H-Bomb

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

How many trump apologists are here? Any?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Anyone who tried to defend him for saying that people who marched with the nazis where "fine" people or who have tried telling us what he meant vs what he actually said for starters. How about people who say he's being sarcastic when there's no indication he was being sarcastic? I could add a lot more.

First time in history we've had a president defending Nazis.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

First time in history we've had a president defending Nazis.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I see.

So when Trump says "I condemn violence and bigotry on all sides", what you hear, is "I like Nazis".

Yes, he could have been very specific about calling them out separately from Antifa. He's a rotten speaker. And he may well have been wrong in his assumption that there were "fine" people mixed in.

If you look at everything he said, he clearly condemned the bigots, but was allowing for the possibility that there were non-bigots in the group. He may have been 100% wrong in that assessment. But to conclude that he was "defending Nazis", is completely irrational.

I can make a LONG list of character flaws that Trump has, and some are very ugly. Nazi sympathizer, isn't on the list, at least, not based on his comments from Charlottesville.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I see.

So when Trump says "I condemn violence and bigotry on all sides", what you hear, is "I like Nazis".No, what I hear is what he said - read it. He was trying to put Nazis on equal footing with people who were marching against NAZIs.

Yes, he could have been very specific about calling them out separately from Antifa. He's a rotten speaker. And he may well have been wrong in his assumption that there were "fine" people mixed in.Go back and read what he said - everytime he called out a Nazi, he had to add something about antifa as if it killed him to call out a nazi.

If you look at everything he said, he clearly condemned the bigots, but was allowing for the possibility that there were non-bigots in the group.I would say if you think you are not a bigot and the person next to you is yelling something about Jews and is a self professed Nazi and you don't leave - you then are a bigot. He may have been 100% wrong in that assessment. But to conclude that he was "defending Nazis", is completely irrational. He was defending nazis' bc some in the crowd word MAGA hats - ie "they like me, therefore they are me and me can't be all bad so they can't be bad".

I can make a LONG list of character flaws that Trump has, and some are very ugly. Nazi sympathizer, isn't on the list, at least, not based on his comments from Charlottesville.

I read that Bannon pushed Pres Trump not to criticize the Alt right too strongly for fear of alienating Trump's core supports. What Bannon failed to recogonize is that the majority of Trump's supporters criticized the Alt right who participated in those marches and where horrified by Trump not criticizing the Nazis more. The thing I can't figure out is he likes "winners" so why isn't he calling for the removal of the statutes of a bunch of traitorous losers?

But back to the apologists - So aren't you being an apologist? Can't the same be said for anyone who posts on either side of a discussion in most threads?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I read that Bannon pushed Pres Trump not to criticize the Alt right too strongly for fear of alienating Trump's core supports. What Bannon failed to recogonize is that the majority of Trump's supporters criticized the Alt right who participated in those marches and where horrified by Trump not criticizing the Nazis more. The thing I can't figure out is he likes "winners" so why isn't he calling for the removal of the statutes of a bunch of traitorous losers?

But back to the apologists - So aren't you being an apologist? Can't the same be said for anyone who posts on either side of a discussion in most threads?

"He was trying to put Nazis on equal footing with people who were marching against NAZIs."

Please post exactly what he said, that you interpreted as him equating Nazis, with those who oppose Nazis. He may have equated the violent jerks on both sides (Antifa is nothing more than a terrorist group), that's hardly the same thing as what you accused him of.

"everytime he called out a Nazi, he had to add something about antifa as if it killed him to call out a nazi."

So he called out both Nazis and Antifa. And that's what ticks you off. Yes, he could have said "Nazis have killed more people than Antifa ever will". But that's nowhere near "defending Nazis", which is what you accused him of.

"I would say if you think you are not a bigot and the person next to you is yelling something about Jews and is a self professed Nazi and you don't leave - you then are a bigot"

That's not a bad point. But interesting that you chose not to apply that logic to Obama, who had Al Sharpton in the Oval Office almost 100 times, and I don't recall you offering a syllable of criticism for that. How about we establish some rules, and we apply them equally to all presidents, regardless of party?

"He was defending nazis' bc some in the crowd word MAGA hats - ie "they like me, therefore they are me and me can't be all bad so they can't be bad".

He has condemned all kinds of bigotry, dozens of times, on camera. But let's ignore all that, because it doesn't fit The Narrative. The Narrative is having a hard time lately.

"aren't you being an apologist?"

No, I am being a rational adult who holds him accountable for the things he actually says and does. Just because I don't heap fabricated criticism at Trump, doesn't mean I am an apologist. I am highly, highly critical of the man. But I do it honestly, and that's the difference between us.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"He was trying to put Nazis on equal footing with people who were marching against NAZIs."

Please post exactly what he said, that you interpreted as him equating Nazis, with those who oppose Nazis. He may have equated the violent jerks on both sides (Antifa is nothing more than a terrorist group), that's hardly the same thing as what you accused him of.TRUMP: I will tell you something. I watched those very closely, much more closely than you people watched it. And you had a group on one side that was bad and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that. But I’ll say it right now.

