Trump's Threats of Violence

8,086 Views | 135 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by quash
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/

Not one democrat said to go and protest peacefully.
Also debunked.

https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_44839468-3d38-415c-b0b0-11ceb87d1ced

Not a single one of those quotes changed with your CNN link. Try again.
No one takes issue with the existence of the quotes, but only the context in which they're presented.
Exactly. And the context of each quote was to go out and cause trouble. Not a single one of the democrats who made those statements said anything about doing it peacefully, like Trump said on 1/6.
Only the Maxine Waters quote was troubling in context, and other Democrats did object to it as well.

https://reason.com/2018/06/25/maxine-waters-sanders-pelosi-schumer/?amp
So, you disagree with your own politifact link that Waters was not calling for violence, but merely urging a policy discussion?

Hmm. You might consider that politifact has a credibility problem before posting future links in an attempt to debunk others.
It was not overtly violent, as Golem claimed, nor did it go unopposed by other Democrats.

Any remotely mainstream source is going to be criticized on this board. There's no point in worrying about what can't be avoided.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/

Not one democrat said to go and protest peacefully.
Also debunked.

https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_44839468-3d38-415c-b0b0-11ceb87d1ced

Not a single one of those quotes changed with your CNN link. Try again.
No one takes issue with the existence of the quotes, but only the context in which they're presented.
Exactly. And the context of each quote was to go out and cause trouble. Not a single one of the democrats who made those statements said anything about doing it peacefully, like Trump said on 1/6.
Only the Maxine Waters quote was troubling in context, and other Democrats did object to it as well.

https://reason.com/2018/06/25/maxine-waters-sanders-pelosi-schumer/?amp
So, you disagree with your own politifact link that Waters was not calling for violence, but merely urging a policy discussion?

Hmm. You might consider that politifact has a credibility problem before posting future links in an attempt to debunk others.
It was not overtly violent, as Golem claimed, nor did it go unopposed by other Democrats.

Any remotely mainstream source is going to be criticized on this board. There's no point in worrying about what can't be avoided.
Politifact is slanted left, just like a number of mainstream news organizations. When they try to explain away Waters comments, they completely lose credibility.

I would submit that Trump's comments were no more incendiary that the comments attributed to Pressly, Harris and Waters.

JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
Not "necessarily," according to Politifact. LOL.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
Married A Horn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/

Not one democrat said to go and protest peacefully.
Also debunked.

https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_44839468-3d38-415c-b0b0-11ceb87d1ced

Not a single one of those quotes changed with your CNN link. Try again.
No one takes issue with the existence of the quotes, but only the context in which they're presented.
Ah yes, politifact. The lefty-run website that uses opinion and commentary to "debunk" alleged false facts.

I love this attempt to explain away the quote of Ayana Pressley:

"Pressley did call for "unrest in the streets" with Tiffany Cross on MSNBC's "AM Joy" show."

"There was no indication Pressley necessarily meant anything other than peaceful protest."

Ah, so she wasn't "necessarily" calling for riots, even though riots, death and destruction were occurring throughout the country at the time. LOL.

And then there is this gem regarding Kamala Harris - mind you, the politician that helped bail the rioters out of jail:

"The quote attributed to Harris, that "protesters should not let up," is legitimate...

However, "Speaking remotely to late-show host Stephen Colbert in June 2020, Harris voiced support for the racial justice protests that were going on but she didn't say she wanted riots to continue.

Ah, of course politfact. Although cities were being burned and looted, clearly she didn't specifically say she wanted riots to continue when she said protestors "should not let up." Clearly.

And then of course with respect to Waters:

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., is quoted as saying: "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere."

But of course, politifact's explanation of this was merely "Waters urging attendees at the event to keep "pushing back" against members of the Trump administration with whom they disagreed."

Ah, so Waters made no call for physical altercations when she said corner them at dept. stores and gas stations, create a crowd and tell them they're not welcome. It was just a policy discussion she was urging. Suuuuuuuure politifact.

But Donald Trump, on the other hand, he was CLEARLY calling for violence with his comments. No question at all, eh politifact? Eh Sam? So what if you have to read through the lines some.


A+ for this post. I need to keep it bookmarked for when discussing 'fact checkers' with non-swine. (This post will do nothing for Sam and he will continue to use 'fact checkers' as authorities as often as possible.)
Married A Horn

Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So if we're done talking about how violent rhetoric is okay because Dems do it too…what about Trump? Does anyone still think his denials are credible after J6?
Married A Horn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

So if we're done talking about how violent rhetoric is okay because Dems do it too…what about Trump? Does anyone still think his denials are credible after J6?


Did you just admit the democrats rhetoric is violent?

