Trump doubles down on "enemies within"

[adrina]

You should get a job with the Atlantic, you'd fit right in. You need to take something for your TDS affliction.

I find it ironic that Trump authorized the use of NG troops on J-6 and it never happened. His generals were insubordinate and if Trump would have won the election those generals would be collecting unemployment (hypothetically speaking) had to add that because you take everything literally.

Again no answer. Why are you working so hard not to answer a simple question?

 

[Pad_Foot]

So, what do you need to know? I suspect, that as a Trump hater, you need to deny that Trump miraculously escaped death because otherwise you would have to acknowledge Trump’s reaction to his near-death experience was brave and courageous. That notion of course is unsettling to you.

Unsettling? A person who has just been shot rising to make himself a target for a second shooter.

Secret service that repeatedly made it possible for a second shooter to succeed.

Was he hit by secondary shrapnel? That would make more sense, but it doesn’t fit the narrative. A bullet at full velocity grazing an ear? No mark?? Ummm? Yeah. Sure!

The alternative??? Fucking unbelievable!! We shall see where history comes out on this !!

Does it get me to vote for the AntiChrist? Fuck no! Would it help me believe he had 666 removed from what used to be his small bald spot?? Perhaps!!

 

[Bodington]

All he has to do is release a medical report. I don't think it was staged, I just have no idea what kind of injury was sustained.

As to serious, you're voting for Trump - someone who says he wants to send the American military after American citizens who disagree with him politically. I can't imagine a more unAmerican and disgusting thing for anybody who is seeking the office of the President of the United States of America can say. You deflected from everything else I said and just focused on the assassination attempt because it is very convenient for you. But the reality is everything I said is not only pertinent but true. And instead of answering for it or even addressing it you hide behind convenient assumptions.

Ironically enough, something right out of Trump's playbook.

If you need to show yourself the door, please go ahead. Because once again you opened a conversation that you are not able to partake in.

I should have known to not waste any time on you once again.

The first highlighted words imply that you actually at first blush entertained the possibility that the assassination attempt might have been staged to make Trump look better. At least you have the wit to realize you cannot present a plausible persuasive argument to bolster such an outlandish accusation. Still you maintain that you are confused by the nature of Trump’s injury. Exactly what are you confused about? Are you suggesting he was not injured at all? Is the blood that is clearly noticeable on his head right after he was hit not real? Was he not shot at all? Then how did the blood appear? A medical report will clear that up for you? And how do you suppose such medical report will relieve your confusion?

I have opined in this thread because I find it rich that you and your ilk take umbrage at Trump for saying that Schiff and Pelosi are “enemies within”. Apparently it is OK for your side to continuously charge Trump with being akin to Hitler, or allege he will end democracy as we know it if he is elected. The latest over the top accusation which Harris and Walz now routinely spew out in their campaign events and which you mimic, is that Trump is going to send the military out to arrest people who disagree with him.

This bizarre claim is based on an interview aired on Fox wherein he was asked about the possibility of unruly demonstrations after the outcome of the upcoming election is ascertained. He replied by assuring that his supporters will not demonstrate but suggested that the other side might. He went on to say that should such demonstrations become unruly and destructive the National Guard could be summoned to quell such a riot. From that answer, the Dems and the Harris-Walz campaign have extrapolated to mean that Trump will send out the National Guard to arrest everyone that did not vote for him. Lost in the translation is the obvious truism that it would be truly impossible for Trump to arrest over seventy million people.

By the way which side has actually successfully jailed their political opponents? Well Peter Navarro, who served in Trump’s cabinet spent four months in prison earlier this year and Steve Bannon, who was one of the managers in Trump’s 2016 campaign, is currently incarcerated to be released on Oct 29. Their crime? Why they were held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents. But wait a minute did not Eric Holder the AG and self described wingman for President Obama refuse to hand over subpoenaed documents? How about the current AG Merrick Garland who also refused to deliver subpoenaed documents. Neither one of them faced prison time. At least the former was censured by the House of Representatives, but Garland narrowly escaped a resolution of inherent contempt in July which would have imposed a $10,000 fine per day for failure to comply. Luckily for Garland four wussy Republican members joined with the Dems to spare him.

