Hillary supporters attack homeless black woman

[Tgo01]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoZ_utS0LuA

Such pathetic animals, a group of grown men and women physically assaulting and intimidating a small black lady and destroying her few possessions because she dares to have an opinion they don't like.

Oh but wait! Trump is the one who instigates violence! Right?

You should honestly be ashamed of yourself for supporting such a vile piece of shit who actively encourages such attacks and says NOTHING when this shit happens. Oh but Hillary will cry crocodile tears and demand Trump drops out when some poor misunderstood protester gets shoved at one of his events.

Spin some more shit liberals. Spin that shit.

[Androidpk]

Hillary is the candidate for peace.

[Candor]

It would have been nice to have one of the liberal posters on the board condemn this act. Oh well.

As for me, I don't care if the victim is Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or whatever. The aggressors should be arrested and charged.

[Warriorbird]

Like typical cowardly piece of shit liberals (sort of like the ones featured in the video) when there is video evidence that their party is filled with pathetic degenerates they just pretend said video doesn't exist.

The thugs in the video don't even have the slightest bit of shame. They themselves filmed their actions and uploaded the video to YouTube saying the homeless lady got what she deserved.

Where is the liberal outrage that a poor, black, woman was attacked? I mean shit, poor, black, AND a woman? That's like the trifecta of victimhood, yet no liberal outrage. No news report on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, or the like. HuffPost strangely enough didn't report on it.

Show me a video of a group of Trump supporters doing the same thing to a defenseless homeless person and watch how fast I call those cowards out for their cowardly shit. But this black woman dared to go against the regressive agenda so she's left out to fend for herself.

Oh but they'll go on and on about how they will support a lying, cheating, corrupt piece of shit like Hillary for president because they believe in protecting and uplifting women!

Liberals are such disgusting creatures.

You'll fly off the deep end to defend people who've actually murdered people but no! A moral outcry has to happen when Republicans do basically the same thing you flipped out on the Democrats over.

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/a6/a646c45633cfab95a2aaf727480883aba7de652148fb3601db 61853a62d3b3da.jpg

[Gelston]

You'll fly off the deep end to defend people who've actually murdered people but no! A moral outcry has to happen when Republicans do basically the same thing you flipped out on the Democrats over.

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/a6/a646c45633cfab95a2aaf727480883aba7de652148fb3601db 61853a62d3b3da.jpg

So, this isn't wrong because worse has happened?

[Seizer]

I rarely post in politics but thought I'd play the role of dipshits for fun, since the silence is deafening.

time4fun - This is just staged Trump hate!!!111!!! Tgo1 you dumb ass how can you not see she was paid for by Trump's campaign. It's obvious by the sign she was carrying!,,, -froth- -froth- -spew- HILLARY4EVA

Ashliana - Well we can see by the sophistication and large words I am using that this woman being clearly recalcitrant in her stance would not see the illumination of the god hand of Hillary Rodham Clinton being the only correct choice in all elections forever and the fact that PK is a Trump supporter because he hates Hillary, and that it was possibly his choice of Sanders that caused this woman to get what she deserves because ya know Hillary supporters would never do anything of this nature within the natural epoch of society so therefore it has to be like time4fun said its a Trump plant. Oh PK why are you in love with Trump? I really need to know. -duck- -duck- -Goose- -honk-

[Gelston]

You forgot to randomly bold, underline, and italicize words for Ashliana.

[Androidpk]

You forgot to randomly bold, underline, and italicize words for Ashliana.

Zero. Self Awareness.

[Warriorbird]

How did I know the first liberal post in here wouldn't be in regards to the video in question but in regards to the mean things I said about liberals?

I know how pathetic liberals are all too well.

WB: Deflect! Straw man! But Republicans!

Remember when that one dipshit Republican said the female body can shut that whole thing down? Remember it was a rare moment when everyone on the PC agreed the person was an asshole and there were no arguments needed?

Why am I not surprised to see we couldn't have another rare moment like that for this story? Simple answer: most liberals are sub human.

Proof:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoZ_utS0LuA

Curiously enough people aren't terribly likely to be receptive when you froth at the mouth and call them subhuman.


So, this isn't wrong because worse has happened?

It's absolutely wrong and falling for the same sordid stuff that Hillary did to begin with. We're going down a bad road. Hell, we've got somebody dehumanizing the opposing party in the thread. Next step is suggesting people who disagree be locked up.

