My Theory On Violence At Trump Rallies

[Geaux4it]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

And just how does Obama differ from Trump?

-Geaux

I'm fairly certain that any Trumpette could answer that question for you.

My bad, that question was asked of the OP. All these accusations sounded like he was describing Obama, not Trump

-Geaux

 

[theDoctorisIn]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

I disagree. I don't think he's engineering violence. However, he certainly is encouraging it.

He should be trying to calm people down, but he doesn't. He amps them up.

It's reason #1,672 why doesn't have the temperament and isn't qualified to be President.

And Americans are seeing it.

He's going to get slaughtered.

View attachment 69467

Here's an idea that I had a week or so ago:

The American political system, while having many faults, has one distinctly relevant advantage over parliamentary systems at this moment in time. While it may tend towards a two-party competition, it also forces those two parties to moderate their positions. If the US had a parliament, this election would probably end up with the Trump Party™ controlling about 15-20% of the seats and holding a significant block towards building a government.

We're at a point in history where the cycle has shifted, and we're seeing a return to far-right populist nationalism all over the world. The American system is inherently more protective of the status quo and resilient against populist insanity than the British model.

 

[Toro]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

I disagree. I don't think he's engineering violence. However, he certainly is encouraging it.

He should be trying to calm people down, but he doesn't. He amps them up.

It's reason #1,672 why doesn't have the temperament and isn't qualified to be President.

And Americans are seeing it.

He's going to get slaughtered.

View attachment 69467

Here's an idea that I had a week or so ago:

The American political system, while having many faults, has one distinctly relevant advantage over parliamentary systems at this moment in time. While it may tend towards a two-party competition, it also forces those two parties to moderate their positions. If the US had a parliament, this election would probably end up with the Trump Party[emoji769] controlling about 15-20% of the seats and holding a significant block towards building a government.

We're at a point in history where the cycle has shifted, and we're seeing a return to far-right populist nationalism all over the world. The American system is inherently more protective of the status quo and resilient against populist insanity than the British model.

I tend to agree. I think we are in a new era. The Keynes era was 1945-1980, the Thatcher/Reagan era was 1980-2009. Now we are in something different, perhaps a nationalist/populist era. This usually doesn't end well.

If Trump wasn't a total douchebag of the absolute highest order, he'd win this thing. But he is so offensive and unprepared, he's going to get crushed. And his supporters will blame everyone but themselves and their candidate.

The GOP is going to look different going forward. Modern conservatism is under attack from within.

 

[Pogo]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

So with all the violence displayed by progressives in the past dont you think it's a stretch to now blame it on Trump?

What violence? Please site specific valid sources. In which Democratic campaigns in recent history has there been violence at the candidates' campaign events? Which Democratic contenders have called for violent, pugilistic put down of protesters, have called for them being carried out of the facility on stretchers?

Post a quote of Trump calling for protesters to be carried out on stretchers.

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

 

[jillian]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

you're correct about what he's doing. it's part of the spectacle.

but look how cute the trumpeters are when they click the little "laugh" button".

I guess it's better than them having to acknowledge that their guy's scum

 

[hunarcy]

But, you support Hillary, so your opinion is less than worthless.

But, you support Trump, so your opinion is not only less than worthless, it is something that belongs sent down the sewer with all the other crap, filth and flotsam.

LOL! You moron, I'm a Bernie guy. I pity your reflexive "they aren't with me so they gotta be on the right" point of view. Go pound salt.

And if Hillary is the nominee, you are going to vote for Trump?

I used to say I'd vote for Trump if Hillary was the nominee to show how opposed I am to her, but Trump's too nuts. So, if Hillary is the nominee, I won't vote. I'm not going to choose between an inauthentic liar and a bombastic lunatic.

If you are going to stay home, you might as well vote for Trump.

Then help me by getting Bernie the nod. He's sincere, on the right track and surging. Hillary is NOT the future.

 

[S.J.]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

And just how does Obama differ from Trump?

-Geaux

Trump is honest.

 

[S.J.]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

So with all the violence displayed by progressives in the past dont you think it's a stretch to now blame it on Trump?

What violence? Please site specific valid sources. In which Democratic campaigns in recent history has there been violence at the candidates' campaign events? Which Democratic contenders have called for violent, pugilistic put down of protesters, have called for them being carried out of the facility on stretchers?

Post a quote of Trump calling for protesters to be carried out on stretchers.

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

 

[Stephanie]

I have to disagree with you dear. Trump has "pumped' up people with his style. but I don't see any violence coming from them unless these agitators being brought in starts trouble and then his supporters get involved, how can they NOT?
Obama did the same thing with his "crowds" in the way he spoke to his subjects, Trump has a following just the same in my opinion.

 

[Pogo]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

So with all the violence displayed by progressives in the past dont you think it's a stretch to now blame it on Trump?

