Trump Shot at Rally in Pennsylvania
WiseToo
New York
BUTLER, Pa. (AP) — Donald Trump's campaign said in a statement that he was “fine” after being whisked off the stage at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania after apparent gunshots rang through the crowd.
“President Trump thanks law enforcement and first responders for their quick action during this heinous act,” spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “He is fine and is being checked out at a local medical facility. More details will follow.”
The Secret Service said in a statement that “the former President is safe.”
The former president and presumptive Republican nominee was showing off a chart of border crossing numbers during his last rally before the Republican National Convention opens Monday when bangs started ringing through the crowd. Trump could be seen reaching with his right hand toward his neck. There appeared to be blood on his face.
He quickly ducked behind the riser as agents from his protective detail rushed the stage and screams were heard in the crowd of several thousand people. The bangs continued as agents tended to him on stage.
The crowd cheered as he got back up and pumped his fist.
His motorcade has since left the venue. His condition was not immediately known.
Police began vacating the fairgrounds shortly after Trump left the stage in what local officers described as a crime scene.
What do you all think?
“President Trump thanks law enforcement and first responders for their quick action during this heinous act,” spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “He is fine and is being checked out at a local medical facility. More details will follow.”
The Secret Service said in a statement that “the former President is safe.”
The former president and presumptive Republican nominee was showing off a chart of border crossing numbers during his last rally before the Republican National Convention opens Monday when bangs started ringing through the crowd. Trump could be seen reaching with his right hand toward his neck. There appeared to be blood on his face.
He quickly ducked behind the riser as agents from his protective detail rushed the stage and screams were heard in the crowd of several thousand people. The bangs continued as agents tended to him on stage.
The crowd cheered as he got back up and pumped his fist.
His motorcade has since left the venue. His condition was not immediately known.
Police began vacating the fairgrounds shortly after Trump left the stage in what local officers described as a crime scene.
What do you all think?
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
177 comments
Let's see who is going to be a classless shitlord about it. Trump or Biden, it would frighten me the same.
This incident is pathetic and you will see strong condemnation from both sides.
Trump may have a loud bark, but it's the clown progressive/anti-MAGA clowns who cause REAL damage.
I suppose Biden couldn't get Trump locked up, so now Biden is upping the stakes.
If this is a leftist darling, like the trans shooter in Nashville, I expect the media to hide any hint of motive.
I gotta give Trump credit, I was impressed by his toughness and defiance by standing there fist pumping and waving to the crowd after being shot within a couple inches of a direct head shot as they rushed him to his SUV, they even had to push him inside it as stood on the door sill fist pumping.
Tough guy, for real, not an act.
What's truly pathetic is that from the day he was elected and over 2 months before he actually entered office, throughout his administration, and even through the nearly 4 years since your side has condemned him and plotted his downfall.
Any condemnation from your side will ring as hollow as you are!
Of course, the left is already saying it was a
MAGA staged act.
Dressed down another prick on a different site for saying it was staged, or saying whatabout Jan 6.
I gave more to elect Republicans this November. That's my revenge, giving Trump the biggest majority we can.
I'm not with anybody who "wants" this to happen. But I'm very surprised (like, literally, "surprised" as in, I did not expect or anticipate it) at a lot of the rhetoric on this particular thread that says that the Democrats somehow fomented this attack by vilifying Trump. I'm sorry, I don't agree. Vilification has happened in both directions in most campaigns throughout our nation's history. Some campaigns are nasty, some are nice. Independent of that, the crazy guy sometimes shoots at the Left, sometimes shoots at the Right, and there's really no correlation between vilification and whether there's a shooting. Furthermore, generally, everyone here would have to agree, the side that wants to curtail gun use through government restrictions is the Left, and the side that wants to reduce government restrictions on gun use is the Right. And, again everyone here would have to agree, on January 6, a sitting President urged an armed crowd to storm the Capitol building.
So it makes only as much sense to say "Trump (and the Republicans) brought this on him" as to say "the Democrats brought this on him." There's plenty of evidence for both. BTW, I don't think either is true. They're both pretty irrational.
Crazy dude with gun did the thang. He probably has an agenda, we'll probably get to read his dang political manifesto probably posted on MySpace or Instagram, and furthermore it probably rambles a lot about the fact that he is angry at the hot girl who wouldn't go out with him in Junior High because he was a smelly creep and never had the courage to ask her out anyway.