How about Trump’s actual action? You will recall that during the 2016 campaign Trump supporters would chant “Lock her up!” at his rallies. This was in conjunction with the fact that Hillary Clinton did commit crimes; the FBI director at the time said so but refrained from submitting the investigation to federal prosecutors on the premise that no federal prosecutor would elect to indict her. When Trump did take office in 2017 he did not direct the Justice Department to go after Clinton on that premise that it would be unseemly and hurt the image of American justice should opposition politicians be jailed. Alas the Biden Justice department harbored no such scruples. Of course none of you Trump haters are concerned that incarceration of Trump would hurt the image of American justice.

It is almost axiomatic that past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior. That sentiment should put paid to the notion that if Trump wins that he will go after his political opponents never mind average every day citizens.

 

[adrina]

The first highlighted words imply that you actually at first blush entertained the possibility that the assassination attempt might have been staged to make Trump look better. At least you have the wit to realize you cannot present a plausible persuasive argument to bolster such an outlandish accusation. Still you maintain that you are confused by the nature of Trump’s injury. Exactly what are you confused about? Are you suggesting he was not injured at all? Is the blood that is clearly noticeable on his head right after he was hit not real? Was he not shot at all? Then how did the blood appear? A medical report will clear that up for you? And how do you suppose such medical report will relieve your confusion?

Why won't Trump release the medical report?
Why has Trump and his doctor described thoroughly different injuries?
Why was there no sign of injury one day later?

If you aren't curious about any of these then it says you're willing to believe anything he says without scrutiny.

I have opined in this thread because I find it rich that you and your ilk take umbrage at Trump for saying that Schiff and Pelosi are “enemies within”. Apparently it is OK for your side to continuously charge Trump with being akin to Hitler, or allege he will end democracy as we know it if he is elected. The latest over the top accusation which Harris and Walz now routinely spew out in their campaign events and which you mimic, is that Trump is going to send the military out to arrest people who disagree with him.

So then what he did on J6 is okay with you. Well it's not okay with me and it's not okay with a lot of Americans. The conservatives are fond of saying if there's nothing to hide then it's no big deal to investigate. We heard that with HRC, and her husband for that matter, for literal decades. Now that it's Trump, that perspective doesn't seem to have the same mileage. Wonder why.

Don't get all poutraged on me missy. You and your ilk have a long history of this bullshit.

Grow the fuck up.

Trump acted inappropriately but you won't admit it. However if Clinton or Obama had done those exact same things you would be yelling your head off.

This bizarre claim is based on an interview aired on Fox wherein he was asked about the possibility of unruly demonstrations after the outcome of the upcoming election is ascertained. He replied by assuring that his supporters will not demonstrate but suggested that the other side might. He went on to say that should such demonstrations become unruly and destructive the National Guard could be summoned to quell such a riot. From that answer, the Dems and the Harris-Walz campaign have extrapolated to mean that Trump will send out the National Guard to arrest everyone that did not vote for him. Lost in the translation is the obvious truism that it would be truly impossible for Trump to arrest over seventy million people.

Again, I like presidents whose words don't have to be sanitized for public consumption. At no time should any president need so much interpretation. If he can't speak clearly then he has no business speaking.

That you don't acknowledge this shows just how low of standards you'll accept because you hate and fear democrats. 50 years of conservative propaganda will do that.

By the way which side has actually successfully jailed their political opponents? Well Peter Navarro, who served in Trump’s cabinet spent four months in prison earlier this year and Steve Bannon, who was one of the managers in Trump’s 2016 campaign, is currently incarcerated to be released on Oct 29. Their crime? Why they were held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents. But wait a minute did not Eric Holder the AG and self described wingman for President Obama refuse to hand over subpoenaed documents? How about the current AG Merrick Garland who also refused to deliver subpoenaed documents. Neither one of them faced prison time. At least the former was censured by the House of Representatives, but Garland narrowly escaped a resolution of inherent contempt in July which would have imposed a $10,000 fine per day for failure to comply. Luckily for Garland four wussy Republican members joined with the Dems to spare him.

So then they shouldn't face consequences for breaking the law? Interesting take from the party of law and order. Ohhhh I get it, it's only law and order for others.

How about Trump’s actual action? You will recall that during the 2016 campaign Trump supporters would chant “Lock her up!” at his rallies. This was in conjunction with the fact that Hillary Clinton did commit crimes; the FBI director at the time said so but refrained from submitting the investigation to federal prosecutors on the premise that no federal prosecutor would elect to indict her. When Trump did take office in 2017 he did not direct the Justice Department to go after Clinton on that premise that it would be unseemly and hurt the image of American justice should opposition politicians be jailed. Alas the Biden Justice department harbored no such scruples. Of course none of you Trump haters are concerned that incarceration of Trump would hurt the image of American justice.