What violence? Please site specific valid sources. In which Democratic campaigns in recent history has there been violence at the candidates' campaign events? Which Democratic contenders have called for violent, pugilistic put down of protesters, have called for them being carried out of the facility on stretchers?

Post a quote of Trump calling for protesters to be carried out on stretchers.

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

I already linked the Washington Post, but how's does this leftist hack video work for ya, Sparkles?

​

 

[S.J.]

So with all the violence displayed by progressives in the past dont you think it's a stretch to now blame it on Trump?

What violence? Please site specific valid sources. In which Democratic campaigns in recent history has there been violence at the candidates' campaign events? Which Democratic contenders have called for violent, pugilistic put down of protesters, have called for them being carried out of the facility on stretchers?

Post a quote of Trump calling for protesters to be carried out on stretchers.

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

I already linked the Washington Post, but how's does this leftist hack video work for ya, Sparkles?

​

Thank you! You have a problem knocking the crap out of somebody who's getting ready to assault you? I don't, and I doubt if you would either (unless you like being assaulted).

 

[Pogo]

I have to disagree with you dear. Trump has "pumped' up people with his style. but I don't see any violence coming from them unless these agitators being brought in starts trouble and then his supporters get involved, how can they NOT?
Obama did the same thing with his "crowds" in the way he spoke to his subjects, Trump has a following just the same in my opinion.

Really? You didn't see this?

Or this?

Don't remember this either?

​

"The memory is the second thing to go"....

 

[Two Thumbs]

My theory is not just that Trump incited and encouraged violence. It is that he deliberately engineered it, and that all these outbreaks are exactly what he intended to happen.

Follow me through this.

We know that Donald Trump planned his Presidential campaign well ahead of time to be a media circus, designed to capitalize on his celebrity, cartoonish public persona, and outrageous behavior in order to essentially get the media to fund his advertising for free to get the ratings. And, in fact, that's exactly what he has done, taking advantage of the already toxic levels of division and discontent in the nation and capitalizing on it to gin up attention and enthusiasm among those who feel disenfranchised by setting people at each other's throats.

We've all heard the list of remarks he's made that his detractors say constitute inciting people to violence, although even they seem to treat them as simply egregious gaffes by an intemperate man. But what if they're not? What if Donald Trump deliberately, with malice aforethought, guided the narrative that direction?

I think he was reaching the point of diminishing returns in regards to dominating the conversation with, "Did you hear the crazy thing Trump said THIS time?" Sure, the media continues to report it, but it's just not particularly shocking to anyone any more. Plus, with the field narrowed down to only three candidates (only two of whom are even credible, as far as getting votes), he knew he was going to have to stop participating in debates, because they would no longer be the format of "tons of candidates, no time for depth, everyone fights to get in catchy one-liners" that suits his style so well, and they would go much more into policy and substance, which would put him at a disadvantage.

And coincidentally, conveniently, what happens? The situation escalates, and the media coverage goes from being dominated by Trump's insane remarks to "Look what happened at the Trump rally, OMG!" Does anyone think it was an accident that he just HAPPENED to start moderating the tone of his behavior a bit at the same time that his supporters started slugging protesters in job lots?

(continued in the next post)

 

[Pogo]

What violence? Please site specific valid sources. In which Democratic campaigns in recent history has there been violence at the candidates' campaign events? Which Democratic contenders have called for violent, pugilistic put down of protesters, have called for them being carried out of the facility on stretchers?

Post a quote of Trump calling for protesters to be carried out on stretchers.

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

I already linked the Washington Post, but how's does this leftist hack video work for ya, Sparkles?

​

Thank you! You have a problem knocking the crap out of somebody who's getting ready to assault you? I don't, and I doubt if you would either (unless you like being assaulted).

Hey Splooges, you axed for a link, I gave you the direct quote. Now you wanna whine about which assault method he called for? Poster please. You wanted the quote ---- and you got it. Man up already.

Check out the images I just posted. Not a single one of those is "getting ready to assault" anybody.

 

[S.J.]

Post a quote of Trump calling for protesters to be carried out on stretchers.

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

I already linked the Washington Post, but how's does this leftist hack video work for ya, Sparkles?

​

Thank you! You have a problem knocking the crap out of somebody who's getting ready to assault you? I don't, and I doubt if you would either (unless you like being assaulted).

Hey Splooges, you axed for a link, I gave you the direct quote. Now you wanna whine about which assault method he called for? Poster please. You wanted the quote ---- and you got it. Man up already.

Check out the images I just posted. Not a single one of those is "getting ready to assault" anybody.

That's right. I got the quote, and it wasn't what you said. I thanked you for it too. After all, you showed yourself to be a liar. Thanks again. lol

 

[Pogo]

Far as I know he didn't specify by what method they should be carried out, he simply advised "knock the crap out of him". Now I don't think we should take the expression literally that Rump wanted people's feces on the floor, do you? Some things you need to extend to their logical conclusions. Which seems strange advice to have to render to an asshat who still takes the quote in his own sigline beyond a logical conclusion... He followed this with "knock the hell", a typical Rumpian partialspeak imperative sentence which like most of what he says cannot be executed in the physical world.