Maybe it was Alec Baldwin. In the threads about Baldwin people are pretty quick to say that whoever holds the gun is responsible for the gun. Maybe we should keep that in mind.
I am -- Glad he didn't get seriously harmed. Very sorry for the one dead spectator. A little miffed that people are taking this occasion to try to irrationally blame Democrats. But I guess if you can make a cogent case for the Democrats deserving blame, I'm willing to reconsider. Also, I am impressed with the fist pump and chant reaction. Dude realized he was being shot at, hit the deck pretty quick of his own accord, promptly realized he had just survived an assassination attempt ("I need my shoes"), used it to rally (and reassure) the crowd immediately. The ego / bravado / leadership of a person used to being viewed by a crowd as the alpha. I'll freely admit Biden would not have been so on-the-ball if he had been similarly grazed in the ear.
No we don’t have to agree with this because it is factually wrong. Perhaps you should read a transcript of what he actually said.
In neither case did either side expressly tell anyone to commit the violence, so how can you be so certain that the politicians on the left didn't cause this while simultaneously being equally certain that Trump's words caused people to storm the Capitol?
As for blaming gun rights, the gun was just the tool used by the person that committed the crime. When some racist right-wing asshole decided to drive his car into a crowd of protesters in Charlottesville in 2017 why didn't the left come out and try to ban cars? After all if guns are to blame for a shooting, surely cars are to blame whenever someone kills someone else with a car, right?
https://x.com/kenvogel/status/1810390653…
Yeah, if you believe the Jan 6 accusations against Trump, then Biden most definitely orchestrated this attempted hit.
So, first, Jesus that's even better, much more rational, about murdering a baby in the womb, sure, that's completely apropos an assassination attempt. Now I'm DEFINITELY agreeing with you, misterorange.
C'mon whodey, are you really going to try to claim that (a) specific orders from a chief executive given to a specific assembled group whom you specifically asked to be armed, orders followed within minutes of them being given, are the same as (b) public commentary by various entertainment figures on a variety of channels over a four-year (or eight?) span distributed piecemeal and often in humorous monologues? I'm (again) surprised anybody would pretend Trump didn't send the mob to the Capitol building, didn't know they'd riot. Look at the videos, read the transcripts (as advised by doctorevil). Here's one analysis -- https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada…
But just for the sake of argument, I'll concede those points to you. Because they were UTTERLY IMMATERIAL TO MY OVERALL POINT that vilification happens in both directions. If you'd read my comments you'd understand my argument and know that going off on January 6 specifically, is going off on an unnecessary tangent. Two of you (so far) have heard that Right-winger's dog-whistle ("don't let the Left use REALITY against us, especially about January 6!") and have salivated as commanded. You were told to suck Trump's cock, you sucked away and begged to know whether he wanted it harder or deeper. Man up, jeez, do your own thinking for a minute. Take my example. I actually accept sense from either side of the aisle. Are you capable of that cognitive act?
So, as conceded, nevertheless, it remains the case that generally speaking, Left and Right vilify (or don't) to varying degrees in various campaigns, and that (my point) armed attacks happen independent of that level of vilification.
I'm sorry I piped up. I offered a laurel branch of peace, generally asserting compassion and sympathy for the victims and generally rejecting political violence. I congratulated Trump on his leadership and wherewithal and referenced him as an "alpha." I suggested personal responsibility instead of victimhood. All these are Right Wing talking points. Yet I was met with anger and disapprobation and outright lies about January 6. The American Right Wing has spoken again. Consistently I live a life of attempted tolerance to opposing views, consistently the Right throws right back in my face my own interest in giving them their fair opportunity to convince me otherwise.
As I stated, "But I guess if you can make a cogent case for the Democrats deserving blame, I'm willing to reconsider." You have not. You have, in fact, proven my initial position. You've offered "if you ..." silly suggestions -- straw men, taking an irrational position and suggesting I should agree with it (banning cars? fer fucks sakes). You don't even know my position on gun control, yet you assume the worst of me. You won't win me over by doing that.