What crimes was HRC indicted for?

It is almost axiomatic that past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior. That sentiment should put paid to the notion that if Trump wins that he will go after his political opponents never mind average every day citizens.

Again trumpers keep having to sanitize and interpret what he says. No one running for the presidency should have so many communication issues.

 

[Politruk]

I have opined in this thread because I find it rich that you and your ilk take umbrage at Trump for saying that Schiff and Pelosi are “enemies within”. Apparently it is OK for your side to continuously charge Trump with being akin to Hitler, or allege he will end democracy as we know it if he is elected.

False equivalency. Trump's threat is real.

 

[Bn2f]

The first highlighted words imply that you actually at first blush entertained the possibility that the assassination attempt might have been staged to make Trump look better. At least you have the wit to realize you cannot present a plausible persuasive argument to bolster such an outlandish accusation. Still you maintain that you are confused by the nature of Trump’s injury. Exactly what are you confused about? Are you suggesting he was not injured at all? Is the blood that is clearly noticeable on his head right after he was hit not real? Was he not shot at all? Then how did the blood appear? A medical report will clear that up for you? And how do you suppose such medical report will relieve your confusion?

I have opined in this thread because I find it rich that you and your ilk take umbrage at Trump for saying that Schiff and Pelosi are “enemies within”. Apparently it is OK for your side to continuously charge Trump with being akin to Hitler, or allege he will end democracy as we know it if he is elected. The latest over the top accusation which Harris and Walz now routinely spew out in their campaign events and which you mimic, is that Trump is going to send the military out to arrest people who disagree with him.

This bizarre claim is based on an interview aired on Fox wherein he was asked about the possibility of unruly demonstrations after the outcome of the upcoming election is ascertained. He replied by assuring that his supporters will not demonstrate but suggested that the other side might. He went on to say that should such demonstrations become unruly and destructive the National Guard could be summoned to quell such a riot. From that answer, the Dems and the Harris-Walz campaign have extrapolated to mean that Trump will send out the National Guard to arrest everyone that did not vote for him. Lost in the translation is the obvious truism that it would be truly impossible for Trump to arrest over seventy million people.

By the way which side has actually successfully jailed their political opponents? Well Peter Navarro, who served in Trump’s cabinet spent four months in prison earlier this year and Steve Bannon, who was one of the managers in Trump’s 2016 campaign, is currently incarcerated to be released on Oct 29. Their crime? Why they were held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents. But wait a minute did not Eric Holder the AG and self described wingman for President Obama refuse to hand over subpoenaed documents? How about the current AG Merrick Garland who also refused to deliver subpoenaed documents. Neither one of them faced prison time. At least the former was censured by the House of Representatives, but Garland narrowly escaped a resolution of inherent contempt in July which would have imposed a $10,000 fine per day for failure to comply. Luckily for Garland four wussy Republican members joined with the Dems to spare him.

How about Trump’s actual action? You will recall that during the 2016 campaign Trump supporters would chant “Lock her up!” at his rallies. This was in conjunction with the fact that Hillary Clinton did commit crimes; the FBI director at the time said so but refrained from submitting the investigation to federal prosecutors on the premise that no federal prosecutor would elect to indict her. When Trump did take office in 2017 he did not direct the Justice Department to go after Clinton on that premise that it would be unseemly and hurt the image of American justice should opposition politicians be jailed. Alas the Biden Justice department harbored no such scruples. Of course none of you Trump haters are concerned that incarceration of Trump would hurt the image of American justice.

It is almost axiomatic that past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior. That sentiment should put paid to the notion that if Trump wins that he will go after his political opponents never mind average every day citizens.

I ain’t reading all this crap.
You’re a writer who desperately needs an editor.

 

[adrina]

I ain’t reading all this crap.
You’re a writer who desperately needs an editor.

As the kids say, fr.

 

[Rebel5soul]

False equivalency. Trump's threat is real.

One can only hope.

 

[Politruk]

One can only hope.

You have a problem with democracy as we know it? There are no sane neo-reactionaries.

 

[Justplainjeff]

So if I understand correctly you’re saying Biden is a better choice than Trump.

