Ginsburg and Civil War

[Richard-H]

Seems like that's what the right wants. How foolish ...

I'll tell you what; we might be in for a good ol' fashioned revolution, if the wealth disparity continues the way it has been.

And so what's the solution to stop this revolution, take money away from the rich and give it to the poor? People can do that today, it's just that they don't bother. Quit giving the rich your money. You, I and everybody here transfer our wealth to the top every single week.

They did that in Venezuela and now it won't be long until they are eating each other.

The one thing the left can never come to terms with is they helped create the 1%. They are instrumental in this so-called wealth transfer. They drive their cars and buy gasoline. They are on this internet and likely have a smart phone with unlimited data and call time. They stop at McDonald's, buy the latest Microsoft computer, pay cable or satellite fees, they buy overpriced coffee at Starbucks, they go to movie theaters and buy CD's of their favorite bands, they are no different than anybody else.

At least we on the right admit to transferring our wealth to the top because we get a return for our money. They have products or services to sell, and we willingly purchase them with no regrets. We don't give them our money, and then complain because they now have our money.

For however much I complain about the desparity in wealth, I agree - it only exist because working people are a bunch of dumb asses. I can't blame the wealthy for being smart. But I can blame them for not being smart enough to realize that they are leading us to a major socio-economic collapse. They got the power, they can change it - even if the workers are too dumb to do it themselves.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think the problem is the Democrats can't shut her up. Just think what would happen if some kook seriously hurt or killed somebody based on her cue just before the midterms. The Democrats couldn't afford anything like that even with the MSM making it a one day story.

So where was your outrage when Trump was advocating his followers to violence and offering to pay their legal bills.

Laughing at home. Trump responded to trouble, he didn't create the problem. We finally have a leader that hits back. That is a good trait in a President.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

 

[Coyote]

So where was your outrage when Trump was advocating his followers to violence and offering to pay their legal bills.

Laughing at home. Trump responded to trouble, he didn't create the problem. We finally have a leader that hits back. That is a good trait in a President.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Man wearing 'MAGA' hat, Trump shirt attacks Hispanic subway rider: Police

 

[Dschrute3]

I heard of a poll that just came out stating that 31% of people surveyed believes that we are on the brink of another civil war. While I don't believe that for a minute, that concern doesn't surprise me with the hatred of Trump spewed by the MSM on a daily basis.

Civil war would mean a lot of deaths, and while leftists are extremely violent people, I just can't see it.

The announcement today of Kennedy leaving the court to spend the rest of his days fishing has probably made record alcohol sales in liberal cities and states, I still don't see the left getting violent enough to start this war. However..........

Would this be more of a reality if something happened to Justice Ginsburg? She is an elderly lady and certainly more prone to illness or death than any other Justice; not that I'm hoping for such a thing. But would such an unfortunate incident make this so-called civil war more of a reality in the US?

The media is a mind controlling machine. Another new poll came out that said 51% approve of the Trump economy. My only question was, WTF are these other 49% that think the economy isn't doing great? Brainwashing media.

Media is the only thing holding Trump acvountable. It sure isnt the sycophant Republicans or his disciples. They wont even call him on his lies.

Accountable? Over 80% of their reporting on Trump is negative. In this kind of economy, do you really believe they would be doing the same if Hil-Liar were President? They would be holding monthly parades.

Shoemaker made a statement that Trump should not nominate a Supreme Court judge because Republicans stopped Obama from nominating one during an election year. Let’s see how many in the MSM point out the lie that It was a Presidential election year and not midterms.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Spot On. If their Hitlery had achieved what Trump has, they would be gushing over her and throwing her daily parades. They're liars and hypocrites. It is what it is.

One thing for sure, she would have received a Peace Prize by now. They give those things to Democrat for doing nothing.

