&” than by tragic killings, brought on guest Todd Starnes, an author and conservative radio host, to discuss Kacey’s speech and she said, “She’s up there preaching about gun control, but how about her language? What happened to wholesome country singers?”

The eye-rolling and offensive quotes did not stop there. “I suspect she was put on a church prayer list,” Starnes responded. Later, he talked about the current wave of country singers who voice their liberal politics, and said, “Once liberalism starts to grow on something” — “Can’t get rid of it,” Earhardt interrupted — “It kills everything it touches,” Starnes concluded.

Later, Earhardt asked, “What about the kids? She’s asking them to chant the F word. I thought about that. I don’t want my daughter… I mean, these young girls, they look up to these musicians. She sings two great songs that I’ve downloaded, ‘Butterflies’ and ‘Rainbow,’ I love those songs, but now I’m gonna look differently at her because she is chanting that vulgar language.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I suggest you simply turn the channel if you find it offensive.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Carlson stated with a straight face the reporting on the rise of white supremacy is a hoax, just like the Russia hoax, I guess he doesn’t believe in actual investigative reporting or maybe he would have stumbled over the FBI directors recent reporting on the dramatic rise in violence directly tied to white supremacy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Liberal fool plagued with TDS
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Unfortunately, there’s no trick.

Yeah, there is a trick. Your supposedly parallel construction ("Republicans are running for office, they are white supremacists, neo nazis, holocaust deniers, anti Semitic and some, I assume, are good people") starts with an all inclusive noun "Republicans." Trump's statement did not have this kind of all inclusive noun such as "Mexicans." In fact, Trump qualified any assumed reference to Mexicans twice in that short statement. He said those he was referring to were not "the best" of the population. It is a sarcastic term of art that actually implies that what is referred to is actually "the worst." So it is obvious, if you're honest about it, that he was not referring to a major part of the Mexican population. And then he qualified it even further with saying even among those illegally crossing were some "good people." "Some" could mean any ratio of those from most to least. "Some" is not "all." And his statement was in the context that it wasn't just good folks seeking a better life that were crossing, but also those "worse" he mentioned which were a problem that called for a solution.

And your phony comparison was ridiculous to begin with, not founded on an actual situation. More self-defeating, it ended with something actually parallel to Trump's remark: "and some, I assume, are good people" which, in itself, destroys your trick of making it look like what you said was about all Republicans. Just as it destroyed any notion that Trump was talking about all Mexicans.


The verbal tricks or innuendoes are consistent in Trump’s speech.
He’s very good at it.
And he has scared many people with his rhetoric.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You'll have to be a bit more specific. He has said a lot of things. Including some pretty good stuff. Anyway, your verbal tricks or innuendoes are consistent with most of your comments about Trump. As I've said before, you're a lot like what you think Trump is.

You can’t show me this, the only data that exists is in Trump and Faux rhetoric, but Trump claims it again and again.
Show me any analysis based on actual data that says large numbers of any population fit Trump’s claims.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know about this "only data" you refer to. I analyze specific statements. His specific statements, when honestly analyzed, don't live up to your demonization.

Carlson stated with a straight face the reporting on the rise of white supremacy is a hoax, just like the Russia hoax, I guess he doesn’t believe in actual investigative reporting or maybe he would have stumbled over the FBI directors recent reporting on the dramatic rise in violence directly tied to white supremacy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it is a hoax. compared to the damage done by fatherlessness and opioids?

GS, this isn’t the 1950s Alabama. The civil rights war is over, the good guys won. sure racism
still exists and
must be stamped out. but it’s nowhere near deserving of the attention it gets, and it gets this much attention because the left is willing to split the country in two to defeat trump. how about a sane, rational conversation about what each side actually stands for, and why each side thinks their ideas are better? ever notice republicans want that conversation, and democrats can’t stop
screaming about nazis long enough to even get started.

if racism is so rampant, why did two democratic presidential candidates conclude that it would be to their advantage to not appear white? Warren says she’s native american, Robert Francis O’Roarke wants to be Hispanic. if white nationals were mainstream, why do so many non whites desperately want to come here?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I suggest you simply turn the channel if you find it offensive.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're the one who said he started posting here bc he didn't like the way Trump was being treated.

Well I got my laugh for today.

sure racism still exists and
must be stamped out. but it’s nowhere near deserving of the attention it gets, and it gets this much attention because the left is willing to split the country in two to defeat trump.

The media has become the greatest recruiting tool White Supremists have had in the past 50 years. :hs:

The media has become the greatest recruiting tool White Supremists have had in the past 50 years. :hs:

exactly, exactly, exactly.

both sides need to calm down and have a cookout.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

exactly, exactly, exactly.

both sides need to calm down and have a cookout.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

dodgeball

And Securing our borders is not racism. just saying

everything not on the democratic agenda is racist. everything.

hollywood has a movie coming out ( released by universal i think, not made in someone’s basement), where wealthy people get to hunt and kill “deplorables.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if racism is so rampant, why did two democratic presidential candidates conclude that it would be to their advantage to not appear white? Warren says she’s native american, Robert Francis O’Roarke wants to be Hispanic. if white nationals were mainstream, why do so many non whites desperately want to come here?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe because they, unlike "Ted" Rafael Edward Cruz or the "swedish" Donald Trump, embraced their heritage.

26% of eligible voters voted for Trump and Clinton

That means that 74% of eligible voters did not vote for Trump in 2016

More than 26% of eligible voters in 2020 are black or hispanic and 80% of blacks consider him racist.

In the next few weeks we will see the results of trump's recent actions on the hispanic vote, I don't predict it will fare well for him, likely farewell will be the effect.

