its because she is a women of color.
trump assassination attempt? 2024
- Thread starter Puff_Dragon
- Start date
Dr.Amber Trichome
Well-Known Member
I heard the gun he used was his father’s. Father should go to jail. The kid is so pissed about being bullied he tries an assassination of Trump? Something does not add up here. Father might be the one who set this up. This was planned and executed quite well. I have a hard time understanding how a young 20 year old could do this on his own. Also heard stories about how a local cop tried to stop him but the kid threatened him with his gun and the cop fell off the building? sound like a cover up story. The bullet picture also a photoshop job imo.
Nugnewbie
Well-Known Member
There is precedent for parents being charged after a child carried out a mass shooting in Michigan. Ethan Crumbley plead guilty to 24 counts, including four counts of murder, multiple counts of attempted murder and terrorism charges. He was 15 when he carried out the shooting. Then his parents were charged with four counts each of involuntary manslaughter after allegedly making the gun used in the shooting accessible to their son and failing to recognize warning signs about him before the shooting. They were convicted. Hard to say if this parent was as negligent, and this shooter is an adult. Guess we'll see in the future.
As far as the event being staged, it occurred to me also. First thing, I don't trust anything to do with Trump. Second, it just didn't seem like there was much blood for a gunshot wound. But, considering there were others hit and killed, or injured and no reports of anything else being fishy, it seems there is no conspiracy theory to follow. Just my thoughts.
As far as the event being staged, it occurred to me also. First thing, I don't trust anything to do with Trump. Second, it just didn't seem like there was much blood for a gunshot wound. But, considering there were others hit and killed, or injured and no reports of anything else being fishy, it seems there is no conspiracy theory to follow. Just my thoughts.
laddyd
Well-Known Member
I keep reading "there's no place for this kind of violence here".
Excuse me this is America and that was the most American thing ever.
There are hundreds of millions of guns in this country.
There are over a hundred firearm deaths in this country every day. Tens of thousands of people die from gunshots in the U.S. every year.
So when some nutcase takes a potshot at possibly the most reviled man on the planet, enough with the outrage, it's disingenuous.
Excuse me this is America and that was the most American thing ever.
There are hundreds of millions of guns in this country.
There are over a hundred firearm deaths in this country every day. Tens of thousands of people die from gunshots in the U.S. every year.
So when some nutcase takes a potshot at possibly the most reviled man on the planet, enough with the outrage, it's disingenuous.
Offmymeds
Well-Known Member
What do they mean by "terminated"?
Unga Bunga
Well-Known Member
I imagine fired , removed from employment .
Bad Karma
Well-Known Member
Bear420
Well-Known Member
The Difference is. Is a Hammer less deadly than a Bullet ? Republican's love the fact Paul Pelosi was Attacked with a hammer and almost killed, While when something happens to the other side it's wrong and the Democrats came out right away and said so. Yet Republican's Use the Death of someone to hopefully gain Traction. If you Supporters on the Republican side don't see that, Just look at the two sides right now, But Since Trump it's been Chaos and It's Rigged, everything he loses is Rigged, Them, Everyone Knows, The guy is full of shit and will Kill our Country with his rhetoric and evil ways. Although I don't want Biden as his time is up and this is true, but I'd still take Biden in a Box than Trump being a Dictator. Trump didn't want to leave last time, what do you think will happen this time ? His Buddy Kim Un the guy that just killed teenagers for watching tv from South Korea, Really that's they guy you want.. A Clear and Present Danger. Remember who said that, Judge J Michael Luttig, a former trump supporter
compassionateExotic
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
Sativied
Well-Known Member
"Today is not just some isolated incident. The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs. That rhetoric led directly to President Trump's attempted assassination." - Donald's VP pick JD Vance
That reasoning applies to insane gun laws. If you allow nearly everyone to own a gun, or 20 guns..., that will lead directly to unnecessary gun deaths. Regarding what Vance calls rhetoric, however, he is right in the same way that allowing roads and vehicles to travel on them will too inevitably lead to accidents and deaths. It doesn't follow we got to stop building roads and vehicles.
It's not just rhetoric though. The 'stopped at all costs' would be, of course. So was the bullseye comment - nobody took that as a hint from Biden to point a gun at Trump. Even if someone would, that wouldn't be on Biden, that wouldn't be a reason to stop using figure of speech. Cause that would be like ending the idea of roads and traffic cause some mentally insane drunk driver causes casualties. Like throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Aside from taking back the bullseye comment, I think Biden responded well in the NBC interview:
Pressed by Holt on whether he has used inciting language, Biden suggested that it was necessary to characterize Trump as a “threat to democracy.”
“How do you talk about the threat to democracy – which is real – when a [former] president says things like he says? Do you just not say anything – because it may incite somebody?”
I watched many many politicians (and people across all levels of society, as well as social media companies and moderators) across several nations grapple with that very key question for decades and have not seen anyone provide a winning response. They don't just not saying anything, but they have to be careful how to phrase it. Just the fact they are forced to navigate a thin line already puts them in a disposition. Cause the other side doesn't have to, they can instead simply lie and bs their way out of losing voters over it. Heck, their supporters convinced themselves it's only fair.