[Thondalar]

I rarely post in politics but thought I'd play the role of dipshits for fun, since the silence is deafening.

time4fun - This is just staged Trump hate!!!111!!! Tgo1 you dumb ass how can you not see she was paid for by Trump's campaign. It's obvious by the sign she was carrying!,,, -froth- -froth- -spew- HILLARY4EVA

Ashliana - Well we can see by the sophistication and large words I am using that this woman being clearly recalcitrant in her stance would not see the illumination of the god hand of Hillary Rodham Clinton being the only correct choice in all elections forever and the fact that PK is a Trump supporter because he hates Hillary, and that it was possibly his choice of Sanders that caused this woman to get what she deserves because ya know Hillary supporters would never do anything of this nature within the natural epoch of society so therefore it has to be like time4fun said its a Trump plant. Oh PK why are you in love with Trump? I really need to know. -duck- -duck- -Goose- -honk-

I lol'd.


edit: I lol'd because nailed it.

[Warriorbird]

lol

So to proof how you aren't subhuman you are going to continue to NOT condemn the actions of the people in the video because I called you subhuman?

Is this like the liberal mantra that we can't call out Muslim terrorists for being Muslim terrorists because it might cause more Muslim terrorists?

Or Ashliana's and time4fun's argument that Republicans are creating more voter fraud because they talk about voter fraud?

So in this case I guess I'm creating more subhumans by calling out subhuman behavior?

Fantastic.



It's adorable how you think I'm just as bad as the assholes in the video because I hurt your feelings.

You don't hurt my feelings. You use fascist style rhetoric and moral panic. You're no different than the people you wail about, considering everything you've rationalized.

Why is this woman the hill to die on?

She's defending Donald Trump.

[Fallen]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

[Warriorbird]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

Absolutely.

[Gelston]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

Hi, you must be new to human politics.

[Androidpk]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

Or the fact that no one in the crowd stepped forward to help the lady.

[Taernath]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

This. Everyone who is not a sociopath thinks this was out of line. There's really no discussion to have in the face of the circlejerking already going on in the thread.

[Thondalar]

lol

So to proof how you aren't subhuman you are going to continue to NOT condemn the actions of the people in the video because I called you subhuman?

Is this like the liberal mantra that we can't call out Muslim terrorists for being Muslim terrorists because it might cause more Muslim terrorists?

It goes further than that. Consider Michelle Obama's passionate speech the other day condemning hate speech/actions towards women...THIS MUST STOP...etc...notice she only mentioned a political opponent. She didn't mention the extremely misogynistic lyrics of her buddy Common, she didn't mention the absolute degradation of women under even "mainstream" Islam...she politicized it. In doing so she missed a great opportunity to spread a really good message to others besides her base.

THIS is what drives me batshit crazy about the left. Principle left the building decades ago. There is nothing left but disagreeing with the other side, no matter what it is. Nobody fights for something anymore, they just fight against the other person.

If you believe in something, it must be absolute. If you have a message, you must say it regardless of opposition.

[Warriorbird]

It goes further than that. Consider Michelle Obama's passionate speech the other day condemning hate speech/actions towards women...THIS MUST STOP...etc...notice she only mentioned a political opponent. She didn't mention the extremely misogynistic lyrics of her buddy Common, she didn't mention the absolute degradation of women under even "mainstream" Islam...she politicized it. In doing so she missed a great opportunity to spread a really good message to others besides her base.

THIS is what drives me batshit crazy about the left. Principle left the building decades ago. There is nothing left but disagreeing with the other side, no matter what it is. Nobody fights for something anymore, they just fight against the other person.

If you believe in something, it must be absolute. If you have a message, you must say it regardless of opposition.

So... rather than say stuff to America (while First Lady) she's supposed to say it to other countries first or one specific rapper?

[Thondalar]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

That's what we call "spin". Nobody is "happy" about this lady being assaulted, but I do find it telling that nobody is condemning it. Similar posts have been made in the past. For sure, it's a blatant attempt at a "gotcha", but...so far its working. Even WB needed you to say something first.

[Thondalar]

So... rather than say stuff to America (while First Lady) she's supposed to say it to other countries first or one specific rapper?

You can't really be that dense.

[Warriorbird]

You can't really be that dense.

Can you?

"Michelle can't talk to America! She has to like confront Common and Saudi Arabia first!"


Even WB needed you to say something first.

I responded to Gelston before he said anything.

[Thondalar]

Can you?

"Hillary can't talk to America! She has to like confront Common and Saudi Arabia first!"