I just saw this and wanted you to see that this guy along with you is a Tucker Carlson fanboy:

"Tucker is RIGHT!" David Duke wrote. "White Supremacy is a ZioMedia Conspiracy Theory! The term is itself a lie. Millions of White activists are NOT 'supremacists' We seek NOT to oppress or destroy any race! Human Rights for all - EVEN FOR WHITE PEOPLE! Stop antiWhite racism!"

The media has become the greatest recruiting tool White Supremists have had in the past 50 years. :hs:

"Spelling and Punctuation are pretty important when you're trying to assert your intellectual Superiority"

Trump keeps the press away from Dayton and El Paso saying he wants it to be about the victims and not a photo op. Then less than 24 hours from his campaign comes a photo op and campaign video.

He got a new slogan to go with the Campaign video.

"I got 22 people killed in El Paso & didn't lose a vote"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1159298817478414337

Between El Paso and now the ICE massive raid detaining almost 700 Latinos, I’m pretty sure he has alienated another voting block. Even if planned ahead of El Paso as reported, very clear rather then do the smart thing and hold off, they move forward. Pretty sad that school bus drivers were suddenly put in the position of determining if young school age children had parents to go home to.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're the one who said he started posting here bc he didn't like the way Trump was being treated.

Well I got my laugh for today.

Just played a round of golf behind Bill Murray on Chappagui#^&#^&#^&#^&, that was my laugh for the day. Sorry about your sad life.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just played a round of golf behind Bill Murray on Chappagui#^&#^&#^&#^&, that was my laugh for the day. Sorry about your sad life.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why would I have a sad life? I think I have a pretty good life.

You seem to be angry quite a bit and constantly post childish things at all hours of the day and night (week day and week night) - which I always thought reflected somehow on your life.

"Spelling and Punctuation are pretty important when you're trying to assert your intellectual Superiority"

Not all of us cut and paste all day long :bshake:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Proving your instincts are all wrong again. Poor liberal fool.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Proving your instincts are all wrong again. Poor liberal fool.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Childish insults from a dotard.

Childish insults from a dotard.

Oh great, you learned a word from the internet. Smart guy!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He didn't call NeoNazis fine people, he called people supporting their right for free speech fine people. There were people on BOTH sides, protesting to remove and protesting to keep the statues. Those were the people he called "fine people". Not the Neo Nazis or White Supremacist nor the Antifa protestors (also assholios).

I know you are a smart guy but on this one you are intellectually lazy - not sure though if by design or by default.

So Paul, please set aside a little over 4 minutes, watch the following video, the unedited segment when Trump spoke of both sides. Then still tell me that you honestly believe he was calling the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists "Fine People"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

Here's another short video that further corroborates yours:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=587Nw4sOA44

Silly boys
People without Trump Devotion Syndrome easily see the consistent lies uttered by the con man
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Silly boys
People without Trump Devotion Syndrome easily see the consistent lies uttered by the con man
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

People with Trump Derangement Syndrome are self delusional. They believe their own fabrications of so-called Trump lies.

They have nothing and make stuff up to promote their agenda like the rest of the silly people known as snowflake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They have nothing and make stuff up to promote their agenda like the rest of the silly people known as snowflake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're the biggest snowflake here as you stated you only started posting here bc you didn't like how Trump was being treated.

You are not paying attention Paul
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

when a bernie sanders fan shot up a gop softball ira rice and almost killed steve scalise, was that bernie’s fault? after all, bernie has used some pretty harsh language to describe conservatives who like capitalism - only caring about the wealthy, greedy one percenters, etc.

are all presidential
candidates responsible when their fans attack those they criticize? or only when trump does it?

i don’t like trumps language any more than the liberals here. but some
consistency would
be nice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


They are not remotely the same.. but when has that ever mattered when defending Trump
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How do they differ?🤷🏿#^&♂️
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How do they differ?🤷🏿#^&♂️
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

One is Trump, the other isn't.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They are not remotely the same.. but when has that ever mattered when defending Trump
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device




Because Trump said the Nazis were very Fine People.

Because Trump said the Nazis were very Fine People.

if that was the only thing he's ever said .. id see your point .. but clearly it is not... ..

my distain for Trump has nothing to do with him being a republican It is based 100% on his actions and behavior as Potus its not a fantasy about his place of birth .. and conspiracy crap As for my current distain for the republican party it too is based on their spineless nature towards Trump they kowtow to his words ,attacks and overall behavior .. and would not for 1 second accept it from any other POTUS or cabinet member if they were Dems or past republican office holders


do I think Trump him giving the thumbs up while holding an orphaned
baby. was deliberate

nope I think it was done without an once of malice or bad intent ...

I feel he is so disconnected by wealth and fame .. He is clueless on how normal people would behave presented with the same dilemma ... and this lack of interpersonal skills shows in all areas of his administration

if that was the only thing he's ever said .. id see your point ..

my distain for Trump

He didn't say it . . . most of the rest of your disdain for Trump is also based on lies, twisted interpretations (lies), circumstantial innuendoes (half truths).

But when you put it altogether in an effusion of self-righteous indignation and disdain, it almost sounds convincing . . . to some, for sure, it comes from some god-like mouth to yours as infallible truth . . . there are a lot of believers . . . and one can't argue with a true believer.

Oh wait . . . it's the Trumplicans who are the believers . . . right . . . right . . .

He didn't say it . . . most of the rest of your disdain for Trump is also based on lies, twisted interpretations (lies), circumstantial innuendoes (half truths).
Good god. And then you have the words out of his own mouth over and over and over again.

I’d ask again, who has TDS?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I’d ask again, who has TDS?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ummmm...YOU :bl:

No,Jeff has straw syndrome.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good god. And then you have the words out of his own mouth over and over and over again.

I’d ask again, who has TDS?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Out of his own mouth, he said that he wasn't talking about the Neo Nazis or White Nationalists. That they should be totally condemned.