Again and again, I offer the opportunity for rational discussion. Again and again right-wingers lie and obfuscate. Anybody suggesting I'm out to ban guns is simply uninformed. Anybody suggesting Trump had nothing to do with the worst insurrection since the Civil War of the 1860s is simply lying, either to himself or to the world at large. Get me some cogent, sensible comments about why Democrats are to blame, why they're MORE to blame than Republicans, and I'll listen. Write them politely without bullshit. And use facts. Ignore January 6, it's immaterial to the discussion, unless you think you need it.
If you have the ability to write something cogent. Please give it a try.
“ I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” How is that an incitement to violence?
Looking for clear reasoning as to why Democrats are to blame for the regrettable assassination attempt on Trump today. I believe it is a wrong act and I believe this sort of thing happens, sadly, independent of vilification in campaigns, which happens sometimes more sometimes less, in either direction Left or Right.
Doctorevil, it DID incite violence, and Trump damn well knew it would. That was his intent. To "stop the steal." (Or, he didn't know it would incite violence because he's too stupid to put on his own pants.) Jan 6 can't be whitewashed. I didn't need it and shouldn't have raised it, for I wrongly assumed truth would matter to you. If you believe that Trump can get off the legal charge of incitement to violence, that's one thing, and I may (or may not) agree with you, it's a close case. But if you genuinely believe he did not prefer, want, benefit from, and intend that violence? If that's your belief, I'd be amazed at how simpering and simping you are for him. He wanted it, he caused it, he may or may not have done so illegally, but don't pretend he didn't direct it.
How can you defend Pres. Biden saying just this week that Trump is a "threat to democracy" and that “it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye”? Do you really think that is not at least as much of an incitement to violence as what Trump said on Jan 6th?
As for Jan 6th being "the worst insurrection since the Civil War of the 1860s" do you consider it worse than having a President (Kennedy) assassinated, another President (Reagan) shot in front of the White House or multiple presidential candidates (Roosevelt, RFK, Trump) shot in attempts (successful in the case of RFK) to prevent their election? That's not even taking into account more localized insurrection like violently taking over portions of cities and declaring them "autonomous zones" that are not subject to local, state or federal laws.
I don't think of assassinations (or attempts) as insurrections. They're illegal too. I can't defend the Woke idiots, I don't try. There have been other riots, too, Watts and Rodney King and George Floyd events etc.. They weren't ever in the political discourse as "insurrections" until Trump had his and his defenders therefore needed something to compare to. There's something categorically different between, on the one hand, a crowd taking over a neighborhood with intent to vandalize and express anger, as opposed to, on the other hand, a crowd taking over building with intent to stop the functioning of election certification.
And I didn't defend Biden and don't want to. I'm sure he would claim that the "bullseye" comment was only a figure of speech and that everyone should know that, but he may be wrong (similar language was used before the G. Giffords attack by her by political opponents IIRC, possibly inciting a crazy dude to do the shooting). I'm referencing, generally, the fact that language seems to be going in both directions and that you could therefore make an equal case for either Right or Left "causing" this particular event; in addition, I would say that neither is a true culprit. Claiming Trump is a "threat to democracy" is a true statement, in the minds of people who view his attempt to prevent the legitimate certification of a valid election as a threat to democracy, but that claim does not equate to demanding that he be shot. Generally, most anti-gun people prefer things to be NOT shot. It's Trump's side that likes guns. But maybe that doesn't convince you?
And for anyone who quotes the Jan 6 nonsense, you have to be an utter fucking moron to think that a couple of mostly unarmed civilians were even a remote threat to the U.S. government. I mean dumb as a box of fucking rocks to think that the U.S. government could be supplanted by a couple thousand overzealous protestors. It is a sprawling multi-agency entity with hundreds of thousands of armed soldiers at its disposal. I mean fucking seriously now.
Yet the Dems have been fanning this relatively inconsequential event as a sign of some great attempt to overthrow democracy. Small wonder that some nutjob took a shot at Trump.
Oh, great. Thanks for the brilliant elucidation. And where did you get your degree in mind reading?
I will echo both Obama and Biden on this. There is no legitimate place for violence in a democratic society, not against a candidate, or a judge, or a prosecutor, or employees of the court, or jurors.
"Claiming Trump is a "threat to democracy" is a true statement, in the minds of people who view his attempt to prevent the legitimate certification of a valid election as a threat to democracy." That is not how the truth works, something can't be "true" only if someone holds a certain belief. Truth is objective and not subject to one's personal beliefs. Saying he is a threat to democracy is true because someone who believes Trump attempted to incite an insurrection would agree with it is no different than claiming "abortion is murder" is a true statement because people who believe "life begins at the moment of conception" would agree.