Let's discuss that for a bit. How do you feel about all their violent rhetoric and what should be done about it / them?
Married A Horn

Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Married A Horn said:

Sam Lowry said:

So if we're done talking about how violent rhetoric is okay because Dems do it too…what about Trump? Does anyone still think his denials are credible after J6?


Did you just admit the democrats rhetoric is violent?

Let's discuss that for a bit. How do you feel about all their violent rhetoric and what should be done about it / them?
The rules they impose on us do not apply to them because they believe they're superior to us. Above us, and, by extension, above whatever rules they conjure for the rest of us.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

So if we're done talking about how violent rhetoric is okay because Dems do it too…what about Trump? Does anyone still think his denials are credible after J6?
Trump's comments: "I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it," he said. "I think if it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it."

Maybe Trump is talking about the same kind of non-violent protest that Politifact says Pressly, Harris, and Waters urged. Or maybe he believes the response would be violent. Who knows?

What does Politifact say about it?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

So if we're done talking about how violent rhetoric is okay because Dems do it too…what about Trump? Does anyone still think his denials are credible after J6?
Oh, and let's be clear: You don't believe Pressly, Harris and Waters were engaging in violent rhetoric, remember?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

You have to know this, You help carry the water for the Dems every time you post these things. The focus should be on the failures of the current administration but by all means lets talk about a has been instead.

The Dems thank you.
I don't think there are many Dems reading this board. It's mostly Republicans arguing with each other about the future of the party and the country.
Democrats hate defending their positions. They avoid places that don't swallow DNC narrative wholeheartedly and when they do visit it's just to troll and spew venom.

Great description of the majority on this board, thanks.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people


Amazing how you can block out facts. People did email Congress, and they did protest peacefully. And others rioted. And unlike what Mothra would have you believe, it was localized, and over a 1,000 people were arrested and jailed.

Try nuance, see what happens.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people


Amazing how you can block out facts. People did email Congress, and they did protest peacefully. And others rioted. And unlike what Mothra would have you believe, it was localized, and over a 1,000 people were arrested and jailed.

Try nuance, see what happens.
Amen. And the rapist that only rapes 1 out of the 10 women he dates is a swell guy most of the time.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

quash said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people


Amazing how you can block out facts. People did email Congress, and they did protest peacefully. And others rioted. And unlike what Mothra would have you believe, it was localized, and over a 1,000 people were arrested and jailed.

Try nuance, see what happens.
Amen. And the rapist that only rapes 1 out of the 10 women he dates is a swell guy most of the time.

Mothra is a christian
Mothra is a snowflake
Therefore all christians are snowflakes.

Fallacies are fallacies no matter how much you like the result they produce.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Mothra said:

quash said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people


Amazing how you can block out facts. People did email Congress, and they did protest peacefully. And others rioted. And unlike what Mothra would have you believe, it was localized, and over a 1,000 people were arrested and jailed.

Try nuance, see what happens.
Amen. And the rapist that only rapes 1 out of the 10 women he dates is a swell guy most of the time.

Mothra is a christian
Mothra is a snowflake
Therefore all christians are snowflakes.

Fallacies are fallacies no matter how much you like the result they produce.
What are you talking about? As I admitted to porterso on that thread, I have seen the light.

He convinced me that an organization whose protests only resulted in riots, murder and destruction a measly 5% oft he time is clearly a very peaceful organization, worthy of our support,

Try to keep up.
muddybrazos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/

Debunked. We have seen the videos for ourselves. Not one democrat said to go and protest peacefully. That politifact fact check is the perfect example of why no rational adults trust politifact.
exactly.

If we applied the same "analysis" to Trump's comments, then we must debunk Sam's nonsense. Absolutely nothing in Trump's statements occurred within the context of any ongoing violence, any ongoing demonstrations, etc.....and were clearly nothing but assessment. Nothing like the explicit calls to action we hear from Democrats.

Trump should keep it up. Flushes out the hypocrisy of the left.
An FBI office was attacked three days after they searched Mar-a-Lago. Online threats have increased, and more violence will be a concern as long as the case is ongoing. The inappropriateness of Trump's remarks in this context couldn't be more obvious.
If an FBI office was attacked then it's safe to assume that the fbi attacked itself since we already know that they create all the terror and they havent met their monthly quota of white supremacist terror yet.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You can't argue with never trumpers and democrats. It doesn't work.

They will characterize anything you do as fascist. It's time to ignore them and get things done. Screw em.


Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Married A Horn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So what should be done to her?
Married A Horn

Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Married A Horn said:

So what should be done to her?
Vote her out.
Golem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.


My GAWD you are delusional. Is it exhausting carrying all that water for the democrats? If not, Biden needs a new press secretary and your disconnection with anything remotely resembling reality is exactly what he's looking for.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Your failure to see context is unsurprising. It's practically a requirement for Trump supporters at this point.