Out of his own mouth, he said he was talking about the peaceful folks on both sides of the issue of tearing down the statue of Robert E. Lee. The many folks who were neither Neo Nazis nor Antifa, who came to demonstrate for or against the removal of the statue.

Out of his own mouth did not come the words "Neo Nazis are fine people." Nor, out of his own mouth, did he imply that. That false "interpretation" of the words that came out of his mouth, came out of the mouths of those who oppose him and concoct lies to destroy him. And it is repeated out of the mouths of believers like you.

His daughter is an Orthodox Jew, His grandchildren are Jews. He has condemned Neo Nazis before and after. Neo Nazis are anti Semites. Would Trump, Mr. Vindictive, Mr. Thin Skinned, think that people who hate his daughter and grand children and would wish them or do them harm, are fine people?

If he had referred to the Neo Nazis, who did he mean by fine people on both sides? Antifa would be the other side. Did the lying interpreters of his words say or even imply that Trump said or believed that Antifa were fine people? Why would they leave out that other side of what they accused Trump of? Actual words that came out of his own mouth have stated quite the opposite. Do you honestly believe that he said that some Antifa were fine people?

The actual words out of his own mouth said who he meant by fine people, and who he didn't. Those words were stated clearly and unequivocally.

What was tortuously twisted as Trump saying that Neo Nazis are fine people came out of the mouths of liars who hate trump and want to defeat and/or destroy him.

Or out of the mouths of those who have TDS.

He didn't say it . . . most of

But when you put it altogether in an effusion of self-righteous indignation and disdain, it almost sounds convincing . . . to some, for sure, it comes from some god-like mouth to yours as infallible truth . . . there are a lot of believers . . . and one can't argue with a true believer.

Oh wait . . . it's the Trumplicans who are the believers . . . right . . . right . . .

so ok lets say Tump didn't say it as you suggest.. But "the rest of your disdain for Trump is also based on lies, twisted interpretations (lies), circumstantial innuendoes (half truths)."

you clearly live in an alternative universe.. your the only one pushing lies twisted innuendoes .. as a trump true believer (yes thats you) , Trump's words and tweets must be honey for your ears ...

Trump says he wants 'very meaningful background checks' for guns


what do you hear?:smokin:

so ok lets say Tump didn't say it as you suggest.. But "the rest of your disdain for Trump is also based on lies, twisted interpretations (lies), circumstantial innuendoes (half truths)."

you clearly live in an alternative universe.. your the only one pushing lies twisted innuendoes .. as a trump true believer (yes thats you) , Trump's words and tweets must be honey for your ears ...

Trump says he wants 'very meaningful background checks' for guns


what do you hear?:smokin:

I hear your nonsense.

I hear your nonsense.


President Donald Trump retweeted a popular conspiracy theory about financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s death by suicide, elevating unsubstantiated claims that Epstein, who died in federal custody, was killed by Bill Clinton.

let me guess your take on this :agree:

President Donald Trump retweeted a popular conspiracy theory about financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s death by suicide, elevating unsubstantiated claims that Epstein, who died in federal custody, was killed by Bill Clinton.

let me guess your take on this :agree:

It's not the kind of thing I care about. Haven't talked to the Don about it. Don't know if he was sarcastic, factually serious, had a few cups of sparkling liquor, pulling someone's chain, poking at the Clintons like a lot of folks do and like a lot of folks do to him . . . I just don't care. You can make a story or theory about it if it makes you feel good. I don't need to concern over it to be satisfied with life.

The authorities say it was suicide. Good enough for me since I don't know anything worth-wile or good enough to care about Epstein. For me, he's not worth talking or thinking about. If he decided to bow out on his own terms, I'm glad he saved the taxpayers some money.

so many great memes

It's not the kind of thing I care about. Haven't talked to the Don about it. Don't know if he was sarcastic, factually serious, had a few cups of sparkling liquor, pulling someone's chain, poking at the Clintons like a lot of folks do and like a lot of folks do to him . . . I just don't care. You can make a story or theory about it if it makes you feel good. I don't need to concern over it to be satisfied with life.

The authorities say it was suicide. Good enough for me since I don't know anything worth-wile or good enough to care about Epstein. For me, he's not worth talking or thinking about. If he decided to bow out on his own terms, I'm glad he saved the taxpayers some money.

Doesn’t surprise me you don’t care that the president of the USA retweet’s a conspiracy theory suggesting a past president may have had something to do with Epstein’s death. I guess it doesn’t surprise me that either Trump might actually believe it, or that he could be that childish and disrespectful of the office, if it was an attempt at humor. Pretty sad it’s the new norm for the highest office and that his outrageous behavior doesn’t raise concern for the GOP moving towards a 2020 election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so many great memes

it is amazing how gullible the right is.

it is amazing how gullible the right is.

not gullible...just amused :jester:

Doesn’t surprise me you don’t care that the president of the USA retweet’s a conspiracy theory suggesting a past president may have had something to do with Epstein’s death. I guess it doesn’t surprise me that either Trump might actually believe it, or that he could be that childish and disrespectful of the office, if it was an attempt at humor. Pretty sad it’s the new norm for the highest office and that his outrageous behavior doesn’t raise concern for the GOP moving towards a 2020 election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so trump is disrespecting the office and a former president by retweeting a funny meme that involved a former president who was once upon a time or two banging interns on the desk in the oval office in the whitehouse....I get it :confused:

so trump is disrespecting the office and a former president by retweeting a funny meme that involved a former president who was once upon a time or two banging interns on the desk in the oval office in the whitehouse....I get it :confused:

Seems Trump had more of a reason to see him dead then Clinton. But this thought is absent in all the true believers and those true believers feel consensual sex is worse then grabbing them by the pussy.. conspiracy theories the rights true policy postion on everything ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not gullible...just amused :jester:

You find it amusing the right constantly believes these crazy conspiracy theories?

not gullible...just amused :jester:

It is amazing how monotonous the left has become.