Suppose that the White House press secretary had told the press she wanted to see "trial by combat" at Trump's rally, hours before the shootings? If you'd expect Biden to have fired her for that, you understand why I would never vote for Trump.
It’s crazy just a few millimeters from possibly radically changing the history of America
Your citation of my sentence ("claiming T is a threat" etc.) LEAVES OUT HALF OF IT. If you're going to quote me, don't quote me falsely. I was stating that the people who think X do not ALSO think Y, where X is "he is a threat to democracy" and Y is "he needs to be shot." If you leave out Y, pretend your false version of X is representative, and from that you then say I am misunderstanding the nature of truth (by saying X must be true because people think it), you're simply deliberately misrepresenting my statements. This type of issue avoidance and subterfuge are reasons I consistently fail to find Republican arguments convincing -- they're hiding. You're hiding right now.
Here is my FULL SENTENCE -- "Claiming Trump is a "threat to democracy" is a true statement, in the minds of people who view his attempt to prevent the legitimate certification of a valid election as a threat to democracy, but that claim does not equate to demanding that he be shot."
Here is how you FRAUDULENTLY ATTEMPTED TO LIE ABOUT MY SENTENCE -- ""Claiming Trump is a "threat to democracy" is a true statement, in the minds of people who view his attempt to prevent the legitimate certification of a valid election as a threat to democracy." That is not how the truth works, something can't be "true" only if someone holds a certain belief. "
You knew, damned well, I wasn't claiming your stupid idea about how I supposedly think truth works. You just didn't want to have to deal with the actual content of my sentence, so you left out the part you can't handle. You lied, either to yourself or to the world at large, about what I said, misrepresented it by making something up, and then pointed out an obvious weakness of the thing you made up. What a surprise, a thing I didn't say is wrong. It's wrong because you made it up.
Stop lying. Especially about things I said less than an hour ago, because it's not like I'm not going to notice. I'll be more likely to agree with you if you address the sentences I actually say instead of the made-up ones I didn't say.
I wanted a fair discussion, a chance to really understand. I hear these smart-seeming people make statements I find silly, I try to ask them why they're saying the things they're saying. But they just deliberately mis-quote me, fling invective at me, use obvious non-sequiturs and logical fallacies, and then complain that "libtards are dumb." Shit, I'm TRYING to give you a chance to HELP ME AGREE WITH YOU but you won't take that chance at face value and actually talk some sense into me.
The reason you won't talk sense into me, is, most likely, that your positions don't hold up to sense. If you think otherwise, use reason, don't misquote me, don't assume the worst of me, don't impute positions to me that I don't hold on scant evidence, don't treat me like I'm stupid (sadly, I'm not) or like I've fallen for propaganda. Explain politely. You can't, can you? Especially, don't just outright lie. It's too damn obvious.
I hope to see an ad like that as the campaigns heat up. The contrast is very revealing.
By the way, just because we agree that calling him a "threat to democracy" alone isn't a call to violence does not excuse the fact that you said calling him a threat to violence is a truth when in fact is an opinion not a truth.
The only threat to democracy in this election is coming from democrats that are calling for the will of tens of millions of their own voters to be ignored by trying to push Biden out of the race. He won the Democratic primaries and any coercion to try to replace him as the party's nominee is a true threat to democracy because it ignores the results of a fair and free primary election process.
I forget that the Gen Z, Millennials etc are shocked by this. It’s been 40+ years. By I grew up with the assassinations / attempts of JFK, RFK, MLK, George Wallace, Gerald Ford and Reagan
It’s been since the 1960’s a long rifle was used. WTF. The secret service typically does an amazing job - but a huge breakdown.
Reminds me when Buckwheat got shot!
I also just heard in a CNN interview from a prior secret service agent that secret service needs to ask for permission to place agents on a private building's roof. I will be interested to hear whether access to the roof was denied to the secret service.
During the video of the event, it seems that Trump, while being walked away from the stage, said "wait, wait..."., before chanting "fight". The guy was shot, yet his initial reaction was to address the crowd. Well, that, and "I need my shoes :-)". I dare anyone to use the "but he's too old and weak to President" talking point after this. Most of us would be darting for the exit, and flying to the nearest secluded resort after that...but not Trump.