Yeah, even Hussein & Gore sycophants have no idea why they received 'Peace Prizes.' Both did absolutely nothing for 'World Peace.' Hussein bombed more countries than GWB did, for God's sake. And Gore, well he's just a Globalist Charlatan jerk. Nuff said.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Laughing at home. Trump responded to trouble, he didn't create the problem. We finally have a leader that hits back. That is a good trait in a President.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Chuckles, I doubt you understand how to walk and breathe at the same time.

The law recognizes a difference, so you're wrong about it being the same.

I never supported Trump during the campaign, whereas you have been shrieking in horror about Trump for two years, but have yet to so much as criticize Maxine Waters, so you're wrong about who has the double standard.

Don't worry, we all understand your transparent hypocrisy. You might as well just come right out and admit that you think violence is wrong . . . unless it's aimed at people who are so "eeeeevil" as to disagree with you.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

They've really done a number on you guys in convincing you those conservatives are constitultionalists. Again...the right leaning justices also partake in judicial activism including Scalia. They are fine with going beyond the constitution when it suits their ideological agenda.

Right....but not necessarily their own self-interests always. I think it goes deeper than that.
I think there are "pressures", even for Justices that come from places of great wealth and power.

As always.....follow the money. It's always the leash held by those with real power, and attached to those who do their bidding in public office.

 

[Coyote]

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Chuckles, I doubt you understand how to walk and breathe at the same time.

The law recognizes a difference, so you're wrong about it being the same.

I never supported Trump during the campaign, whereas you have been shrieking in horror about Trump for two years, but have yet to so much as criticize Maxine Waters, so you're wrong about who has the double standard.

Don't worry, we all understand your transparent hypocrisy. You might as well just come right out and admit that you think violence is wrong . . . unless it's aimed at people who are so "eeeeevil" as to disagree with you.

Yup. It is ok for Trump to exhort his followers to violence. I get that. You do not 4 paragraphs to amplify your obvious hypocrisy.

 

[g5000]

The media is a mind controlling machine. Another new poll came out that said 51% approve of the Trump economy. My only question was, WTF are these other 49% that think the economy isn't doing great? Brainwashing media.

Remember during the Obama years when we had a booming stock market and economy, and yet all the pseuedocons were claiming we had a terrible economy? Remember when Trump and some of you were claiming the real unemployment rate was 42 percent?

Yeah. Complain about brainwashing again so we can all have another big belly laugh.

 

[Coyote]

So where was your outrage when Trump was advocating his followers to violence and offering to pay their legal bills.

Laughing at home. Trump responded to trouble, he didn't create the problem. We finally have a leader that hits back. That is a good trait in a President.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

A double standard is when you apply different reactions to the same situation. You are talking about two totally different situations.

It's one thing if a guy sucker punches another guy for no reason, and another thing if a guy sucker punches a guy that just insulted his wife or girlfriend. They are not the same situations.

Only on rare occasion did Trump attack people who didn't draw first blood. GW and his father are the only two I can think of off the top of my head. But as for the others, he responded to an attack of some kind.

Trump is no different then Maxine (who actually didn't even call for violence but push back). Still not appropriate.

Trump on multiple occassions has called for violence against those who disagree, heckle, etc.

If you think it was inappropriate in Maxine then I am amazed you think it is appropriate in Trump. And that is the problem. You defend it. Unreal. Calling for violence, cheering the beating up of people is wrong.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Remember during the Obama years when we had a booming stock market and economy, and yet all the pseuedocons were claiming we had a terrible economy? Remember when Trump and some of you were claiming the real unemployment rate was 42 percent?
Yeah. Complain about brainwashing again so we can all have another big belly laugh.

"BOOMING" ???...... AYFCrazy ?

You mean that artificial bubble created when he blew through TRILLIONS WASTING money on losing green energy crap that failed and shoveling the rest of it to his supporters?
Where are all the bridges? Where is A BRIDGE? Roads? A Street???

