Red Jen Psaki doubles down on Joe Biden's smear against Kyle Rittenhouse

[22lcidw]

Local Madison radio host is now claiming he know who Jump-Kick Man is. He's not outing his name, but is detailing his lengthy criminal record this morning. He's talking about how he should never have been on the streets.

The filthy FBI seems to be able to track down all the Patriots that protested agaisnt the stolen election on 1/6 but couldn't find Jump-Kick Man?

I question 9/11. All the money spent on these agencies and that disaster happened. And who suffers? The American citizen from that terrible day and from the legislation of tyranny that came from it..

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Well, no, by definition they are not. They are not trying to enforce law or justice that is not being met. They are trying to destroy a system that they perceive as unjust (at least if take the rhetoric at face value). That would not be, by definition, a vigilante or vigilantism.

By our operational definition but what about theirs? How dare you assume their definition?

 

[Slade3200]

"how up at race riots in the fashion that Kyle and his buddies did, don’t you?"

You are being condescending as youre inferring if I don't agree with your POV I am a moron. Kyle went there in his words to help save his city as the police weren't doing their job. He should not have been there but that is not a crime. Neither is self defense.

I was inferring nothing of the sort. You’re reading too much into it. I’m asking simple questions.

 

[FA_Q2]

fair enough. im just not into changing the meanings of words cause people don't like how they sound when used against their actions. while i think it may be on the extreme side of use, i do think it's a valid case for using the word.

the trick is *why* they're doing it.

it all comes back to - stop the stupidity when it starts and kyle goes through life w/o any of us knowing him. except POLITICS doesn't want that.

and slade is being 100% political, as he always does.

That cannot be said enough. It needs to be shouted from the rooftops in todays age where the entire political process seems intent on redefining words to mean anything. Speech is violence (and hilariously enough the SAME EXACT PEOPLE claim silence is violence as well), infrastructure means social welfare, justice now must have an added effect that means the opposite of justice a la social justice, climate justice, racial justice and on and on. It is not a new phenomena by any means, the commerce clause has interpreted commerce to, quite literally, mean anything and everything, but it certainly has been massively accelerated in recent times.

When those in power can define words to mean anything, the law means whatever they want it to.

 

[FA_Q2]

By our operational definition but what about theirs? How dare you assume their definition?

I do indeed dare as per my last post.

The fact that words have meaning is extremely important in coherent communication.

 

[Slade3200]

You are confused Moon Bat. The word doesn't mean what you think it means.

The asshole destructive mob that ran down Kyle to punish him for doing something they didn't like had no legal authority to do it so that sure as hell makes them vigilantes.

Now just the shut the fuck up about things you know nothing about. It just makes you look like more of an idiot than we already think you are.

The word means exactly what the definition of the word says…. You keep digging this hole of ignorance your standing in deeper and deeper

 

[Slade3200]

It is more than do not understand, it is flatly immoral to do so in the most charitable interpretation.

And your defense of your statement is just another form of Trump's famous 'some people say.' Oh no, I don't actually agree I am just saying that you understand where the idea comes from. Well, that is disingenuous IMHO.

I’m not defending anything genius I’m simply expanding the conversation by providing perspective and asking questions.

there is a posture that can be taken to resist civil rights protests which skates dangerously close to racist and white suprematists… it is also totally fine and understandable to try and protect property during a dangerous riot.

 

[FA_Q2]

I’m not defending anything genius I’m simply expanding the conversation by providing perspective and asking questions.

there is a posture that can be taken to resist civil rights protests which skates dangerously close to racist and white suprematists… it is also totally fine and understandable to try and protect property during a dangerous riot.

No, you are not.

Like I said, you are just saying what 'some other people said.'

 

[Slade3200]

By our operational definition but what about theirs? How dare you assume their definition?

Why would you go by anything other than the standard English definitions of words?

 

[Slade3200]

No, you are not.

Like I said, you are just saying what 'some other people said.'

Yes I am… more specifically I was commenting on the presidents tweet and his press secretaries statement… what’s wrong with that?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I was inferring nothing of the sort. You’re reading too much into it. I’m asking simple questions.

So why did you say "don't you"? That was not necessary.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I do indeed dare as per my last post.

The fact that words have meaning is extremely important in coherent communication.

Again, these people cannot even define what a man is.

 

[Slade3200]

So why did you say "don't you"? That was not necessary.

Oh well I’m very sorry if I hurt your feelings or offended you. It was not intended.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Why would you go by anything other than the standard English definitions of words?

The same reason you defined a "man" differently as gender is suddenly a social construct. Definitions seem to malleable.

 

[FA_Q2]

Again, these people cannot even define what a man is.

lol. Well, that is another thread entirely.

 

[iceberg]

The word means exactly what the definition of the word says…. You keep digging this hole of ignorance your standing in deeper and deeper

and if he spends the rest of his life digging in that same hole, eventually he'll find you down there at the very bottom of it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I’m very sorry

You're dodging. Why did you say "don't you"? Why did you choose those words?

 

[iceberg]

lol. Well, that is another thread entirely.

maybe. but it does illustrate his point that you and much of the left loves to redefine words to fit your emotional imbalances.

 

[Slade3200]

The same reason you defined a "man" differently as gender is suddenly a social construct. Definitions seem to malleable.

I define gender by how the dictionary defines it. You want definitions to be malleable? Really?! I wouldn’t have expected that from you… or are you just doing a childish “if they can’t do it then so can I” argument??

 

[iceberg]

You're dodging. Why did you say "don't you"? Why did you choose those words?

good luck with that one, don quiote.