The meme game has been strong this weekend
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You find it amusing the right constantly believes these crazy conspiracy theories?

I don't believe in aliens and ghosts but I enjoy the stories

You find it amusing the right constantly believes these crazy conspiracy theories?

You do know that believing a meme isn’t required to find humor in them, right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems Trump had more of a reason to see him dead then Clinton.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you may be on to something.....

Doesn’t surprise me you don’t care that the president of the USA retweet’s a conspiracy theory suggesting a past president may have had something to do with Epstein’s death. I guess it doesn’t surprise me that either Trump might actually believe it, or that he could be that childish and disrespectful of the office, if it was an attempt at humor. Pretty sad it’s the new norm for the highest office and that his outrageous behavior doesn’t raise concern for the GOP moving towards a 2020 election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Had the same thought.
. That would have been a universal response from most but since Trumps in office .. its explained away with never ending BS or best president ever
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You do know that believing a meme isn’t required to find humor in them, right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

of course you can find humor in them but doesn't it say something about the right that they constantly believe those crazy conspiracy theories.

Uranium one, Benghazi, pizza gate, Clintons took $ from their foundation, etc, etc.

The Walmart massacre is the first large scale anti-Hispanic terrorist attack in the United States in living memory. It may not be the last or the worst.
The word "infestation" certainly suggests the solution of "extermination."
As for the claim that sensible people are supposed to take Trump seriously but not literally, it looks like Patrick Crusius didn’t get that memo.

If voters realize that Trump is not only a racist but also a racist who provokes terrorists, his presidency cannot be rescued.

So the denialists must deny.

Get used to him.
2020 will yield the same result because sensible people don’t want open borders and they also don’t want to pay off others student loans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Get used to him.
2020 will yield the same result because sensible people don’t want open borders and they also don’t want to pay off others student loans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That’s 50% of the voting group for Cheeto.
The other half are racists. :hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Get used to him.
2020 will yield the same result because sensible people don’t want open borders and they also don’t want to pay off others student loans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if warren gets the nod ... I agree ... but paying off student loans has as much of a chance as getting Mexico to pay for the wall or replacing Obama care with something cheaper and better .... and some people voted for that and are still waiting

of course you can find humor in them but doesn't it say something about the right that they constantly believe those crazy conspiracy theories.

Uranium one, Benghazi, pizza gate, Clintons took $ from their foundation, etc, etc.

but Russia a hoax climate change is a hoax new town a hoax and it the medias fault .. there is a clear pattern

All hail Trump

Look at all the great things He has done in only three years. Imagine what He could do in 20 or 30! Amazing! And when we hear His voice, it's like an angel sighing. I have no choice, I hear His voice. Feels like flying. It's like a dream, no end and no beginning.

:bgi::nailem:

of course you can find humor in them but doesn't it say something about the right that they constantly believe those crazy conspiracy theories.

Uranium one, Benghazi, pizza gate, Clintons took $ from their foundation, etc, etc.

Banghazi was a "Crazy Conspiracy Theory" I prefer to think of it as a failure of leadership, unless you are trying to throw a tape into the mix, then Maybe.

Like I said, great meme game

Banghazi was a "Crazy Conspiracy Theory" I prefer to think of it as a failure of leadership, unless you are trying to throw a tape into the mix, then Maybe.

House Benghazi Committee Republicans: No new evidence that Clinton, secretary of state at the time of the attack, is to blame for the facility’s vulnerability or the U.S. response to the attacks.

House Benghazi Committee Democrats: Clinton never personally denied U.S. diplomats’ requests for more security in Benghazi



"During the attack, a stand-down order was given, and our troops were told to change their clothes four times, and we needed, you know, permission from the Libyans to actually save Americans, and that's what they were discussing" in Washington, Hannity said on his program that evening.

For this fact-check, we'll look at the alleged stand-down order and whether troops were told to change their clothes four times while the attack was under way.

The short answers, based on the committee's report: The stand-down order was actually an order to wait while CIA officials tried to make sure its security team didn't get into a firefight with friendly militia. The order for troops to change clothes was unrelated and came hours after everyone had already been evacuated from Benghazi, not "during the attack."

We'll go through this chronologically. All times are Libyan. Washington was six hours behind.

The ‘stand-down’ order

The attack on the mission compound began at 9:42 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012, when seven American staff members were inside, along with five diplomatic security agents. In addition, the United States was using local militia to help provide protection, so there were three armed members of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, who lived on the compound and helped provide security, and five unarmed members of the Blue Mountain Guard Force.

According to the Benghazi committee report, a frantic call for help immediately went out to the CIA annex about a mile away. The annex security team, known as the GRS, started getting their gear together as annex officials made fruitless calls trying to contact the local groups, including the February 17 militia, they had been working with. Their goal: find out who was involved in the fight and whether they could get additional equipment.

With the sounds of gunfire in the distance and occasional tracer bullets flying overhead, the security team was eager to get going. Yet the officer in charge — the chief of base — was telling them to wait because the calls to the militias were not being answered. He and his deputy, who are unnamed, said they didn't want the team mistakenly getting into a firefight with friendly militia forces. Although sending the security squad and all the heavy weaponry from the annex to the mission would leave the annex defenseless, according to the report, the top officials at the annex gave them the green light, according to the testimony.

At 10:05 p.m., 23 minutes after the frantic call from the mission, the annex team was rolling.

Kris Paronto, a former Army ranger, is one of the men who rushed to the compound from the CIA annex to help bring people back. "Thirty minutes we were told to wait," he told Hannity June 28. "Twice the word 'wait' was used. Once the words 'stand down' was used. But to me that's semantics."