OH, YOU MEAN "BOOMING" as in "BLOWN UP" ?
OH, YOU MEAN FROM IRAN'S PERSPECTIVE? Ahhhhh....yeah...sure.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Laughing at home. Trump responded to trouble, he didn't create the problem. We finally have a leader that hits back. That is a good trait in a President.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

A double standard is when you apply different reactions to the same situation. You are talking about two totally different situations.

It's one thing if a guy sucker punches another guy for no reason, and another thing if a guy sucker punches a guy that just insulted his wife or girlfriend. They are not the same situations.

Only on rare occasion did Trump attack people who didn't draw first blood. GW and his father are the only two I can think of off the top of my head. But as for the others, he responded to an attack of some kind.

Trump is no different then Maxine (who actually didn't even call for violence but push back). Still not appropriate.

Trump on multiple occassions has called for violence against those who disagree, heckle, etc.

If you think it was inappropriate in Maxine then I am amazed you think it is appropriate in Trump. And that is the problem. You defend it. Unreal. Calling for violence, cheering the beating up of people is wrong.

Nobody verbally attacked Mad Max. She did not promote abuse or attack on individuals in self defense. She advanced these attacks on innocent people based on who they work for or their political stance.

I think you need to learn the difference between responding to an attack and being the attacker. No government official should ever influence others to attack American citizens simply because those people have different politics than they have. What Trump did may not have been the most appropriate thing to do, by at least it wasn’t un-American. They are far from the same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[iceberg]

Laughing at home. Trump responded to trouble, he didn't create the problem. We finally have a leader that hits back. That is a good trait in a President.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Man wearing 'MAGA' hat, Trump shirt attacks Hispanic subway rider: Police

seriously?

both sides are at each others throats and life has never had to little meaning for us as a country. to pretend only the "other" side is violent or capable of it is completely self serving and why we're falling apart all around ourselves.

 

[Coyote]

Honestly - when will it stop? Maxine went to far. I am glad that her colleagues called her on it. It only takes one NUT to take things to far.

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

A double standard is when you apply different reactions to the same situation. You are talking about two totally different situations.

It's one thing if a guy sucker punches another guy for no reason, and another thing if a guy sucker punches a guy that just insulted his wife or girlfriend. They are not the same situations.

Only on rare occasion did Trump attack people who didn't draw first blood. GW and his father are the only two I can think of off the top of my head. But as for the others, he responded to an attack of some kind.

Trump is no different then Maxine (who actually didn't even call for violence but push back). Still not appropriate.

Trump on multiple occassions has called for violence against those who disagree, heckle, etc.

If you think it was inappropriate in Maxine then I am amazed you think it is appropriate in Trump. And that is the problem. You defend it. Unreal. Calling for violence, cheering the beating up of people is wrong.

Nobody verbally attacked Mad Max. She did not promote abuse or attack on individuals in self defense. She advanced these attacks on innocent people based on who they work for or their political stance.

I think you need to learn the difference between responding to an attack and being the attacker. No government official should ever influence others to attack American citizens simply because those people have different politics than they have. What Trump did may not have been the most appropriate thing to do, by at least it wasn’t un-American. They are far from the same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Trump's violent rhetoric has certainly influenced his followers: Trump Hate Map

Trump...talking about protestors (protesting is free speech, every public figure endures them):
Has Donald Trump never 'promoted or encouraged violence'?

March 2016. At a rally in North Carolina, Trump said, "In the good old days this doesn't happen because they used to treat them very, very rough. And when they protested once, they would not do it again so easily. But today they walk in and they put their hand up and they put the wrong finger in the air at everybody. And they get away with murder, because we’ve become weak."

March 2016. At one point at a rally in Michigan, Trump reiterated his pledge to pay legal fees for people who remove protesters. "Get him out," Trump said. "Try not to hurt him. If you do, I'll defend you in court, don't worry about it." (Trump later said he had never made the pledge to pay legal fees.)