Trump was also praised for his quick hit-the-ground reaction. He has good reaction time, and was well-trained by agents.
Durr durr gUn vIoLeNcE
Durr durr wHaTaBoUt jAnUaRy sIxTh
Durr durr sEtUp
All of you can eat my unwiped asshole.
This was an assassination attempt. A few millimeters and we might have chaos on the streets and a lot of people (not just here) are more concerned about making liberal talking points.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democra…
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-ne…
If you call someone a Nazi, a dictator, a tyrant, a threat to the country, a Russian puppet or Putin's soldier often enough and loud enough, people will believe you. A cease to this violent rhetoric is not enough. A pubic apology is not enough. All of them - from Hillary to Cenk Unger- must issue public written retractions for all of these vile and untrue accusations which were the cause of this attempted assassination and more violence against other conservatives and Republicans.
Meanwhile, try exceeding the speed limit a few MPH, or drive with {gasp} a license plate light which is not illuminated.", and they are all over it. Add LE to list of jobs which can be done with no accountability.
This is the equivalent of attorney failing to file a legal document, or accountant failing to file a timely tax return for client, or engineering not updating engineering drawings, etc.....except with potentially deadly consequences. Same occurred with school resource officer where there was a school shooting.
Even though the preventive control was a failure (the secret service advance team failing to identify the risk), there should have been better diligence by the boots on the ground to detect the shooter's presence. And, what about the snipers? Why wouldn't they watch for unusual activities?
At least the 1st layer of secret service seemed to act in accordance with training. That stage reaction played out just as they practiced and watched on training videos.
While there's some of that going on, there is also a lot of right wing effort to spin this against the left and try to score political points. They can't give it a rest even for a second. Like an addiction, the temptation is too great for them to resist their ingrained habits. They will find some examples of extreme rhetoric on the left and attempt to pin it on Biden and the left as a whole. Just their latest con in the works.
The shooting might bolster his "tough guy" image, but it doesn't automatically make Trump a person with good character, judgment and policies. The "threat to democracy" talking point is no more inciteful than the "we won't have a country anymore", but it's far more credible. The January 6 insurrection was just one piece. There were the fake electors, the attempt to get Mike Pence to reject votes, the voting machine defamation, all the election denials, and now the groundwork being laid by Republicans to dispute the next election if Trump loses. It's a valid concern and not going away.
Democrats are not the victims here.
We don't know the shooter's motivation, but the "threat to Democracy" or "wants to destroy America" rhetoric from either side sucks.
Don't go digging into the past to make yourself a victim.
I agree with you that this assassination attempt should automatically changes anything about Trump's character. It does emphasize one thing though, Trump was able to get back up after being shot with determination and energy while Biden couldn't even show any sign of energy after flying on Air Force One from Camp David to Atlanta for a debate.
As for your statement that people should "condemn the shooting and agree there is no place for violence in our politics" have you seen anyone say the opposite? Is there some legitimate person out there saying the don't condemn the shooting or that they believe there is a place for violence in our politics?
Perhaps the only good thing that will come out of this is that maybe the government will agree to give all presidential candidates Secret Service protection. RFK Jr has repeatedly requested Secret Service protection for his campaign, but Biden's government has denied him any protection. If the Democrats had their way Biden would be the only candidate with a Secret Service detail.
As predicted, Democratic leader responses have been classy, Republicans are spewing dangerous conspiracy theories.
Looks like the shooter was a loner 2nd Amendment enthisiast who wore a shirt for a fairly popular guns and explosives YouTube channel.
Way to show how far the left will stretch for victim status.
What choice do they have now? They've been spewing shrill nonsense for months now, claiming that Trump was a fascist, danger to democracy, etc., etc., and that everything must be done to stop him. Is it any surprise that some screwed up 20 year old took it seriously and acted on it?
Oh, and as to your other comment, use some common sense dude. Even if the kid hadn't recently donated $15 to a progressive voter turnout group, someone doesn't do what this kid without ample fuel - even if it wasn't personally delivered.
Earlier this year he introduced a bill in Congress to remove Secret Service protection from Trump.
And he employs radical staffers - one who tweeted that the shooter should have practiced more. That’s pretty disgusting coming from the staff of a political rival.