Not exactly. The dictionary definition of a stand-down order means your force is no longer on alert or operational. The chief of the annex was adamant that he never told the security team to actually stand down — only to wait. While members of the security team reported hearing the phrase "stand down," the narrative in the GOP report offers no evidence that, contrary to Hannity's claim, the team was told it wasn't going to be sent to help.

So it was Hannity’s conspiracy theory, not the GOP’s
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So it was Hannity’s conspiracy theory, not the GOP’s
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why would it matter who started it if the righty's believed it? I don't think I mentioned GOP - exactly who is the GOP and which one's did the GOP start?

Was Trump a Rep or a Dem when he started the Birther lie and like over 40% of Repub. believed him with no evidence.

FactCheck Posts

Trump on Clinton’s ‘3 a.m. Call’

By Robert Farley

Posted on April 28, 2016

Donald Trump says that “instead of taking charge” during the Benghazi attacks, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “decided to go home and sleep.” Clinton says she was continuously engaged in responding to the attack from the moment she learned of it in the afternoon and “did not sleep all night.”

Trump is certainly entitled to his opinion, but the evidence shows Clinton was fully engaged in the immediate response, and subsequent congressional investigations concluded the government response to the attack — including Clinton’s — was appropriate.

For other claims from Trump’s speech, see our separate story, “Trump’s Foreign Policy Speech.”

In a speech on foreign policy on April 27, Trump hearkened back to Clinton’s famous “3 a.m.” campaign ad in 2008 in which she claimed she was more “tested” and prepared than Barack Obama to handle a late-night call to the White House about a dire emergency.


Trump, April 27: After Secretary Clinton’s failed intervention in Libya, Islamic terrorists in Benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave Americans. Then, instead of taking charge that night, Hillary Clinton decided to go home and sleep. Incredible.

Clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie, proven to be absolutely a total lie. Our ambassador was murdered and our secretary of state misled the nation. And, by the way, she was not awake to take that call at 3 o’clock in the morning.

Trump made a similar claim the previous day on “Fox & Friends.”

Trump, April 26: She’s a disaster. Remember the famous call at 3 o’clock in the morning? She was sleeping, OK? She was sleeping. You know, it was her ad. Who would you like at 3 o’clock in the morning? Well, the phone rang and she was sleeping.

Trump is echoing a frequent attack line against Clinton. In an April 12, 2015, appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Sen. Rand Paul said, “I think Benghazi was a 3 a.m. phone call that she never picked up.” And on Sept. 16, 2015, Sen. Lindsey Graham tweeted at Clinton, “Where the hell were you on the night of the Benghazi attack?”

There have been numerous congressional inquiries into the Benghazi attacks and the U.S. response to it, and Clinton herself has testified twice about it. And so we now know quite a bit about where Clinton was on the night of the Benghazi attacks, and what she was doing.

The Immediate Response

For starters, we should note that the embassy in Tripoli alerted the State Department headquarters in Washington about the attack on the diplomatic facility in Benghazi at about 3:45 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on Sept. 11, 2012, according to Clinton’s accounts and a Senate report on the attack. In her book “Hard Choices” (on pages 322-323), Clinton said she received the news in her office from the department’s executive secretary, Steve Mull.

Clinton wrote (page 323) that her first action was to use a secure phone on her desk to contact the White House, where she spoke to National Security Advisor Tom Donilon. At 4:05 the State Department Operations Center sent an “Ops Alert” notifying senior department officials, the White House Situation Room, and others that the Benghazi facility was under attack.

Obama immediately gave an order to “do whatever was necessary to support our people in Libya” and to mobilize “all possible resources,” Clinton said in her book.

Clinton wrote that she led the State Department operations team to work with the embassy in Tripoli to “get our people to safety and to break down the doors of the Libyan government if necessary to demand more support.” At 5:41 p.m., Clinton also called CIA Director David Petraeus because she knew the agency had a nearby post with a heavy security force, and according to the Wall Street Journal, Clinton “wanted to make sure the two agencies were on the same page.”

Clinton described a frenzy of communications that followed news of the attack, including communication with various State Department officials, the White House, the Libyan president, the National Security Council, the CIA, Department of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff and other agencies.

At around 8 p.m. (2 a.m. in Benghazi time), Clinton — with other senior staff on the line — called Gregory Hicks, deputy chief of mission at the Libyan embassy in Tripoli. Hicks testified that Clinton “asked me what was going on, and I briefed her on developments. Most of the conversation was about the search for Ambassador Stevens. It was also about what we were going to do with our personnel in Benghazi, and I told her that we would need to evacuate, and that was–she said that was the right thing to do.”

It should be noted that responsibility for the military response did not fall on Clinton, but rather on Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Marty Dempsey.

The actions taken by Clinton and others have been scrutinized in detail in several investigative reports, including by Republican-controlled House committees. Congressional committees and an independent board detailed the rescue attempts that night, carried out despite U.S. military assets not being in position to defend the Benghazi facility. Those reports said there were no undue delays in responding to the attacks, and they pointedly rejected unfounded allegations that the U.S. response was deliberately thwarted by a “stand down” order.

“Quite the contrary: the safe evacuation of all U.S. government personnel from Benghazi twelve hours after the initial attack and subsequently to Ramstein Air Force Base was the result of exceptional U.S. government coordination and military response,” the independent Accountability Review Board concluded in its Dec. 18, 2012, report.

The “U.S. military performed well in responding to the attacks,” the House Armed Services Committee said in a February 2014 report. Separately, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said in its November 2014 report that the CIA — which was first on the scene of the attack — responded in a “timely and appropriate manner.”

Working from Home

At some point, Clinton made the decision to leave the State Department for the night and continue working from her home because, “I knew the days ahead were going to be taxing on us all, with the entire Department looking to me to lead them through this shocking tragedy while keeping everyone focused on what lay ahead,” Clinton wrote on page 328 of her book.