For one, I said nothing about Hillary, I was talking about Michelle Obama's speech. For two, her entire speech was built around mistreatment of women, but she only spoke about it as it pertained to Donald Trump...like he's the only person on the planet that still abuses women. Her speech wasn't about equality for women, it was about defeating Trump. Instead of using her position to speak out against all the ways women are still mistreated, she focused it on a condemnation of one person, who also happened to be a political rival.

I repeat...you can't really be that dense.

[Tgo01]

You don't hurt my feelings. You use fascist style rhetoric and moral panic. You're no different than the people you wail about, considering everything you've rationalized.

I'm a fascist? God damn you are absurd.


Why is this woman the hill to die on?

She's defending Donald Trump.

Because she's a human being, you fucking piece of shit.

[Warriorbird]

For one, I said nothing about Hillary, I was talking about Michelle Obama's speech. For two, her entire speech was built around mistreatment of women, but she only spoke about it as it pertained to Donald Trump...like he's the only person on the planet that still abuses women. Her speech wasn't about equality for women, it was about defeating Trump. Instead of using her position to speak out against all the ways women are still mistreated, she focused it on a condemnation of one person, who also happened to be a political rival.

I repeat...you can't really be that dense.

So... Michelle Obama has special rules because why again?


I'm a fascist? God damn you are absurd.



Because she's a human being, you fucking piece of shit.

Let's think of all the people who you've implied aren't humans over the past several years. But this one's important!

Hopefully Trump gets elected so you can talk about throwing everybody who disagrees with you in jail. We're subhuman after all.

[Thondalar]

So... Michelle Obama has special rules because why again?

Huh. Guess you really are that dense.

[Tgo01]

There's really no discussion to have in the face of the circlejerking already going on in the thread.

You sound like those people in the video who just stood around and watched.

"Well there is really no point in doing anything...right?"

Yes, keep quiet and keep telling yourself I am actually happy that this woman was assaulted the way she was.

[Warriorbird]

Right. I'm happy these animals treated this woman the way they did.

How convenient. You get to turn this whole thing around on me and others like me by saying we are just as bad as the thugs in the video.

Unreal.

It's funny how he didn't actually say that. I remember some other talk about "thugs" from you too.

[Thondalar]

Can you?

"Hillary can't talk to America! She has to like confront Common and Saudi Arabia first!"

Gonna go ahead and re-post this where you responded without apparently knowing wtf you were even responding to and then later edited it.

[Warriorbird]

Huh. Guess you really are that dense.

So why exactly is she not allowed to make political statements again?

[drauz]

Hopefully Trump gets elected so you can talk about throwing everybody who disagrees with you in jail. We're subhuman after all.

Um... Isn't that the liberal's position? Or should I say the liberal college position.

[Warriorbird]

Gonna go ahead and re-post this where you responded without apparently knowing wtf you were even responding to and then later edited it.

I'm gonna go ahead and suggest that there's special Thondalar rules for Democratic First Ladies.

Why exactly is that? Are they supposed to know their place?

[Tgo01]

Let's think of all the people who you've implied aren't humans over the past several years. But this one's important!

And here you have WB equating me calling someone a mean name to literally assaulting and berating and humiliating a homeless person in front of dozens of people.

Oh right, I forgot, the left is actually starting to push forward this theory that saying something mean to someone is just as bad as physically assaulting them.

[Warriorbird]

Um... Isn't that the liberal's position? Or should I say the liberal college position.

There's a big difference between some college students shouting and Donald Trump going full Putin.

[Tgo01]

People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.


It's funny how he didn't actually say that.

How am I misreading what he said?

[Warriorbird]

And here you have WB equating me calling someone a mean name to literally assaulting and berating and humiliating a homeless person in front of dozens of people.

Oh right, I forgot, the left is actually starting to push forward this theory that saying something mean to someone is just as bad as physically assaulting them.

That's funny. I never actually said that and you have like this constant delusional world where you hallucinate the left doing stuff.


How am I misreading what he said?

Completely, I'd say.

[Tgo01]

That's funny. I never actually said that and you have like this constant delusional world where you hallucinate the left doing stuff.

:rofl:

Keep back peddling.


Completely, I'd say.

Enlighten me. Or are we now dealing with "vague WB" since we've already witnessed "strawman WB", "deflect WB", and "BUT REPUBLICAN! WB"?

[Warriorbird]

:rofl:

Keep back peddling.



Enlighten me. Or are we now dealing with "vague WB" since we've already witnessed "strawman WB", "deflect WB", and "BUT REPUBLICAN! WB"?