Your time is dwindling gentlemen, and he represents the final years of your perceived power block. But fear not, the country shall survive....and your children will be better and stronger after you leave this place.
No, I do not support someone with Parkinson's running the country. No, I do not support a morally decayed snake oil salesman running the country either. And finally, I do not support assassinations.
That is all.
Orange Man Bad! Orange Man Bad! Orange Man Bad!
I know gamma is desperate for someone to say something nice about Trump. Here goes:
Yes, he is not a monster or a tyrant, and should be treated with respect and dignity as the prospective Republican Party nominee for President. He seems like a nice guy with a good heart... when you're on his side and it benefits him. But he has severe character flaws that make him unfit for President.
—
I think you missed the point. Apparently when she was interviewed for the job they forgot to ask “Oh, and one final question. Would you support the assassination of a political opponent if they are leading in the polls?”
Before you start lobbing missiles at the old guys in the forum - perhaps take a look at the shooter.
Another Gen Z loner living with his parents.
Working a minimum wage job. Probably an incel afraid of girls. Playing video games all day.
I said the situation stinks.
Here's an opinion from a veteran military sniper...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/…
Every time he opens his mouth you can practically hear the dementia progressing.
This assassination attempt doesn't just make Trump sympathetic, it is making Democrats forget that they have a Parkinson's patient in the White House.
Bullshit. The guy who shot at Trump was a registered Republican wearing a gun friendly tee shirt. 20 years old, just a stupid, bullied kid who saw an opportunity for his 15 minutes of fame. Basically the same profile as the shooters of Columbine, Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook.
Only question is if he was psychotic. If he just wanted to kill, kill, kill, he wouldn't have chosen one of the best protected men in the world.
Love watching lefties try to deflect and say they're the real victims here. Who just got shot, again?
^^^^^I'm going with this.
All these old fucks firing off with their bullshit before the shooter profile begins.
Same as the other shooters you mentioned? So at the time of the shooting
he was a high school kid? A korean immigrant? Were those high school kids registered Republicans? How about the korean guy? A profile covers more than a couple things. You're a white, adult, male same as him. Using your fuzzy logic your profile is the same as his.
And regardless of him being a registered Republican, his most recent political act before the shooting was contributing to a far left democratic cause. Does that match your profile too?
Your former tagline about being on the opposite side of the potomac away from Trump says it might be. Your TDS is still showing.
^^^^^I'm going with this.
All these old fucks firing off with their bullshit before the shooter profile begins.'
I have news for you bud, dawg is one of the oldest guys here, and I'm pretty sure he's white too.
What's bullshit? He may have registered as Republican four years ago when he got his driver's license, but he has since donated to leftist organizations. He could be a RINO like I called out. The other three you called out had nothing to do with anything but mental illness, much less politics. You are very desperately losing this argument to attempt to distract from the core premise with such idiotic misdirection.
God forbid they have to beat Trump at the ballot box (or battle box as Biden said).
A toast to further comeuppance to lawfare and political violence.
Cope and seethe. Seethe and cope. Or just grow the fuck up.
Very well put! You get a gold star.
wild4testes... Describing biden? Well you're wrong about the nice guy with a good heart part and you forgot to mention the feebleness and dementia.
🙃
Even with racist violence, whether black on white or white on black, there is often some fuel source behind the scenes. Racist friends or family or online posts social media.
The irony has your attention! Thank you for taking a closer look! Would you like to sit down and have a drink? I'm not like these "other" guys.....:)
Just saw this a minute ago, yeah good idea!
In either case, Secret Service leadership needs to be held accountable.
@PuddyTat, your right wing troll school has identified you as in dire need of remedial training. Scurry back and see if you can improve your game. Nobody knows WTF you're talking about, it's clear as day the anger, vitriol and sense of victimhood is coming from the right-leaning posters here, blaming the left.
Meanwhile, you're literally complaining that this incident is being used to "score political points." Guess what, bud. We have actual grounds to play the victim here, and you're sucking at the nipple of victim status like a newborn.
Cry harder!
Let's remember - election denier, six times business bankrupt, sexual predator, fraudster, convicted felon...
I wouldn't vote for him for dogcatcher.
The scaremongering doesn't work when Trump’s term didn't end the world.