Clinton, “Hard Choices”: With our DS agents at the heavily fortified CIA post and our reinforcements from Tripoli on the ground at the airport, I decided to move from my office to my home in northwest Washington, only minutes away from Foggy Bottom. I knew the days ahead were going to be taxing on us all, with the entire Department looking to me to lead them through this shocking tragedy while keeping everyone focused on what lay ahead. When I became Secretary the Department outfitted my house with all the secure communications and other equipment necessary to work as easily from there as I could from the office.

I got on the phone with President Obama and gave him the latest updates.

On Oct. 22, 2015, during a House Select Committee hearing on Benghazi, Republican Rep. Martha Roby questioned Clinton closely about her decision to go home that night. For context, the questions came about nine hours into Clinton’s testimony.


Roby: And who else was at your home? Were you alone?

Clinton: I was alone, yes.

Roby: The whole night?

Clinton, laughing: Yes, the whole night.

Roby: I don’t know why that’s funny. I mean, did you have any in-person briefings? I don’t find it funny at all.

Clinton: I’m sorry — a little note of levity at 7:15, noted for the record.

Roby: Well, I mean, the reason I say it’s not funny is because it went well into the night when our folks on the ground were still in danger. So I don’t think it’s funny to ask you if you were alone the whole night.

Clinton: Well, Congresswoman, you asked if I had a SCIF. I had secure phones. I had other equipment that kept me in touch with the State Department at all times. I did not sleep all night. I was very much focused on what we were doing.

In regard to Clinton’s reference to utilizing a “SCIF” at her home, that’s short for a Sensitive Compartmented Informational Facility, a secure room that allows communication protected against leakage of sensitive security/military information.

In response to Roby’s follow-up questions, Clinton revealed that prior to her leaving the State Department headquarters for home, the death of U.S. Foreign Services Information Management Officer Sean Smith had been confirmed, and Clinton said she also knew U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens “was most likely not alive.” Clinton said she was at home when she learned of the second attack on the CIA annex facility, which began about 11:15 p.m. Eastern time and claimed the lives of CIA contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

Clinton said she talked to President Obama “late in the evening,” though she couldn’t recall exactly when.

We could find little in the available public documents to confirm Clinton’s engagement on the crisis after she went home — other than Clinton’s sworn testimony that “I had other equipment that kept me in touch with the State Department at all times. I did not sleep all night. I was very much focused on what we were doing.”

We know, for example that at 11:12 p.m., Clinton sent an an email to her daughter, Chelsea (who is identified in the email under her alias “Diane Reynolds.”) In that email, the secretary of state wrote: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al Qaeda-like group: The Ambassador, whom I handpicked and a young communications officer on temporary duty w a wife and two young children. Very hard day and I fear more of the same tomorrow.”

We also know that at 11:38 p.m., Clinton emailed State Department officials Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan and Victoria Nuland to ask if the State Department should announce Stevens’ death that night or wait until the following morning.

We reached out to the Clinton campaign, which noted the 11:38 p.m. email Clinton sent from home, but provided no further evidence of communications through the early morning hours of Sept. 12. And because — as Clinton testified — she was home alone, there is no one to independently confirm her actions. We also reached out to the Trump campaign, but it did not respond.

Trump is entitled to his opinion about Clinton’s response to the Benghazi attack, but the evidence shows Clinton was fully engaged in the immediate response. And subsequent congressional investigations concluded the government response to the attack — including Clinton’s — was appropriate. Clinton testified that even after she went home that night, she remained awake all night, engaged and focused on the situation. Since there is no way to independently verify that, we’ll let readers decide for themselves, but we would note Trump has not provided any evidence to contradict Clinton’s account.

Meanwhile in the current Presidency with that guy who would be working all the time and not leave the WH

This is Trump's 218th day at a Trump golf club and 286th day at a Trump property as president.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SItU_PMMeA

Why would it matter who started it if the righty's believed it? I don't think I mentioned GOP - exactly who is the GOP and which one's did the GOP start?

Was Trump a Rep or a Dem when he started the Birther lie and like over 40% of Repub. believed him with no evidence.

Can’t get that man out of your head can you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Can’t get that man out of your head can you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well I'm amazed at how the full Rep. party have given themselves over to him with hardly any pushback. The things that people use to complain about Obama and the Dems are 50 x worse and no one seems to care. His lies are passed over as if this is normal behavior. We can go on and on. How many days has he vac. or golfed, How many executive actions, the deficit etc. Maybe we should discuss the things that used to be brought up here - Obama's tan suit or his "lie" about keeping your Dr. how Obama disrespected the office by putting his feet up. Ect.

Well I'm amazed

quit whining...

and....you are the ONLY one that ever brings up this Obama tan suit...over...and over...and over

quit whining...

and....you are the ONLY one that ever brings up this Obama tan suit...over...and over...and over

but weren't you the one who posted a picture of it a few times? Do you still have that picture along with the rest of the petty pictures you used to post or did you get a new phone?

Well I'm amazed at how the full Rep. party have given themselves over to him with hardly any pushback. The things that people use to complain about Obama and the Dems are 50 x worse and no one seems to care. His lies are passed over as if this is normal behavior. We can go on and on. How many days has he vac. or golfed, How many executive actions, the deficit etc. Maybe we should discuss the things that used to be brought up here - Obama's tan suit or his "lie" about keeping your Dr. how Obama disrespected the office by putting his feet up. Ect.

Enjoy the ride cupcake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Enjoy the ride cupcake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I get so embarrassed for you when I read your posts.

I get so embarrassed for you when I read your posts.