Vague? You said he did something he simply didn't do. Tough to alter that.

And clearly I need to embrace more of your strategies.

[drauz]

There's a big difference between some college students shouting and Donald Trump going full Putin.

Who is Trump saying hes going to throw in jail? Are they for actual crimes or because someone was a meanie head (the latter would be the college liberal's view).

[drauz]

So why exactly is she not allowed to make political statements again?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ObhB750-B4

[Warriorbird]

Who is Trump saying hes going to throw in jail? Are they for actual crimes or because someone was a meanie head (the latter would be the college liberal's view).

When's the last Presidential candidate who declared his opponent would be in jail in a debate? Or do we have to reach outside of the country to find one of those?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHLUA9DxcqQ

...yeah.

[Gelston]

When's the last Presidential candidate who declared his opponent would be in jail in a debate? Or do we have to reach outside of the country to find one of those?

When is the last candidate that had Federal investigations on them? Or do we have to reach outside the country to find one of those?

[Androidpk]

When's the last Presidential candidate who declared his opponent would be in jail in a debate? Or do we have to reach outside of the country to find one of those?



...yeah.

Bill Clinton was excited about the investigation into Bush when they were both running.

[Thondalar]

So why exactly is she not allowed to make political statements again?

I'm a sucker...guess I'll try one more time.

As first lady, she is certainly able and "allowed" to make political statements. Most first ladies do. Watching her speech, I have to admit I was a bit emotional. She brought up many great points. The problem is, she wasn't talking about womens' rights in general, she was only talking about Trump. In doing so, she ignored the fact that we still have a LONG way to go in that area, in general.

When you make a speech of that sort...something that touches on fundamental human rights, regardless of sex, race, creed...talking about things that should be universal rights for all people...when you politicize it, you minimize it. You make it seem like its only an issue where you're talking about it. She has had a national forum to talk about this for the last 8 years...but she chose right now. A few weeks (at the time) before the election. To give that speech, and focus it on Trump.

She chose to ignore all the terrible things happening to women around the world, the terrible ways women are still portrayed in popular culture in America, and take what could have been a ground-breaking speech for womens' rights in general, and reduced it to base-pandering.

I didn't catch her speech live, but I was watching the Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC later that night and she showed it without commercial interruption...it started out great. I was like hot damn, here's a liberal finally standing up and calling some people out...oh...wait...only calling one person out...for something said years ago...but..there's so much more! ...argh...

Simply pointing out more hypocrisy from the "modern left". A people I wish dearly I could still call my own. If you still don't get it, well...sorry. Got nothing more for ya.

[drauz]

When's the last Presidential candidate who declared his opponent would be in jail in a debate? Or do we have to reach outside of the country to find one of those?

Whens the last time a presidental candidate has been under FBI investigation for crimes?

[Thondalar]

When is the last candidate that had Federal investigations on them? Or do we have to reach outside the country to find one of those?

This.

[Warriorbird]

When is the last candidate that had Federal investigations on them? Or do we have to reach outside the country to find one of those?

Excluding nominated candidates and VPs... Bill Clinton.


I'm a sucker...guess I'll try one more time.

As first lady, she is certainly able and "allowed" to make political statements. Most first ladies do.... To give that speech, and focus it on Trump.

It sounds like you wanted her to not make a political speech and she made a political speech. She's clearly stumping for Clinton. What did you expect? Her to attack some random rapper and American allies?

[Gelston]

Excluding nominated candidates and VPs... Bill Clinton.

Oh. Another Clinton. Imagine that.

[Androidpk]

It's an inquiry not an investigation.

[Thondalar]

I'm gonna go ahead and suggest that there's special Thondalar rules for Democratic First Ladies.

Why exactly is that? Are they supposed to know their place?

Are you drunk?

[Gelston]

It's an inquiry not an investigation.

Inquiry is a soft word for investigation, don't mind the semantics.

[Fallen]

What the hell is up with TGoO1?

[Thondalar]

It's an inquiry not an investigation.

Name one other time the FBI gave 5 people immunity and indicted nobody.

[Tgo01]

When's the last Presidential candidate who declared his opponent would be in jail in a debate?

Like I showed dipshit time4fun when she tried to pull this shit, Obama himself as candidate said he would instruct his administration to look into the Bush administration and if any laws are broken he would make it clear that no one is above the law in this country.

Oh but right, Obama didn't come right out and say "Bush will be in jail if I become president" so he gets a pass.

[Warriorbird]

Yes, and I asked you to explain to me what he "really" said and how I misunderstood what he "really" said. Your answer was literally a one word non answer of "Completely."