[cross talk]

You had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit and they were very, very violent.

REPORTER: Do you think that what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?

TRUMP: All of those people — Excuse me — I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.




REPORTER: Mr. President, are you putting what you are calling the alt-left and white supremacists on the same moral plane?

TRUMP: I am not putting anybody on a moral plane. What I’m saying is this: You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious and horrible. And it was a horrible thing to watch. But there is another side. There was a group on this side, you can call them the left. You have just called them the left, that came violently attacking the other group. So you can say what you want, but that’s the way it is.

REPORTER: You said there was hatred, there was violence on both sides?

TRUMP: Well I do think there’s blame. Yes, I think there is blame on both sides. You look at both sides. I think there is blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it. And you don’t have doubt about it either. And if you reported it accurately, you would say.





REPORTER: The neo-Nazis started this thing. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest —

TRUMP: Excuse me. They didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis. And you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.

You had people in that group — excuse me, excuse me — I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.




"everytime he called out a Nazi, he had to add something about antifa as if it killed him to call out a nazi."

So he called out both Nazis and Antifa. And that's what ticks you off. I'm not ticked off at all. I think it is hilarious to watch the apologists try to explain his actions. Yes, he could have said "Nazis have killed more people than Antifa ever will". But that's nowhere near "defending Nazis", which is what you accused him of.

"I would say if you think you are not a bigot and the person next to you is yelling something about Jews and is a self professed Nazi and you don't leave - you then are a bigot"

That's not a bad point. But interesting that you chose not to apply that logic to Obama, who had Al Sharpton in the Oval Office almost 100 times, and I don't recall you offering a syllable of criticism for that. I never defended him nor did I critize him. Am I supposed to respond to every one of your numerous posts? I did defend him on your constant complaining about Rev. Wright. How about we establish some rules, and we apply them equally to all presidents, regardless of party? Fine with me - so does that mean all those posts about Obama's vacations, mom pants, the amount of exec. orders, etc. will get deleted or are you going to go back and change your comment on them?

"He was defending nazis' bc some in the crowd word MAGA hats - ie "they like me, therefore they are me and me can't be all bad so they can't be bad".

He has condemned all kinds of bigotry, dozens of times, on camera. But let's ignore all that, because it doesn't fit The Narrative. The Narrative is having a hard time lately.The "narrative" is he only does it when he gets called out. Something along the lines of "fine, I denounce" after his lying and saying he doesn't know anything about David Duke even though there is tape w/Trump talking about Duke previously. Took proding for him to make a comment on Charlottesville and then he said he had to gather the facts - as if that has ever stopped him from tweeting before knowing any facts The Neo Nazis where thrilled w/Trump's comments after Charlottesville

"aren't you being an apologist?"

No, I am being a rational adult who holds him accountable for the things he actually says and does. Just because I don't heap fabricated criticism at Trumpexpecting your Pres. not to lie is fabricated criticism (or bitter hatred)?, doesn't mean I am an apologist. I am highly, highly critical of the man.really only his crassness and lying - I'll give you that. But I do it honestly, and that's the difference between us.

That is your view- I think you are an apologist (I'll guess I'll start using that here) and a hypocrite. Should we pull up a post where you said only the nut who shot Giffords was guilty and not anyone on the right and then recently said the nut who shot Scalise was a result of the left's actions? I called DS on that one and let you off easy even though you had repeatedly argued basically the same thing as him in the same threads. How about your complaining about Obama blaming Bush for leaving him a bad economy and your complaining that he shouldn't talk about the prior Pres? You seems to not have a problem w/Pres. Trump's constant complaining of not only the former Pres. but of the defeated candidate. Pure hypocrisy.

[Jim in CT]

Paul -

"And you had a group on one side that was bad and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that. But I’ll say it right now"

There were two groups there at the same time. They are both disgusting. Is one worse than the other? Probably.

That's not "defending Nazis", not even close.

"to watch the apologists"

If you think I am a Trump apologist, you don't know what "apologist" means. I hate the guy. But I hate him for the things he has actually said and done.

If you have no quarrel with Obama meeting with Sharpton dozens of times, it's the height of hypocrisy for you to say that anyone standing next to a racist, should leave the premises, or they are a racist. Try making that wrong.

I don't need to change any of my criticisms of Obama. My criticisms were based on facts (well some were clearly personal as I didn't like the guy), and I don't hold Trump to a lower standard. The double standard is on your side. Again, on one hand you have no problem with Obama meeting with Sharpton dozens of times. On the other hand, you say Trump should denounce everyone that was standing next to the racists. How is that, in any way, consistent?

"really only his crassness and lying". His disgusting views towards women, too. When he exhibits true racist behaviors, I'll criticize him for it. I won't fabricate it.

[nightfighter]

Originally Posted by PaulS

First time in history we've had a president defending Nazis.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I would have to do some deep digging, but I am 75% sure there were some words spoken on their behalf by FDR, pre Pearl Harbor, said in an effort to keep the US neutral and out of the war in Europe. Again, pre WW2. Just saying and has no bearing on current discussion.