You are running out of ammunition my little mud hen. Stay the course. Someday I am going to hug you and never let go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are running out of ammunition my little mud hen. Stay the course. Someday I am going to hug you and never let go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Again I'm embarrassed for you that you really have nothing else to say other than the same childish insults.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please provide an example of what any body would consider to be an insightful post from you ,Paul.

Was it the one where you disclosed people make money in the northeast and then move south? You are a tool. Plain and simple. But I have fun with you so keep entertaining me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please provide an example of what any body would consider to be an insightful post from you ,Paul.

Was it the one where you disclosed people make money in the northeast and then move south? You are a tool. Plain and simple. But I have fun with you so keep entertaining me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Again nothing but childish insults from a dotard. It's embarrassing how your posts lack substance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://youtu.be/lA5UqUyFmT0
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Again nothing but childish insults from a dotard. It's embarrassing how your posts lack substance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you for providing fodder my little puppet.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you for providing fodder my little puppet.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Again nothing but childish insults from a dotard. It's embarrassing how your posts lack substance.

Again nothing but childish insults from a dotard. It's embarrassing how your posts lack substance.

you should read YOUR posts :confused:

you should read YOUR posts :confused:

Scott - seriously why would I care what you think? You're just a snarky individual - which they say is the lowest form of wit.

Scott - seriously why would I care what you think? You're just a snarky individual - which they say is the lowest form of wit.

:wave:

Like most #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s PaulS thinks HE is adding substance. He should read his last 10 posts and decide if his offerings are in depth. I guess that is heavy lifting in his snow globe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Like most #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s PaulS thinks HE is adding substance. He should read his last 10 posts and decide if his offerings are in depth. I guess that is heavy lifting in his snow globe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You mean the ones responding to your childish insults? Of course they don't add value - but that is the same as the vast majority of your posts.

Ann Coulter's contribution to the notion that "someone was listening."

https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2019/08/14/what-the-el-paso-shooter-learned-from-immigrants---p--n2551700?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=bf6d5580969b1ebc1202d7fd625046d4&pid=3f1e97e4-c05a-419b-9c3d-8cc16b57cace

Ann Coulter's contribution to the notion that "someone was listening."

https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2019/08/14/what-the-el-paso-shooter-learned-from-immigrants---p--n2551700?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=bf6d5580969b1ebc1202d7fd625046d4&pid=3f1e97e4-c05a-419b-9c3d-8cc16b57cace


Trump’s Aryan Witch Enforcer selectively missed a lot of history, to attempt to make a contorted point.
Google Aztlan and Google immigrant invasion, a lot more hits on immigrant invaders than Aztlan, but keep spinning and believing Trump's rhetoric has no effect.

Then you can look at things from the viewpoint of American citizens of Mexican descent:
Mexican Cession and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the illegal land takings that have occurred since.
Mexican Repatriation occurred in the 1930s when the government illegally deported a million AMERICAN citizens of Mexican descent to Mexico.

Trump’s Aryan Witch Enforcer selectively missed a lot of history, to attempt to make a contorted point.
Google Aztlan and Google immigrant invasion, a lot more hits on immigrant invaders than Aztlan, but keep spinning and believing Trump's rhetoric has no effect.

She didn't miss any history. She pointed out a slice of reality that made its point. She wasn't trying to make your Salem Witch trial investigation's selective points which also "missed" a lot of history. History is far far far more extensive than your little range. And the brief little slice of it that she presents is a spot on contribution of events and words that influence. The number of hits on google is irrelevant in terms of who is listening to the rhetoric of Mexican Supremacist factions. To dismiss the effect of that rhetoric on a large number of Mexicans who want to be here, and welcome any notion of their right to be here regardless of our immigration laws, helps to solidify the belief that they indeed have a right, a superior right that precedes anyone else's.

Then you can look at things from the viewpoint of American citizens of Mexican descent:
Mexican Cession and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the illegal land takings that have occurred since.
Mexican Repatriation occurred in the 1930s when the government illegally deported a million AMERICAN citizens of Mexican descent to Mexico.

You've already pointed that out. I regret that I gave you the opportunity to once again point it out. I got it the first time and it gets boring hearing about it over and over. It's all interesting, but this is still the U.S., not Mexico, however it got to be that way.

This is the first time that Coulter's viewpoint has been tendered. There is no need to bring all that old stuff up as if it somehow discredits what she says. I doesn't. But a not very nice try.

You've already pointed that out. I regret that I gave you the opportunity to once again point it out. I got it the first time and it gets boring hearing about it over and over. It's all interesting, but this is still the U.S., not Mexico, however it got to be that way.

This is the first time that Coulter's viewpoint has been tendered. There is no need to bring all that old stuff up as if it somehow discredits what she says. I doesn't. But a not very nice try.

Perhaps she should have read his manifesto.
Then she would have seen this statement.

"Actually the Hispanic community was not my target before I read The Great Replacement."

Pretty far stretch to blame that on Armando Navarro, Roberto Rodriguez or some civil action group.

But perhaps Ann Coulter feels guilty about saying this, though I doubt it.

Ann Coulter, appearing as a guest on Jeanine Pirro’s Fox News show, offered a dispassionately violent suggestion about what could be done to stem the flow of migrants: “You can shoot invaders.”

Perhaps she should have read his manifesto.
Then she would have seen this statement.

"Actually the Hispanic community was not my target before I read The Great Replacement."

Pretty far stretch to blame that on Armando Navarro, Roberto Rodriguez or some civil action group.

But perhaps Ann Coulter feels guilty about saying this, though I doubt it.

Ann Coulter, appearing as a guest on Jeanine Pirro’s Fox News show, offered a dispassionately violent suggestion about what could be done to stem the flow of migrants: “You can shoot invaders.”

This doesn't address Coulter's article that I posted. It seems that no matter what is actually said, it simply provides you with an opportunity to change the subject and drag us back into whatever bone you have to pick. That gets old. But I do understand that it does relieve you of the burden of rebutting or disproving or even of making a pertinent response.