He also "promised" (his term) to pay for the assailant's legal fees, a promise that he then denied having said, even though it's recorded on video, In Rump's world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you change historical events on a dime merely by denial that they ever happened.

That's what "I have the best words" means ---- they have the magical effect of a time machine. Don't like the way something went down? No problem, just declare that it happened differently, and since the universe revolves around Numero Uno, it becomes the new history.

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

I already linked the Washington Post, but how's does this leftist hack video work for ya, Sparkles?

​

Thank you! You have a problem knocking the crap out of somebody who's getting ready to assault you? I don't, and I doubt if you would either (unless you like being assaulted).

Hey Splooges, you axed for a link, I gave you the direct quote. Now you wanna whine about which assault method he called for? Poster please. You wanted the quote ---- and you got it. Man up already.

Check out the images I just posted. Not a single one of those is "getting ready to assault" anybody.

That's right. I got the quote, and it wasn't what you said. I thanked you for it too. After all, you showed yourself to be a liar. Thanks again. lol

You're welcome. Always happy to help expose Denialists.

 

[S.J.]

You didn't post the quote, you posted your version. No one is interested in your version, you're not known for your honesty. Give us a credible link, like a video (in it's entirety, not some edited version from a leftist hack site).

I already linked the Washington Post, but how's does this leftist hack video work for ya, Sparkles?

​

Thank you! You have a problem knocking the crap out of somebody who's getting ready to assault you? I don't, and I doubt if you would either (unless you like being assaulted).

Hey Splooges, you axed for a link, I gave you the direct quote. Now you wanna whine about which assault method he called for? Poster please. You wanted the quote ---- and you got it. Man up already.

Check out the images I just posted. Not a single one of those is "getting ready to assault" anybody.

That's right. I got the quote, and it wasn't what you said. I thanked you for it too. After all, you showed yourself to be a liar. Thanks again. lol

You're welcome. Always happy to help expose Denialists.

Are you excusing your dishonesty too?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I have to disagree with you dear. Trump has "pumped' up people with his style. but I don't see any violence coming from them unless these agitators being brought in starts trouble and then his supporters get involved, how can they NOT?
Obama did the same thing with his "crowds" in the way he spoke to his subjects, Trump has a following just the same in my opinion.

To be fair - if Trump wanted his own followers to cause trouble he would do what most Democrat politicians are having their supporters do - invade and disrupt the oppositions Rallies - go where you are not wanted and create trouble! Donald Trump has never done that. Not once. That's Clinton's style. Bully the opposition.

There is no record of a Trump supporter ever going to a Clinton or Sanders' rally - EVER. The Democrats are upset because Trump has changed the rules of the game. If you come to his rallies looking for trouble? You're going to find it.

Best advice to Blacklivesmatter, LGBT and the rest of the Clinton foot soldiers is - Mind your own business and don't go where you are not wanted.

With Bikers' for Trump vowing to appear now at the rest of the events? It's all over but the shout.
If you are not going to a Trump rally to support Trump - stay away.

read this:

Furthermore, bikers in support of Trump said they would show up at the event in response to the planned protest.

“Patriotic bikers, from all across the U.S. are planning to show up at ALL future Trump rallies to make sure that any paid agitator protesters don’t take away Mr. Trump’s right to speak or interfere with the rights of Trump supporters to safely attend,” a press release from the group stated. “We shall not be silenced!”

Local police with riot gear stood guard in the hotel lobby all night and were expecting people to start pouring in Wednesday morning.

bikers for trump | saboteur365

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I have to disagree with you dear. Trump has "pumped' up people with his style. but I don't see any violence coming from them unless these agitators being brought in starts trouble and then his supporters get involved, how can they NOT?
Obama did the same thing with his "crowds" in the way he spoke to his subjects, Trump has a following just the same in my opinion.

Really? You didn't see this?

Or this?

Don't remember this either?

​

"The memory is the second thing to go"....

These people are Clinton voters paid to disrupt Trump rallies. They need to get a real paying job and tell Clinton bye-bye. It's no way to earn a living or win an election.

 

[Pogo]

I have to disagree with you dear. Trump has "pumped' up people with his style. but I don't see any violence coming from them unless these agitators being brought in starts trouble and then his supporters get involved, how can they NOT?
Obama did the same thing with his "crowds" in the way he spoke to his subjects, Trump has a following just the same in my opinion.

Really? You didn't see this?

Or this?

Don't remember this either?

​

"The memory is the second thing to go"....

These people are Clinton voters paid to disrupt Trump rallies. They need to get a real paying job and tell Clinton bye-bye. It's no way to earn a living or win an election.

Link?




Didn't think so.