Speaking of which, any thoughts on the Trump interview?
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Your failure to see context is unsurprising. It's practically a requirement for Trump supporters at this point.

Speaking of which, any thoughts on the Trump interview?
By "context" you really mean "anything you can imagine that supports your narrative", because you certainly aren't in favor of actual context.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Your failure to see context is unsurprising. It's practically a requirement for Trump supporters at this point.

Speaking of which, any thoughts on the Trump interview?
By "context" you really mean "anything you can imagine that supports your narrative", because you certainly aren't in favor of actual context.
My "narrative" about Democrats only exists in your imagination. I have no interest in defending them or doing anything else except pointing out that words mean things. I know partisan hacks often find that inconvenient. But "kids in cages" does not overtly mean "burn, loot, murder" no matter how much you might like it to be so.

If you're comfortable with the reasoning which holds that months of inflammatory rhetoric can contribute to violence even without expressly violent language, we can certainly agree. All pretenses notwithstanding, you obviously aren't comfortable when it's applied to Trump. You're bringing the same old double standards and tiresome whatabouts that we see here daily.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Your failure to see context is unsurprising. It's practically a requirement for Trump supporters at this point.

Speaking of which, any thoughts on the Trump interview?
By "context" you really mean "anything you can imagine that supports your narrative", because you certainly aren't in favor of actual context.
My "narrative" about Democrats only exists in your imagination. I have no interest in defending them or doing anything else except pointing out that words mean things. I know partisan hacks often find that inconvenient. But "kids in cages" does not overtly mean "burn, loot, murder" no matter how much you might like it to be so.

If you're comfortable with the reasoning which holds that months of inflammatory rhetoric can contribute to violence even without expressly violent language, we can certainly agree. All pretenses notwithstanding, you obviously aren't comfortable when it's applied to Trump. You're bringing the same old double standards and tiresome whatabouts that we see here daily.
At but there's the rub; you claim that outright calls for violence were not expressly violent language from democrats while claiming language that EXPRESSLY asked for peaceful demonstration from Trump was a de facto call for violence. You desperately want to compare the democrats' violent rhetoric with Trump's calls for peaceful demonstration and it simply doesn't work. Besides, the years of violent rhetoric and actions from democrats were a direct factor in the actions of the rowdy unarmed tourists on Jan6th. The same cannot be said for the actions of the black supremacist riots.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, calling for the abolition of ICE by democrat politicians, comparing them with Nazis, saying they are kidnapping children and worse was a direct factor in ICE facilities being firebombed by democrats. Even if you don't wish to acknowledge it.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Your failure to see context is unsurprising. It's practically a requirement for Trump supporters at this point.

Speaking of which, any thoughts on the Trump interview?
By "context" you really mean "anything you can imagine that supports your narrative", because you certainly aren't in favor of actual context.
My "narrative" about Democrats only exists in your imagination. I have no interest in defending them or doing anything else except pointing out that words mean things. I know partisan hacks often find that inconvenient. But "kids in cages" does not overtly mean "burn, loot, murder" no matter how much you might like it to be so.

If you're comfortable with the reasoning which holds that months of inflammatory rhetoric can contribute to violence even without expressly violent language, we can certainly agree. All pretenses notwithstanding, you obviously aren't comfortable when it's applied to Trump. You're bringing the same old double standards and tiresome whatabouts that we see here daily.
At but there's the rub; you claim that outright calls for violence were not expressly violent language from democrats while claiming language that EXPRESSLY asked for peaceful demonstration from Trump was a de facto call for violence. You desperately want to compare the democrats' violent rhetoric with Trump's calls for peaceful demonstration and it simply doesn't work. Besides, the years of violent rhetoric and actions from democrats were a direct factor in the actions of the rowdy unarmed tourists on Jan6th. The same cannot be said for the actions of the black supremacist riots.
What I'm doing, and what you desperately don't want to do, is comparing the entirety of Trump's message with that of the Democrats. Not just one sentence from one speech. And the one thing we know was a direct factor in J6 was Trump's rhetoric. We know it because the rioters said so.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

Yes, calling for the abolition of ICE by democrat politicians, comparing them with Nazis, saying they are kidnapping children and worse was a direct factor in ICE facilities being firebombed by democrats. Even if you don't wish to acknowledge it.
I don't mind acknowledging it at all. Will you acknowledge that calling for the abolition of the FBI and comparing them with Nazis is no different? I doubt it.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

Sam Lowry said:

Golem said:

Later Trump said, "There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives, and unfortunately, there's plenty to go around." I'm almost sure Trump said that.

And then he said of his supporters, "They're not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop. They're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day." He went on to say, "Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."

Trump didn't stop there, though. He took aim at the Biden administration, saying to his Trumpsters "If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gas station, you get out and create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." While some thought this was encouraging violence, Trump kept going. "The people are going to turn on them. They're going to protest. They're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the President, 'No, I can't hang with you."