This doesn't address Coulter's article that I posted. It seems that no matter what is actually said, it simply provides you with an opportunity to change the subject and drag us back into whatever bone you have to pick. That gets old. But I do understand that it does relieve you of the burden of rebutting or disproving or even of making a pertinent response.
Ann Coulter who said “You can shoot invaders.” then claims no culpability when a man decides to shoot people he views as invaders.
Her “argument” has no basis in reality.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ann Coulter who said “You can shoot invaders.” then claims no culpability when a man decides to shoot people he views as invaders.
Her “argument” has no basis in reality.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You just made her point. If you deny that inflammatory rhetoric from the left leads to violence but that Trump using perfectly valid words is the reason for mass shootings, then your opinion has no basis in reality. Constantly ragging on Trump for merely using a word, which accurately describes a situation, then giving a pass to all the pols and organizations that accuse him and white males and Republicans of being fascists, Nazis, etc., with no real basis for saying so, repeatedly, shows what a hypocrite who makes stuff up you really are.

You just made her point. If you deny that inflammatory rhetoric from the left leads to violence but that Trump using perfectly valid words is the reason for mass shootings, then your opinion has no basis in reality. Constantly ragging on Trump for merely using a word, which accurately describes a situation, then giving a pass to all the pols and organizations that accuse him and white males and Republicans of being fascists, Nazis, etc., with no real basis for saying so, repeatedly, shows what a hypocrite who makes stuff up you really are.

Her point is saying “You can shoot invaders” has no effect?
Trump’s Denialists, of which you are one, must deny.
Because if voters realize that Trump is not only divisive but also a person who provokes terrorists, his presidency cannot be rescued.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Her point is saying “You can shoot invaders” has no effect?
Trump’s Denialists, of which you are one, must deny.
Because if voters realize that Trump is not only divisive but also a person who provokes terrorists, his presidency cannot be rescued.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I was referring to the article by her that I posted and to which you had a pseudo, or rather non-existent, reply. You changed the subject. I attempted to get back to the subject. You refuse. As I said, you ramble on about other things so you don't have to respond. Which is OK. Don't respond. But just don't post one of your knee jerk other hates as if it is a response.

I don't know about her "you can shoot invaders" remark. And I certainly don't know the context nor intent of what she said. I have learned that trusting to your interpretation of that could very well be misleading, or entirely wrong.

And I'm not interested in, nor agree with, everything that Coulter says. I thought that the article by her that I posted, and to which you pretended to reply to, was enlightening as to the one-sided, even hypocritical, if not entirely fallacious, condemning Trump of inspiring violence because he used certain words.

I understand why you would try to evade any reasonable discussion of how that is not fair nor accurate--or even an outride lie.

I was referring to the article by her that I posted and to which you had a pseudo, or rather non-existent, reply. You changed the subject. I attempted to get back to the subject. You refuse. As I said, you ramble on about other things so you don't have to respond. Which is OK. Don't respond. But just don't post one of your knee jerk other hates as if it is a response.

I don't know about her "you can shoot invaders" remark. And I certainly don't know the context nor intent of what she said. I have learned that trusting to your interpretation of that could very well be misleading, or entirely wrong.

And I'm not interested in, nor agree with, everything that Coulter says. I thought that the article by her that I posted, and to which you pretended to reply to, was enlightening as to the one-sided, even hypocritical, if not entirely fallacious, condemning Trump of inspiring violence because he used certain words.

I understand why you would try to evade any reasonable discussion of how that is not fair nor accurate--or even an outride lie.
Her article proposed that the shooter was influenced by a viewpoint that is held by very few as opposed to something broadcast on Fox, called as such by Trump in rallies time after time.

Keep denying, perhaps you actually believe that Trump’s speech has no effect and he is using those words to join people together to solve a problem.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Words are like guns
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Her article proposed that the shooter was influenced by a viewpoint that is held by very few as opposed to something broadcast on Fox, called as such by Trump in rallies time after time.

This sentence is incoherent.

It begins by trying to compare different things--being influenced by a viewpoint, and by the source of a (the same?) viewpoint. Possibly being influenced by the actual rhetoric is one thing. Attributing the source of the rhetoric as influence is another thing. Coulter addressed the rhetoric and action itself--the source being those who actually said or wrote or did it.

If your saying that the shooter would be influenced, not by the rhetoric, but by the source (Fox News), that is a different argument which Coulter did not address.

If your saying that the "viewpoint" of the Mexican supremacists is held by very few because it wasn't on Fox News and therefor it would not be effective in influencing the shooter, that would be assuming something you don't know, as well as being irrelevant, and even more it would be misleading since the "viewpoint" actually has been broadcast or written in main stream media, including the NYT and other main print and television media other than Fox.


Keep denying, perhaps you actually believe that Trump’s speech has no effect and he is using those words to join people together to solve a problem.


And then you end by bringing in Trump, totally ignoring the distinct possibility that the shooter was influenced by the actual massive illegal immigration and the verbal threats of Mexican Supremacists that have been going on for a long time and are fully explicated rhetoric, not just single words, or supposed "code" or "dog whistles."

As you say, keep denying.

I don't deny that some crazy might take any word, no matter how legitimate or pertinent, and go off on a killing spree. But I'm going to point the finger on the shooter. That we cannot use legitimate language to describe events because some crazy may go batchit is ridiculous.

You seem to want to deny that rhetoric from the left can be effective enough to cause violence. The leftist media and politicians are fairly quiet about the possibility that their rhetoric, which is more direct and explicit, not just dog whistle stuff, influenced the Dayton shooter, who was a Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren fan. But boy, are they going hyper over the El Paso shooting because they somehow conclude that it's Trump's fault.