Also its been proven that right wingers don’t actually support freedom of speech either. Like ive been saying for years, when it comes down to it the left wing has favored groups whom they want to restrict speech in favor of, and it’s basically a couple minority races and maybe lgbtq. Now, the right has the same thing. You merely need to examine the anti semitism bill from months ago and see how many right wingers proudly and fully supported insane free speech restrictions when it came to israel or judaism.
The "who killed more people" argument is a pile of shit. Were the Germans and Japanese who lost more in WW2 than America, righteous?
Every death in Gaza is on Hamas, who started this whole thing and could end it in an hour if they released hostages. And who promised thousands more massacres. Israel has a right to defend itself.
You cannot honestly compare the left and right on free speech. Who muscled social media companies? Who is funding outside vendors to determine what is and isn't true? The prosecutions of people who do donuts on pride flag crosswalks is another blasphemy law.
Fuck Hamas, fuck Iran, fuck hate speech laws, fuck censorship. Put it all together and that says fuck the left.
Anyway, your argument defeats itself. You cant possibly defend or believe in the constitution because by your own admission you believe an israeli citizens life is more valuable than an arabs, and believe people have different values dependent on their race or religion.
Before you bring it up, Himmler, I'm not even Jewish.
Anyone else remember the days before the internet when saying this would get you punched in the mouth?
Your completely delusional. To insane proportions. Each time israel chooses to kill someone, hamas made them do it?? Lmao. Fucking nutjob. You wouldnt say the same if it was the reverse situation no doubt.
How superior is an israeli or a jew compared to a white person in your mind? Or a black person? Or an arab or asian?
By your own admission, you believe an israeli killing a million arabs is equal to an arab killing a single israeli. That much you’ve admitted, no doubt. Im just curious now, how blacks, whites, asians and latinas stack up in the racial hierarchy compared to jews.
rickmacrodong
29 minutes ago
Lol youre a fucking violent zoo animal who should be getting raped and tortured in prison, walking around with a bleeding ass in prison. Same goes for your garbage wife and family. I completely debunked your so called “points” on that thread.
Your an israeli lapdog.
Why the fuck dont you move to israel since youre clearly a fake right winger who has more allegiance to a foreign country lmao
rickmacrodong
32 minutes ago
Again with the "more deaths." Were Germany and Japan more righteous in WW2 because they lost more?
If Hamas hadn't instigated this whole thing, no Gazans would have died. They sacrifice their own people to protect their weapons. Every Gazan death was an unavoidable tragedy, and self defense by Israel against an enemy that promised a thousand pogroms.
The "Jews want the entire Middle East" is nonsense. A few far right politicians, which need to go, want the West Bank and all of Jerusalem. Yes, they're criminals. I never said otherwise.
Israel has more startups per capita than any other country in the world, that's a fact. They're the only country in the Middle East where LGBTQ have ANY rights, yet we have "Queers for Palestine" like chickens for KFC. They can do just fine, look at the Iron Dome technology when most countries would have just called in airstrikes. Shit, they warn people when bombings are coming. They've killed fewer civilians than Americans in Mosul.
I'm not Jewish. Not Muslim. I'm American and know who our allies are in the region. Not Iran and the Houthis (who Biden just removed from the terror watchlist!) who literally have "DEATH TO AMERICA" in their slogan.
Palestinians can rise up against Hamas and join the civilized world, or meet the fate of the enemies of civilization.
Israel, literally does the equivalent of blowing up an entire country, because less than 1% of their population was killed. That is literally the definition of terrorism.
What you fail to understand is that terrorism is terrorism no matter the religious of the person doing it, or the religion of the person its being done to. Attacking civilians, is terrorism, whether Hamas does it to Israel, or Israel does it to someone else. Israel doesnt verify whether people are affiliated with Hamas before killing them. It literally, intentionally kills civilians which equals terrorism. Since israel has killed like, 100x as many people as hamas, that means israel is an even bigger terrorist.
Now, israel is no ally to America, hell, even people who support israel for religious reasons dont do it because of some sort of goodness jn israel. The people who support israel for religious reasons do so because they believe tbe sooner israel is established the sooner Jesus can return and then kill off israel. So its kind of a laughable situation when even the majority of israel supporters themselves, are essentially praying for the death of israel long term.
Israels certainly no ally, considering JFK and Nixon were both anti israel and israel is the primary suspect for what happened to them. If thats “conspiracy” then we can stick to confirmed facts and look up the uss liberty attack, the king david hotel bombing, the yinyon plan, the irgun, and numerous other cases of israel being involved in shady stuff.
