Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Donald is just being a typical modern liberal who responds to what people say someone has said rather than their actual words. Over and over again during Trump’s presidency, I would hear him say something, then hear his enemies in the media either outright lie about it or remove the context to make it sound like he meant the opposite of what he meant. If Trump ever supported racism, I never heard the comment, He certainly never practiced it in his personal life.When did Trump ever urge racist feelings, Donald? That's absurd.
Poetic license is how you describe something that not only untrue but foments racial tension? Whites Only drinking fountains were something that USED to define parts of this country, Donald but claiming they still do is simply race baiting! You can do better.
With all due respect, Donald...blacks make up about 3% of your population.The rest of the world sees the shoddy treatment of black people in America, but we do understand the 'race' problem that America has created for itself.
In all honesty, much of the criticism of the black population in America has some validity.
I've tried repeatedly to persuade at least some Americans to acknowledge same, but that calls for white people to condemn themselves for creating the problem.
And so the racism problem has developed out of that, as opposed to other modern democracies such as Canada for example, where we have treated our black people as equals.
So sure, I'll take your personal word for how you feel, but I have to point out that you're not the majority.
And then too, we can't exclude the Trump factor if we are to talk about racism.
How about a new thread for the express purpose of examining racism in America?
Interesting...so do Canadian politicians tell your Police to stand down and allow violent protesters to loot and burn large parts of your cities?I've already explained my position on that several times. Carrying a gun around on the streets is just looking for trouble and that's the reason we don't allow such behaviour in Canada.
The defense never behaved illegally to cause the judge to admonish it. The prosecution did so on several occasions. In my opinion the prosecutor did so deliberately after his case was destroyed by his own witnesses in an attempt to force a mistrial so he could have a do over.There is SOOO much evidence of problematic behavior that this asshole judge (who has not ONCE admonished the defense) has barred. Dude needs to be disrobed. He even led applause for a defense witness yesterday who happened to be a Vet. New trial, new judge please!
I totally agree with that assessment!The defense never behaved illegally to cause the judge to admonish it. The prosecution did so on several occasions. In my opinion the prosecutor did so deliberately after his case was destroyed by his own witnesses in an attempt to force a mistrial so he could have a do over.
Give me a break. That’s completely absurd. I live in Arizona where both open and concealed carry have been legal forever. I see several people every day carrying pistols. As is everywhere in the USA, the use of lethal force in self defense is legal here and cases of it being abused are so rare that I’ve never heard of one. Statistically a white man is in more danger of being shot by a black man than a black man is in danger of being shot by a white man.I agree on his culpability too boots, but that's America!
Kyle's penalty is of minor importance; it's what is going to come after that I'm really interested in hearing about.
All over America, losers with guns on the streets will start shooting black men and claiming self defense. It's a slamdunk IMO.
You can’t even keep your premis straight. Chauvin didn’t kill anyone with a gun, he was convicted of kneeling on a suspect’s neck who died.No country is completely free of racism. It's an issue of how far America has allowed it to get out of hand.
It's highly unlikely he will be convicted of murder, but the situation has been created in which Americans are responsible for the consequences.
IMO, the license to murder with guns is the top priority now. The Chauvin murder was a huge setback when he was convicted on all counts. This kid is the next best thing to a cop getting away with murder. Maybe even a better play in some respects.
First thing to do after the trial is to drop all mention of self defense and then spin it as a white man's right with a gun.
Then America will be fully prepared for Trump's hijacking of democracy in favour of fascism.
I like to think ahead of the crowd Boots. And it always provided grist for the mill.
No doubt true. Chauvin got the balls to use his hands instead of a gun because he had the backing of several others who were intent on murder.You can’t even keep your premis straight. Chauvin didn’t kill anyone with a gun, he was convicted of kneeling on a suspect’s neck who died.
The defense engaged in identical tactics and this butthole judge has said nothing. It is clear where his sentiments lie. Judges are supposed to be neutral. This guy is everyone's annoying RW uncle that nobody wants to invite for Thanksgiving. "Hope the Asian food for lunch isn't stuck on a ship offshore" ??? Please.The defense never behaved illegally to cause the judge to admonish it. The prosecution did so on several occasions. In my opinion the prosecutor did so deliberately after his case was destroyed by his own witnesses in an attempt to force a mistrial so he could have a do over.
www.forbes.com
thehill.com
Do they? I think you're about right.With all due respect, Donald...blacks make up about 3% of your population.
No, and you can verify that by a bit of research if you're interested.Interesting...so do Canadian politicians tell your Police to stand down and allow violent protesters to loot and burn large parts of your cities?
I suspect that is the perception of those carrying guns. The situation in America has so out of control that the police aren't capable of handling riots anymore. That is, unless they resort to deadly force with real bullets. Is that what you're advocating. If so then don't ever again criticize China's response in Tiannemen square.There is a REASON that guns were being carried around in the streets by civilians and it's because the authorities utterly failed to do their jobs and protect the people and property of the cities they were sworn to!
I don't need to contemplate citizens needing to carry guns to do the police's job. When, or if a country gets to that level of violence, I would say that it's teetering on the edge of anarchy, revolution, and fascism.Be honest, Donald. What do you think would eventually happen if your Police DIDN'T do their jobs? How long do you think it would be until there were guns in the hands of Canadians protecting themselves against violent mobs?
As was established yesterday, preface your replies to me with "I disagree". Then state my point on which you disagree. I refuse to waste my time on trying to determine what point you're trying to make.You are fully aware of the fact you have yet to demonstrate a rational basis for any of your claims.
Thus, you know your statement, above is false.
Please demonstrate the rational basis for your claim.
