It's sad that there a lot of people on this board that have similar sentiments..,
Trump Evacuated As Shots Fired at White House Correspondents' Dinner, Shooter Dead
13,510 Views |
229 Replies |
Last: 7 days ago by Jack Bauer
historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Correction....the internet used to be the place people would go to act tough
Now its where the mentally ill go...and it is also in large part turning people mentally ill.... with endless 24-7 connectivity and boosting anxiety/depression/ and "fight or flight" response via juicing up the threat response we all natural have within us.
Get ready for a three month news cycle of D.C. journos congratulating each other for their declared heroism. https://t.co/6cMI433ITi
— Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) April 26, 2026
historian said:
All that and more. It wasn't just the president there, it was the VP, the Speaker, most of the Cabinet, etc. Most of the line of succession. This one nutcase had the potential to do real harm to our entire country. It's the stuff of Hollywood scripts but this was real.
Exactly.
Which is why I don't get why the hallway wasn't completely blocked off/locked down.
That video of him running past the "checkpoint" and about 8 agents responding and shooting at him AFTER he was past them should have been a video of him getting shot at entering the hallway, not running past them.
Redbrickbear said:Get ready for a three month news cycle of D.C. journos congratulating each other for their declared heroism. https://t.co/6cMI433ITi
— Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) April 26, 2026
They will now also all claim they are "survivors" and that they were at a mass shooting, criticize anyone who questions them on gun violence/ political violence, etc. because "they experienced it firsthand"
Only leftist media, can incite an assassination attempt then go back and say how brave they were for being there LOL
Cannot make this **** up
Cannot make this **** up
Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
According to Jesus, anyone who hates another person in their heart is morally guilty of murder.
The assassination attempt has inspired some meme makers:
So good pic.twitter.com/MjUJV4K7Uh
— Mostly Peaceful Memes (@MostlyPeaceful) April 26, 2026
— FO𝕏 YOU (@F0XYOU) April 26, 2026
— Les White (@realLesWhite) April 27, 2026
I know someone who writes a certain article that only appears on Mondays...
— Beau (@Capacitor1776) April 26, 2026
This should be in it
😆 pic.twitter.com/9YRv9ods1d
historian said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
According to Jesus, anyone who hates another person in their heart is morally guilty of murder.
As I said earlier, many Christians follow more Paul than Jesus...
Redbrickbear said:Johnny Bear said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
So many of these obviously violent lefty lunatics are teachers - meaning people who are actually influencing children. Talk about totally scary and evil.
Wait until you find out about the Professors….the rot is so much deeper in the university setting.
We have to remember that most teachers are from middle & working class backgrounds. And it's still one of the biggest job in small towns all over America for women.
So lots and lots of moderate to conservative teachers.
But at the university level is when things get wild.
98%-2% splits between liberals vs conservatives among the faculty…that kind of thing
Numbers so disproportional and skewed that they are literally unbelievable
The fact there are public universities with such skewed faculty is a disgrace and should be challenged legally in each state.
FLBear5630 said:historian said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
According to Jesus, anyone who hates another person in their heart is morally guilty of murder.
As I said earlier, many Christians follow more Paul than Jesus...
Do you ignore some of Paul's writing? Do you find fault in his writings?
Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
FLBear5630 said:historian said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
According to Jesus, anyone who hates another person in their heart is morally guilty of murder.
As I said earlier, many Christians follow more Paul than Jesus...
I was referring to what Jesus Himself said in the Sermon on the Mount.
EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
According to his manifesto, he wanted to take out the administration starting with Trump.
historian said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
According to his manifesto, he wanted to take out the administration starting with Trump.
Mitch SEEMS to be saying something different.
EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
Mitch Blood Green said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
When it is threats, wishing death, harm, etc then yes. That should be a line that isn't crossed.
When it is using the correct gender and not the mentally ill person's made up gender then absolutely not.
cowboycwr said:Mitch Blood Green said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
When it is threats, wishing death, harm, etc then yes. That should be a line that isn't crossed.
When it is using the correct gender and not the mentally ill person's made up gender then absolutely not.
Should be. I tend to remember conservatives not wanting the BS speech closely monitored.
You're my nephews age. I remember cringing watching young people play video games. All that nonsense is protected.
Mitch Blood Green said:cowboycwr said:Mitch Blood Green said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
When it is threats, wishing death, harm, etc then yes. That should be a line that isn't crossed.
When it is using the correct gender and not the mentally ill person's made up gender then absolutely not.
Should be. I tend to remember conservatives not wanting the BS speech closely monitored.
You're my nephews age. I remember cringing watching young people play video games. All that nonsense is protected.
Conservatives don't want speech closely monitored. They want certain types of violent speech monitored and punished.
Video games are not even in the same ballpark as what is being discussed.
People can get online and use wrong pronouns, call people evil, call religion or specific religions evil, say they hate specific people, point out all the things that person does wrong, etc. But they should not be able to freely talk about wishing harm on them, visualizing doing harm, etc.
But you are taking what is being said and over generalizing it.
cowboycwr said:Mitch Blood Green said:cowboycwr said:Mitch Blood Green said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
When it is threats, wishing death, harm, etc then yes. That should be a line that isn't crossed.