Israel also certainly isnt the only place in the middle east where lgbtq have rights… they have the same rights everywhere else. The iron dome technology is something they wouldnt even have had they not stolen american taxpayer dollars. And yes no matter who approves giving money to israel, it still is israel thieving and mooching those dollars.
Queers for palestine doesnt equate to chickens for kfc because palestinian civilians dont have an issue with lgbtq. If Palestine= hamas then israel = the idf/government. And once again israel has killed more, stolen more, mooched and leeched more… morality is measured in numbers. A group that kills more people, is more evil. Thats why you have to bend over backwards and attempt to “explain” why a certain religions followers are 50x as valuable as another race/religion. It’s essentially the only way you can back israel in any way and attempt to stay logically consistent.
I'm thinking a Jewish guy screwed your girlfriend in high school.
See you dont get it. Poor upbringing, subhuman character, lack of morality.
If X group refuses to release hostages, doesnt mean you can go on a rampage killing whoever you want. Im not sure where you got that idea.
Hah, good one. Im thinking a jewish guy screwed your girl and you happily let him, and even offered to screw him. I mean you’re literally attempting to argue that its morally acceptable for Israelis to go around killing anyone and everyone they please. I would assume youre also on some watchlists somewhere considering you basically are operating under a terrorist mindset. You believe if someone from a particular country kidnaps your family or attacks your family members, you can go and attack random people from that country.
Its a tribal mindset to have.. its subhuman.. and its also the same sort of logic terrorists and gang members use to attempt to justify their killings.
You don't seem to know very much on the definition of terrorism, initiation of force and international law. Take off your white hood, go to the nearest public library and educate yourself.
If a group of people kills 1,200 people, does that mean that now, it’s acceptable to murder anyone who shares the same gender/race/religion of those original murderers? Or that you can attack the entire country of those murderers?
The answer would be no across the board, period. 9/11 was wrong because a group of people decided to attack random civilians. killing civilians intentionally = terrorism no matter who does it. and lol, nobody in humam history has or ever can kill 50,000 civilians accidentally. israel doesnt only target mosques and hospitals either. not to mention the laughable logic behind attempting to argue killing civilians is okay if you suspect they could be hiding weapons or sheltering murderers.
so as long as Hamas merely suspected the 1200 civilians they killed, were hiding weapons or sheltering violent IDF soldiers in their house, it would make it okay to attack? or if they "suspected" a music festival could have weapons or infrastructure hidden they can attack? nonsense.
its funny you talk about "white hood" when you literally claim, repeatedly, that an Israeli person is hundreds of times more valuable than a Palestinian person. to better clarify your belief system, I asked you how you believe a white, black, asian or latino person stacks up in your racial hierarchy system and you refused to answer.
if you watch even basic news reports and follow basic rules of war.. concepts of morality… you would understand that it isnt actually acceptable to attack an entire neighborhood, city, country, religion, race, just because someone from one of those groups did something violent. in order to support israel you are basically attempting to argue that its fine to attack an entire country or race of people as punishment for something a handful of them did.
there is no rule of war or law anywhere that allows for something like this, other than Jewish extremist religious texts.
have you not read about a school shooting in the news at any point? kid at a school gets bullied by some people, then later on starts shooting at random people
in that school. its concerning to me that you think that sort of behavior is normal. its like your mind is twisted- similar to these violent criminals. to a rational law abiding person, we understand school
shootings are bad and immoral because yourr attacking random classmates for something one or two particular classmates did. in your deluded mind this is somehow normal behavior…
Read anything on war theory, AdolfMicroBrain.
Thats not how morality or rules of war work. You can go after confirmed murderers. If you dont have the ability or capability to target the confirmed murderers, no that doesnt mean you can just nuke their whole country or indiscriminately bomb everything in human sight. Again your logic can be used to literally justify every terrorist attack in human history.
At the end of the day you’re basically arguing for why school shootings are morally acceptable. Its nonsensical. You cant attack random people in a school just because some students at that school did something to you.
And, no, Biden would never have fired her because he does not believe in accountability. None of the democrats do. That's part of their creed- no one is above the law except for every democrat party member. It's pure communism. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Here’s another shocker I heard. Biden has not met with his full cabinet in 9 months. He is not really governing.