In February 2016, during his campaign for president, Trump told a crowd in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, "So I got a little notice. We have wonderful security guys. It said, ‘Mr. Trump, there may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience.’ So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Just knock the hell .... I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise."​

Or how about Trump's encouraging supporters to go after the media and harass and taunt them? Trump, Calling Journalists ‘Sick People,’ Puts Media on Edge

Protests are FREE SPEECH as long as they don't turn impede another's rights. You don't beat people up for protesting or giving a lewd finger.

His supporters lap it it all up, defend it, and then get enraged when Maxine Water's (unacceptable) calls for crowds to target and harass Trump officials and their families? Maxine stepped up what Trump was already doing but you don't see that at all because when it's in support of your man, you find reason's to excuse it.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

In both your instances, you are citing SELF DEFENSE on the part of Trump.

Read your own examples again more carefully.

There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between Self Defensive moves vs OFFENSIVE moves which Maxine Waters is advocating.

Trump is saying...IF THEY ATTACK YOU FIRST....ATTACK BACK aka DEFEND YOURSELF.

MAXINE WATERS IS SAYING GO ATTACK PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PERSONALLY BOTHERING YOU.

To make it any clearer, it'd have to be written in water.

 

[Coyote]

So advocating violence is a good trait? Or only in Trump? Or when Maxine responds by saying we must push back that is a good trait?

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Man wearing 'MAGA' hat, Trump shirt attacks Hispanic subway rider: Police

seriously?

both sides are at each others throats and life has never had to little meaning for us as a country. to pretend only the "other" side is violent or capable of it is completely self serving and why we're falling apart all around ourselves.

You misunderstand. I think both sides are becoming unhinged and it's only going to escalate. The President exhorting his followers to violent actions. Maxine Waters calling for harrassment of officials and their families in public spaces. The president has now said "be careful what you wish for" to Maxine Waters. When it's coming from politicians and the president himself - it is unacceptable.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Seems like that's what the right wants. How foolish ...

I'll tell you what; we might be in for a good ol' fashioned revolution, if the wealth disparity continues the way it has been.

And so what's the solution to stop this revolution, take money away from the rich and give it to the poor? People can do that today, it's just that they don't bother. Quit giving the rich your money. You, I and everybody here transfer our wealth to the top every single week.

They did that in Venezuela and now it won't be long until they are eating each other.

The one thing the left can never come to terms with is they helped create the 1%. They are instrumental in this so-called wealth transfer. They drive their cars and buy gasoline. They are on this internet and likely have a smart phone with unlimited data and call time. They stop at McDonald's, buy the latest Microsoft computer, pay cable or satellite fees, they buy overpriced coffee at Starbucks, they go to movie theaters and buy CD's of their favorite bands, they are no different than anybody else.

At least we on the right admit to transferring our wealth to the top because we get a return for our money. They have products or services to sell, and we willingly purchase them with no regrets. We don't give them our money, and then complain because they now have our money.

For however much I complain about the desparity in wealth, I agree - it only exist because working people are a bunch of dumb asses. I can't blame the wealthy for being smart. But I can blame them for not being smart enough to realize that they are leading us to a major socio-economic collapse. They got the power, they can change it - even if the workers are too dumb to do it themselves.

I don’t think it’s dumb to want things in life, especially things that make our lives more enjoyable and easier. Should one live like the Amish simply to avoid giving their money to the rich?

We have more wealthy people today than we did 50 years ago because we have more things to buy today, more people with advanced education, more people with access to investments, people winning the lotteries every day. I don’t see this as a bad thing.

Here is where your philosophy fails: if somebody has too little money, it’s not because somebody else has too much. That’s a liberal lie they have been promoting for decades to turn people against each other. If Buffett and Gates lost every dime they had today, it won’t change my life one iota come Monday.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Coyote]

In both your instances, you are citing SELF DEFENSE on the part of Trump.

Read your own examples again more carefully.

There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between Self Defensive moves vs OFFENSIVE moves which Maxine Waters is advocating.

Trump is saying...IF THEY ATTACK YOU FIRST....ATTACK BACK aka DEFEND YOURSELF.