Not hardly. The Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Hollywood elite took that option off the table.

 

[Politruk]

Hollywood elite

You are an idiot.

 

[Justplainjeff]

You are an idiot.

If you think Joe went off the ticket willingly, you make a bag of rocks look smart.

 

[Politruk]

If you think Joe went off the ticket willingly, you make a bag of rocks look smart.

That's you, if you think a Hollywood elite exists and matters politically.

 

[jomar]

You should get a job with the Atlantic, you'd fit right in. You need to take something for your TDS affliction.

I find it ironic that Trump authorized the use of NG troops on J-6 and it never happened.

Link us up on that assertion. For clarity, not the Atlantic.

His generals were insubordinate

Link us up on that assertion.

and if Trump would have won the election those generals would be collecting unemployment (hypothetically speaking)

Probably would be in reality because trump is all about loyalty, like Hitlers generals, not the rule of law and the constitution.

 

[dmallord]

If Trump loses he retires to his Mar A Lago estate and enjoys the rest of his life.

When he loses, it will be a fitting end to his histrionics. Spend his time planning his library minus the classified documents. Hopefully, the ocean rise will increase his waterfront real estate.

 

[dmallord]

Context!! Use "IF NECESSARY"

https://reason.com/2024/10/16/no-tr...ple-simply-because-they-oppose-his-candidacy/

"Never before has a presidential nominee—let alone a former president—openly suggested turning the military on American citizens simply because they oppose his candidacy," New York Times reporters Lisa Lerer and Michael Gold say in a "news analysis" published on Tuesday. They are referring to former President Donald Trump's comments in a Fox News interview with Maria Bartiromo on Sunday. Yet nowhere in that interview did Trump suggest that "the military" should be deployed against American citizens "simply because they oppose his candidacy."

"These misleading takes reflect the familiar tendency of Trump's most vociferous critics to exaggerate the evidence of his authoritarian instincts by quoting him out of context. That tactic is counterproductive, since it invites anyone who is even mildly skeptical to dismiss the broader case against him as fact-free hyperventilating. It is also unnecessary, since there are plenty of legitimate reasons to worry about Trump on this score."

Can Adam Schiff be considered an enemy from within, IMO A BIG YES. He used his position as house intel committee chairman to lie, to formulate a plan to depose a sitting president, orchestrate a conspiracy of lies and attempt a soft coup. He's a despicable politician and a true threat to our republic. He followed through with his conspiracy by pushing through the most partisan impeachment. You can add Pelosi, Waters, Green, Nadler, Clinton to the list. The military would not be used against these anti-American slimeball, the DOJ would be used.

Reflects the familiar tendency to exaggerate? Nope. That's believable stuff. Did the exaggeration element of his J6 speech not send a mob to attack the Capitol? It did. Direct correlation.

A normal president or ex-president doesn't go around saying IF necessary, I would hunt down Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi as enemies of the state. What sane person puts those thoughts out for the public to consider that it makes him look like a loon and a deranged man? Ans: D. J. Trump convicted felon.

Anyway, you try to twist this, it is an unsupported attempt at denialism. Typical of you.

 

[dmallord]

You should get a job with the Atlantic, you'd fit right in. You need to take something for your TDS affliction.

I find it ironic that Trump authorized the use of NG troops on J-6 and it never happened. His generals were insubordinate and if Trump would have won the election those generals would be collecting unemployment (hypothetically speaking) had to add that because you take everything literally.

BS.

 

[Bn2f]

Reflects the familiar tendency to exaggerate? Nope. That's believable stuff. Did the exaggeration element of his J6 speech not send a mob to attack the Capitol? It did. Direct correlation.

A normal president or ex-president doesn't go around saying IF necessary, I would hunt down Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi as enemies of the state. What sane person puts those thoughts out for the public to consider that it makes him look like a loon and a deranged man? Ans: D. J. Trump convicted felon.

Anyway, you try to twist this, it is an unsupported attempt at denialism. Typical of you.

And the Pelosi family has already suffered through the real ramifications of a lie.

 

[Bn2f]

BS.

Have not seen you around much during the day - hope all is well with you.

 

[dmallord]

Have not seen you around much during the day - hope all is well with you.

Home from the last hospital visit. Home hospice care, now. Med are... messing with me. Foggy, sleep cycles out of wack. And other things.

Sucks, being 87... Should have staded 86.