Worse, Vance's tweet, Johnson's veiled comments and thousands of other examples by now, paint Biden and other dems as a danger to Trump, you know, the cult leader of millions of bat shit gun owners. The GOP and Trump got themselves a new trump card, one they won't hold back.
Typical for remakes of foreign movies (it's an analogy ffs, not suggesting it's like a movie...) is that the ending is often changed to be a happy one. Usually kills the story and makes it unrealistic but Americans love a happy ending. The situation where someone who referred to the demagogue as 'America's Hitler' becomes VP is definitely a new twist that was in no original, that would be way too unrealistic for fiction.
That reasoning applies to insane gun laws. If you allow nearly everyone to own a gun, or 20 guns..., that will lead directly to unnecessary gun deaths. Regarding what Vance calls rhetoric, however, he is right in the same way that allowing roads and vehicles to travel on them will too inevitably lead to accidents and deaths. It doesn't follow we got to stop building roads and vehicles.
It's not just rhetoric though. The 'stopped at all costs' would be, of course. So was the bullseye comment - nobody took that as a hint from Biden to point a gun at Trump. Even if someone would, that wouldn't be on Biden, that wouldn't be a reason to stop using figure of speech. Cause that would be like ending the idea of roads and traffic cause some mentally insane drunk driver causes casualties. Like throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Aside from taking back the bullseye comment, I think Biden responded well in the NBC interview:
Pressed by Holt on whether he has used inciting language, Biden suggested that it was necessary to characterize Trump as a “threat to democracy.”
“How do you talk about the threat to democracy – which is real – when a [former] president says things like he says? Do you just not say anything – because it may incite somebody?”
I watched many many politicians (and people across all levels of society, as well as social media companies and moderators) across several nations grapple with that very key question for decades and have not seen anyone provide a winning response. They don't just not saying anything, but they have to be careful how to phrase it. Just the fact they are forced to navigate a thin line already puts them in a disposition. Cause the other side doesn't have to, they can instead simply lie and bs their way out of losing voters over it. Heck, their supporters convinced themselves it's only fair.
Worse, Vance's tweet, Johnson's veiled comments and thousands of other examples by now, paint Biden and other dems as a danger to Trump, you know, the cult leader of millions of bat shit gun owners. The GOP and Trump got themselves a new trump card, one they won't hold back.
Typical for remakes of foreign movies (it's an analogy ffs, not suggesting it's like a movie...) is that the ending is often changed to be a happy one. Usually kills the story and makes it unrealistic but Americans love a happy ending. The situation where someone who referred to the demagogue as 'America's Hitler' becomes VP is definitely a new twist that was in no original, that would be way too unrealistic for fiction.
Samwiseman420
Well-Known Member
You know what really sucks? People have to hide their true feelings about this "assassination" attempt or they get banned or ridiculed. Anyone speaking their true feelings is called a hater and getting canceled. Over half this country hates his guts. We shouldn't have to hide our feelings.
Unga Bunga
Well-Known Member
It's likely more how people express their feelings . The hate on both sides has brought us to where we are , and it's not a good place .
Nugnewbie
Well-Known Member
This site has to police hate speech, or they risk being heavily scrutinized, and possibly having the site taken down if they allow it. Sunni and curious2garden have stated this repeatedly. We can't just say what we want. I do wonder how that fits with the 1st amendment, but websites are responsible to control inflammatory rhetoric, and like I said, it has to be monitored and eliminated.
I don't know all the ins and outs, but most of it seems obvious.
I don't know all the ins and outs, but most of it seems obvious.
Unga Bunga
Well-Known Member
1st amendment has no bearing on private forums .
Samwiseman420
Well-Known Member
I understand that completely. But it's all subjective and how it's perceived by whom. For example, if someone comes up to you and says "trump was just shot", and you reply with "oh well", is that hateful? Do I have to reply with an "OMG how dreadful!" response when it's not a true feeling?
Do we all have to fake our feelings in order to seem more humane? I guess that's what I'm asking here. Can you just say "I don't care"? Or is that considered hateful and violent?
Last edited:
Nugnewbie
Well-Known Member
TOS comes before our feelings and opinions. It irks me in a way, but it's not my sandbox. Dumpy and his ilk say things often. It sparks outrage. The difference I think between dumpy and Joe is, if dumpy says inappropriate things, when called out on it, he usually doubles down, and NEVER apologizes, or admits it was wrong. On the other hand, Joe will step back, and apologize if his rhetoric is interpreted as inciteful or wrong. This just played out when J.D. Vance blamed the shooting on Biden and the democrats campaign, for wanting to put dumpy in the"bullseye". Joe explained exactly what he meant with his words, and then apologized saying he didn't use the best judgment. If the shooting hadn't occurred, hard to say if ANYONE would have condemned him for saying it. Also, don't hold your breath for Vance to apologize. It's just not the MAGA way.
Thats actually NOT true, you are wildly bending it. its not "subjective" and no ones been banned for saying "oh well" you are being absolutely ridiculous and I think you are well aware of it
We dont allow violations of TOS if you cannot voice your opinion without violating the TOS than that is a problem you need to figure out yourself.
IF youd like to speak about this further my inbox is open to discuss what you cannot / can do here.