When it is using the correct gender and not the mentally ill person's made up gender then absolutely not.
Should be. I tend to remember conservatives not wanting the BS speech closely monitored.
You're my nephews age. I remember cringing watching young people play video games. All that nonsense is protected.
Conservatives don't want speech closely monitored. They want certain types of violent speech monitored and punished.
Video games are not even in the same ballpark as what is being discussed.
People can get online and use wrong pronouns, call people evil, call religion or specific religions evil, say they hate specific people, point out all the things that person does wrong, etc. But they should not be able to freely talk about wishing harm on them, visualizing doing harm, etc.
But you are taking what is being said and over generalizing it.
I'm not sure that this guy has a violent internet presence. He wrote a manifesto and shared with his family who then turned him in.
Mitch Blood Green said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
If they break the law, such as threatening or advocating murder, then yes. Free speech has reasonable limits.
Good point. If he had posted the manifesto on social media that would gave been a crime.
Trump after 3 assassination attempts pic.twitter.com/Ctttv4JLHO
— ꓕNIOԀꓤƎ⅁⅁Iꓤꓕ (@Grxit) April 26, 2026
historian said:
Good point. If he had posted the manifesto on social media that would gave been a crime.
Can I get you to proofread my manifesto?
No need. If it does not include any criminal threats to kill someone or commit other acts of violence it's protected speech.
Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Good point. If he had posted the manifesto on social media that would gave been a crime.
Can I get you to proofread my theyifesto ?
FIFY
Johnny Bear said:ShooterTX said:
This is why the dems are engaging in violence... they are being gaslit by their leaders who know that they are too stupid to think for themselves. The dems "trust the experts" so they will believe anything they say. When the "experts" call Trump Hitler or a dictator or a threat to democracy... they know that their idiot followers will eventually assassinate Trump.
They use "experts" like the SPLC to label normal Christian conservatives as Nazis, to get Charlie Kirk killed.
And here Obama continues the grift by claiming that no one knows the motivation, so that his idiot followers will continue the violence.
Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night's shooting at the White House Correspondents Dinner, it’s incumbent upon all us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy. It’s also a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice…
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) April 26, 2026
Obama is an evil liar. Anyone who doesn't acknowledge that is either an idiot or also an evil liar.
What a completely disingenuous post by Obama. Anybody with at least half of a brain (and I realize that eliminates a lot of mind numbed dims) knows that the motivation was to assassinate Trump and/or members of his cabinet because people like Obama have brainwashed the shooter to think Trump is Hitler and his supporters are Nazis. Obama is scum along with most of the people that support him.
The attorney general said we dont know the motive.... so anyone can be forgiven for parroting that. If that guy can say it anyone can.
LIB,MR BEARS said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Good point. If he had posted the manifesto on social media that would gave been a crime.
Can I get you to proofread my theyifesto ?
FIFY
It's gonna be a womanifesto because it's gonna be crazy.
Mitch Blood Green said:EatMoreSalmon said:Mitch Blood Green said:historian said:
Exactly. Such attitudes are insane. The fact that some people are willing to proclaim the fact that they are murderers at heart is even more insane. There must be consequences every single time.
They're not murders. They're internet warriors. The internet has allowed act tough when they have zero ability to defend themselves.
Watching the attacker, his plan had zero chance of success. Not even sure if he fired his weapon. I bet he didn't even have the ability to make the first person miss.
Are you trying to claim the attacker did not really mean to shoot anyone but just make a scene, or that he was just crazy suicidal?
Nope. I'm saying everything on the internet doesn't include intent. Some of it is bluster. Do you want everyone arrested for stuff said online?
Was just wanting clarification.
I do think what someone shouts on social media should be viewed as any other public conversation as far as law enforcement is concerned.
All Things Considered did a story about the shooter, addressing the question of whether he had been radicalized by left-wing content on the internet. The host concluded that, no, actually, his views are really quite mainstream. The correspondent chimed in to ask whether this…
— wanye (@xwanyex) April 27, 2026
no no no
FLbear said this happens on both sides
FLbear said this happens on both sides
Redbrickbear said:All Things Considered did a story about the shooter, addressing the question of whether he had been radicalized by left-wing content on the internet. The host concluded that, no, actually, his views are really quite mainstream. The correspondent chimed in to ask whether this…
— wanye (@xwanyex) April 27, 2026
Was the All Things Considered host talking on another show? Who was the correspondent asking the question?
Not surprised an NPR host would feel this way, but wondering who it was trying to bring sanity.
historian said:Trump after 3 assassination attempts pic.twitter.com/Ctttv4JLHO
— ꓕNIOԀꓤƎ⅁⅁Iꓤꓕ (@Grxit) April 26, 2026
I have never seen this before. What an awesome quick witted response.
cowboycwr said:historian said:Trump after 3 assassination attempts pic.twitter.com/Ctttv4JLHO
— ꓕNIOԀꓤƎ⅁⅁Iꓤꓕ (@Grxit) April 26, 2026
I have never seen this before. What an awesome quick witted response.
Is that video for real?
That's a good one.