Not content to end with such overtly violent rhetoric, Trump continued, "I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be."





(Just kidding, these were all statements by very prominent democrats. Leftists like Sam didn't make a peep when these nut jobs overtly called for violence)
Debunked.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jan/07/facebook-posts/quotes-4-democrats-twisted-make-it-look-they-endor/



Calling for "unrest in the streets" isn't a call for violence?
It can be. It's less than clear in this context, where she's talking about organizing, making phone calls, and other things that go along with peaceful activism.
ROFL, I've heard it all!! Somebody shouts there will be unrest in the streets and the action that followed was a group of people making phone calls and writing sternly worded letters.

All you have to do is look at what happen in areas after the statements were made just like what you're doing with Trump. You will see the unrest in the streets" did equate to violence, not emails to congress people
Waters' and Pelosi's statements were two years before the riots. Harris' was after they started, and Pressley's was two and a half months later. I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on Pressley. Considering that the riots had been going on all summer, she shouldn't have said it. I give her less benefit of the doubt as a member of the Squad.
Many letters and phone calls were made to representatives based on Trump's speech, therefor we can ignore the couple hundred rowdy tourists on Jan 6th! I like the reasoning being shared here. And as for that awesome timeline you shared of when these violent leftists were calling for riots and murders, if they were making such statements for two years before their followers decided to act on their instructions during the year of black supremacist riots or two minutes before, it was all part of what led to the death and destruction. It was also part of what led to ICE facilities being firebombed. (You forgot about those attacks, didn't you? All that anti-ICE rhetoric based on the "kids in cages" lie) Harris literally bailed out rioters and one went on to murder. If you can't see the difference between "yeah, they said it but we don't think they meant it" and "yeah, he never said it but we think that is what orange man bad REALLY meant" then you're always going to be embarrassed when these conversations come up, as you have been here.
You're making my case for me. All I'm saying is that these were not overt calls to violence. No doubt some of the Dem rhetoric did contribute to violence, just as Trump's rhetoric did on J6. I've always said so. Glad you're starting to see the light.
No, they were direct calls to violence for two years that led to the year of black supremacist riots. You failing to understand the conversation might be the least surprising thing ever.
Your failure to see context is unsurprising. It's practically a requirement for Trump supporters at this point.

Speaking of which, any thoughts on the Trump interview?
By "context" you really mean "anything you can imagine that supports your narrative", because you certainly aren't in favor of actual context.
My "narrative" about Democrats only exists in your imagination. I have no interest in defending them or doing anything else except pointing out that words mean things. I know partisan hacks often find that inconvenient. But "kids in cages" does not overtly mean "burn, loot, murder" no matter how much you might like it to be so.

If you're comfortable with the reasoning which holds that months of inflammatory rhetoric can contribute to violence even without expressly violent language, we can certainly agree. All pretenses notwithstanding, you obviously aren't comfortable when it's applied to Trump. You're bringing the same old double standards and tiresome whatabouts that we see here daily.
At but there's the rub; you claim that outright calls for violence were not expressly violent language from democrats while claiming language that EXPRESSLY asked for peaceful demonstration from Trump was a de facto call for violence. You desperately want to compare the democrats' violent rhetoric with Trump's calls for peaceful demonstration and it simply doesn't work. Besides, the years of violent rhetoric and actions from democrats were a direct factor in the actions of the rowdy unarmed tourists on Jan6th. The same cannot be said for the actions of the black supremacist riots.
What I'm doing, and what you desperately don't want to do, is comparing the entirety of Trump's message with that of the Democrats. Not just one sentence from one speech. And the one thing we know was a direct factor in J6 was Trump's rhetoric. We know it because the rioters said so.
Ah, so we can't look at the words he spoke to determine if they're actual calls to violence but his entire existence and our interpretations of that existence is at play when judging his specific words. I guess that's the same brilliant reasoning that allows you to ignore direct and headed calls to violence by democrats, right, because despite their actual words we can look at the entirety of their careers and create a peaceful message from those violent words. Got it.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Wangchung said:

Yes, calling for the abolition of ICE by democrat politicians, comparing them with Nazis, saying they are kidnapping children and worse was a direct factor in ICE facilities being firebombed by democrats. Even if you don't wish to acknowledge it.
I don't mind acknowledging it at all. Will you acknowledge that calling for the abolition of the FBI and comparing them with Nazis is no different? I doubt it.
Your(democrats) previous reactions and outright support of such rhetoric like abolish ICE and defund the police and all cops are *******s leads me to not care what you think now, when we see an actual corrupt agency that needs a top down "reimagining". In other words, we don't let the real wolf maraud freely just because you democrats wouldn't stop crying wolf when there was no wolf.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.