How many liberals on here believe the blood bath hoax

IMG_0800.jpeg
 
Has any of the leftist disinformation threads on the subject been taken down here yet?
As long as free speech rules apply equally to both sides I dont think the lying lib bloodbath threads should be removed

I believe exposing the left as purveyors of lies serves as a wakeup call for us

Wokeness in reverse
 
i think that every proud boy knows exactly what trump clearly meant.

is this one of those cases where we must take trump seriously but not literally?
.

So, you can't answer the question with anything other that "They use code and it scares me.

:laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301:







.
 
Can any of our Trump defenders explain the economic formula where China building cars in Mexico will turn into a “Bloodbath” for the US?

If that is what Trump meant, there must be some explanation
 
I listened to the part of Trump's Dayton speech where he uses the term "bloodbath" (twice, I think).....and in the paragraph he used it in he was talking about Chinese cars made in Mexico and subject to a 100% tariff.
Now, if he used 'bloodbath' again in the last 30-minutes of the speech, l dunno. Will listen to those 30 minutes later.

Nonetheless, regarding 'bloodbath' and why there is an alertness to Trump's more dramatic wordings...or implied threats.....well, that is obvious.
I mean by that, we know well Trump's remarks to the Proud Boys...."Stand back, and stand by". Or to his supporters....to come to DC
* for his rally at the Ellipse, as it will be "wild"; or at the Ellipse to "Fight"; or also at the Ellipse, Trump's lawyer on the same podium, Giuliani, stating we must have trial by combat, which Trump heard and did not modify or mitigate as is required by responsible leadership.

So, yeah, there is an understandable and reasonable 'alertness' to Trump's language. And legitimate questions on whether it is merely political rhetoric or intentional signaling that can lead to dire results.

Hindsight allows a renewed perspective on his more alarming language. Meaning, if he uses threatening language and threats later emerge consistent with his apparent encouragements, well, you bet, it is right and proper to pay special attention to his wording. We have seen it before.



* Trump's Twitter message on December 19th, 2020:
"Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election," Trump tweeted, even after he had heard from many of his top political and legal advisers that he had, in fact, lost.
"Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. "Be there, will be wild!" he wrote, referring to the day Congress was set to formally certify Joe Biden's victory in the electoral college.

---------------------------------------
Did they come?
Was it wild?
 
Last edited:
I listened to the part of Trump's Dayton speech where he uses the term "bloodbath" (twice, I think).....and in the paragraph he used it in he was talking about Chinese cars made in Mexico and subject to a 100% tariff.
Now, if he used 'bloodbath' again in the last 30-minutes of the speech, l dunno. Will listen to those 30 minutes later.

Nonetheless, regarding 'bloodbath' and why there is an alertness to Trump's more dramatic wordings...or implied threats.....well, that is obvious.
I mean by that, we know well Trump's remarks to the Proud Boys...."Stand back, and stand by". Or to his supporters....to come to DC
* for his rally at the Ellipse, as it will be "wild"; or at the Ellipse to "Fight"; or also at the Ellipse, Trump's lawyer on the same podium, Giuliani, stating we must have trial by combat, which Trump heard and did not modify or mitigate as is required by responsible leadership.

So, yeah, there is an understandable and reasonable 'alertness' to Trump's language. And legitimate questions on whether it is merely political rhetoric or intentional signaling that can lead to dire results.

Hindsight allows a renewed perspective on his more alarming language. Meaning, if he uses threatening language and threats later emerge seemingly from his encouragements, well, you bet, it is right and proper to pay special attention to his wording. We have seen it before.



* Trump's Twitter message on December 19th, 2020:
"Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election," Trump tweeted, even after he had heard from many of his top political and legal advisers that he had, in fact, lost.
"Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. "Be there, will be wild!" he wrote, referring to the day Congress was set to formally certify Joe Biden's victory in the electoral college.

---------------------------------------
Did they come?
Was it wild?
CNN says Trump is going to murder all democrats if he wins the election, and as we know, CNN never lies, so I would leave the country if I were you!

1710770149825.png
 

Forum List

Back
Top