The reason you GET to that level of violence, Donald is that politicians allow it to happen! The looting and burning of major American cities happened because local politicians didn't have the stones to stand up to anarchists and BLM members when those groups increasingly became violent. It's no different than dealing with your kids...if you don't draw lines and tell them you can do THIS...but you will not do THAT...then they will do whatever they feel like doing!Do they? I think you're about right.
No, and you can verify that by a bit of research if you're interested.
I suspect that is the perception of those carrying guns. The situation in America has so out of control that the police aren't capable of handling riots anymore. That is, unless they resort to deadly force with real bullets. Is that what you're advocating. If so then don't ever again criticize China's response in Tiannemen square.
I don't need to contemplate citizens needing to carry guns to do the police's job. When, or if a country gets to that level of violence, I would say that it's teetering on the edge of anarchy, revolution, and fascism.
You raise some good questions! Keep it together and we may be able to have a fruitful discussion.
I wouldn't debate that point even though it leaves me wondering in what context to take it?The reason you GET to that level of violence, Donald is that politicians allow it to happen!
I've already commented on the degree of violent reaction you are expecting from the police. At the moment, America has decided to not escalate police action to killing protesters to the degree that was demonstrated at Kent State.The looting and burning of major American cities happened because local politicians didn't have the stones to stand up to anarchists and BLM members when those groups increasingly became violent.
I accept that analogy, with some reservations that would lead us too far off topic. Suffice to say that your don't portray to me an attitude of police restraint or tolerance. Be that with children or police authority. On children, that's just my guess of course.It's no different than dealing with your kids...if you don't draw lines and tell them you can do THIS...but you will not do THAT...then they will do whatever they feel like doing!
You're alluding to examples of which I'm not aware. Do your example include lethal force by police?The reason you can tell that IS the case is that in US cities that had politicians that enforced the law...protests happened but riots did not. It's only where politicians told their Police to "stand down" that things got really out of hand. You saw it happening time after time...month after month.
As was established yesterday, preface your replies to me with "I disagree".
This is a deliberate mis-characterization of events.America has decided to not escalate police action to killing protesters to the degree that was demonstrated at Kent State.
Wait a minute...those riots in those cities had ZERO to with Trump or the election, Donald! They were about the misconception that the Police were targeting blacks and murdering them in our streets...a misconception driven by the Main Stream media!I wouldn't debate that point even though it leaves me wondering in what context to take it?
I think it could mean the effort Trump and his supporters are putting into causing political turmoil by falsely claiming stolen elections.
I've already commented on the degree of violent reaction you are expecting from the police. At the moment, America has decided to not escalate police action to killing protesters to the degree that was demonstrated at Kent State.
But I understand that you don't agree that they shouldn't.
I accept that analogy, with some reservations that would lead us too far off topic. Suffice to say that your don't portray to me an attitude of police restraint or tolerance. Be that with children or police authority. On children, that's just my guess of course.
You're alluding to examples of which I'm not aware. Do your example include lethal force by police?
It's my own perception that all of the increase in racism and the violence that arises out of it, is due to Trump's urging.Wait a minute...those riots in those cities had ZERO to with Trump or the election, Donald! They were about the misconception that the Police were targeting blacks and murdering them in our streets...a misconception driven by the Main Stream media!
The National Guard was called out during the Kent State riots. They were NOT called out during the Capitol riot. Quite obviously...they should have been. The Capitol Police were woefully prepared to deal with a large demonstration which led to it turning into a riot.
You're just going over old ground and I don't find it at all inteeresting. And besides, you're afraid of commenting on the degree of violence you're hinting at advocatingWhat have I posed here that leads you to believe that I don't believe in police restraint or tolerance? I simply know from long experience that with big crowds and children...rules have to be enforced or you WILL lose control of things!
As for your last question? I'm not familiar with Police having to resort to lethal force...other than one of them shooting an unarmed protester at the Capitol riot. It's something that bothers me about the Ashli Babbitt killing. I don't think it had to happen. I don't think it would have happened if the Capitol Police had done their jobs that day. Whoever was in charge of that FUBARED it in a major way and someone lost their life because of it!
Please demonstrate the rational basis for your statement.It's my own perception that all of the increase in racism and the violence that arises out of it, is due to Trump's urging.
What do you base that perception on, Donald? What did Trump ever do that increased racism in the country? I'm baffled by your contention that he's the root of all this alleged racism and violence. The ironic thing is that Joe Biden is the man who put tens of thousands of black Americans in Federal prisons with his Senate version of the Clinton Crime bill and Donald Trump is the man who's policies RELEASED many of those same black Americans...yet you label Trump a racist and seem to think Biden is a champion of the black community!It's my own perception that all of the increase in racism and the violence that arises out of it, is due to Trump's urging.
makes no sense unless you meant to say 'unprepared'.
You're just going over old ground and I don't find it at all inteeresting. And besides, you're afraid of commenting on the degree of violence you're hinting at advocating
You've lost me with that last sentence, Donald. What are you saying I'm afraid of?It's my own perception that all of the increase in racism and the violence that arises out of it, is due to Trump's urging.
makes no sense unless you meant to say 'unprepared'.
You're just going over old ground and I don't find it at all inteeresting. And besides, you're afraid of commenting on the degree of violence you're hinting at advocating
I did indeed mean to say unprepared...thank you!It's my own perception that all of the increase in racism and the violence that arises out of it, is due to Trump's urging.
makes no sense unless you meant to say 'unprepared'.
You're just going over old ground and I don't find it at all inteeresting. And besides, you're afraid of commenting on the degree of violence you're hinting at advocating