MAXINE WATERS IS SAYING GO ATTACK PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PERSONALLY BOTHERING YOU.

To make it any clearer, it'd have to be written in water.

Bullshit on self defense. No one was attacking Trump on several of those occassions. Turning his followers anger onto the press box at rallies? Keep up the double standard.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

You misunderstand. I think both sides are becoming unhinged and it's only going to escalate. The President exhorting his followers to violent actions. Maxine Waters calling for harrassment of officials and their families in public spaces. The president has now said "be careful what you wish for" to Maxine Waters. When it's coming from politicians and the president himself - it is unacceptable.

I think you're delusional.

Ok, fine...list the Colleges and Universities where Conservatives have shut down Leftist (or even called for their silencing)......

You can't. And even if you could conjure up one or two pseudo examples, the number of times the Left has done it is overwhelming comparatively speaking.

It's obvious you are a flaming hypocrite. But let me say this.....if you people expect you can just continue to attack Conservatives and push them around and bully them to no end......guess again. EVENTUALLY they sure as hell are gonna push back.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Mad Max advocated violence simply because people worked or supported a President. Trump advocated violence when people came to his events for the sole purpose of starting a problem and causing disruption, and Trump responded accordingly.

So yes, advocating violence against people that wish to disrupt your otherwise peaceful and cheerful event is something I support. If you don't want him to do such a thing, stay home and beat up your mother or something, but don't come to Trump rallies to start trouble with him.

I don't know how you can equate the two situations. It's apples and oranges.

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Man wearing 'MAGA' hat, Trump shirt attacks Hispanic subway rider: Police

seriously?

both sides are at each others throats and life has never had to little meaning for us as a country. to pretend only the "other" side is violent or capable of it is completely self serving and why we're falling apart all around ourselves.

You misunderstand. I think both sides are becoming unhinged and it's only going to escalate. The President exhorting his followers to violent actions. Maxine Waters calling for harrassment of officials and their families in public spaces. The president has now said "be careful what you wish for" to Maxine Waters. When it's coming from politicians and the president himself - it is unacceptable.

She SHOULD be careful of what she wishes for. If you want to see that as some sort of physical threat, then that's just a reflection of your desire to project the worst onto those you don't like. It can be equally, and much more realistically, seen as a warning that your own tactics can come back and bite you in the ass in unexpected ways. Seems to me that Trump is correct, given that "Auntie Maxine" subsequently had to start canceling personal appearances because she was getting threats.

 

[Coyote]

Double standards.

Only if you're a dimwit . . . oh, wait. Forgot who I was talking to.

Just trust us, hon. There's a difference between punching someone who's behaving aggressively toward you, and harassing or assaulting someone just because you don't think people with their ideology deserve to live.

The only difference is... Trump and your double standard. Dont worry, I understand your lowbrow support of violence, it comes from the top down after all.

Man wearing 'MAGA' hat, Trump shirt attacks Hispanic subway rider: Police

seriously?

both sides are at each others throats and life has never had to little meaning for us as a country. to pretend only the "other" side is violent or capable of it is completely self serving and why we're falling apart all around ourselves.

You misunderstand. I think both sides are becoming unhinged and it's only going to escalate. The President exhorting his followers to violent actions. Maxine Waters calling for harrassment of officials and their families in public spaces. The president has now said "be careful what you wish for" to Maxine Waters. When it's coming from politicians and the president himself - it is unacceptable.

She SHOULD be careful of what she wishes for. If you want to see that as some sort of physical threat, then that's just a reflection of your desire to project the worst onto those you don't like. It can be equally, and much more realistically, seen as a warning that your own tactics can come back and bite you in the ass in unexpected ways. Seems to me that Trump is correct, given that "Auntie Maxine" subsequently had to start canceling personal appearances because she was getting threats.

So death threats against her are ok in your book just like it's ok for Trump to threaten others with violence or target the media to his followers for violence.