I see we have now moved onto "defensive WB", I do hope the next iteration of WB we see is "'I know you are but what am I?' WB"



Well look at that.

Let's reflect on what you said he said versus what he actually said again if you can do that.


What the hell is up with TGoO1?

I'm not sure he knows.


Like I showed dipshit time4fun when she tried to pull this shit, Obama himself as candidate said he would instruct his administration to look into the Bush administration and if any laws are broken he would make it clear that no one is above the law in this country.

Oh but right, Obama didn't come right out and say "Bush will be in jail if I become president" so he gets a pass.

Right here there's a healthy dose of "BUT DEMOCRATS!"

[Tgo01]

What the hell is up with TGoO1?

What? Did you or did you not say I was happy that this woman got assaulted the way she did?


This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

[Tgo01]

Right here there's a healthy dose of "BUT DEMOCRATS!"

You asked a fucking question and I answered it. Try it sometime, moron.

Oh yeah, and:


I do hope the next iteration of WB we see is "'I know you are but what am I?' WB"

You are so predictable, WB.

[Fallen]

You seem particularly agitated at anyone and everyone. No one is glad this woman was assaulted. Everyone thinks all involved should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Why would you possibly think otherwise? If there's some sort of "gotcha" moment taking place here, i'm not seeing it.

[Warriorbird]

What? Did you or did you not say I was happy that this woman got assaulted the way she did?

Except you didn't go after him about that. Instead we got this weird nonsense.



How convenient. You get to turn this whole thing around on me and others like me by saying we are just as bad as the thugs in the video.

Unreal.

[Tgo01]

You seem particularly agitated at anyone and everyone. No one is glad this woman was assaulted. Everyone thinks all involved should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Why would you possibly think otherwise? If there's some sort of "gotcha" moment taking place here, i'm not seeing it.


This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

How am I possibly misunderstanding you? This wasn't even a vague post on your part, you literally said this is a weird thread because people are happy this happened to this woman. Okay, you didn't specifically mention me. Is that the part I misunderstood? Were you referring to someone else? And if so, who?

[Tgo01]

Except you didn't go after him about that. Instead we got this weird nonsense.

Oh, LOL.

So that's what your beef was? He didn't say I was as bad as the thugs on the video? Honestly how would I not be just as bad as the thugs on the video if I were actually happy this woman got assaulted the way she did?

[Warriorbird]

Oh, LOL.

So that's what your beef was? He didn't say I was as bad as the thugs on the video? Honestly how would I not be just as bad as the thugs on the video if I were actually happy this woman got assaulted the way she did?

You claimed he did. He didn't. It's a lot like your mysterious (and unsourced, because sources are BIASED!) references to stuff that nobody's ever done.

[Fallen]

How am I possibly misunderstanding you? This wasn't even a vague post on your part, you literally said this is a weird thread because people are happy this happened to this woman. Okay, you didn't specifically mention me. Is that the part I misunderstood? Were you referring to someone else? And if so, who?

You're literally losing your shit over this thread. Go back and read it, you're coming off as a crazy person convinced that all "liberals" squealed with glee about a black woman being assaulted for supporting Trump. It's just odd and over the top. You're treating this like it's some condemnation of all Democrats that they didn't meet your standard of outrage. It's fucking odd.

[drauz]

Right here there's a healthy dose of "BUT DEMOCRATS!"

Should he only have provided examples of Republicans? You asked a question and he gave an example. This isn't a "But Democrats!" argument....

[Warriorbird]

Should he only have provided examples of Republicans? You asked a question and he gave an example. This isn't a "But Democrats!" argument....

It wasn't an actual example but because Obama said something that he could pretend was related he said it. "But Obama!"

Obama didn't tell George Bush he'd be in jail. Dick Cheney either.

If anything it represented Obama dodging the question of whether he'd bring them up for war crimes charges... and he didn't. Can you really say the same about Trump?

[drauz]

You're literally losing your shit over this thread. Go back and read it, you're coming off as a crazy person convinced that all "liberals" squealed with glee about a black woman being assaulted for supporting Trump. It's just odd and over the top. You're treating this like it's some condemnation of all Democrats that they didn't meet your standard of outrage. It's fucking odd.

It shows the hypocrisy of the left. They shout and condemn at Trump supporters getting violent but then when one of their own assaults an elderly homeless woman all you can hear is crickets. Can you imagine the media coverage if this had been Trump supporters doing this to a elderly and homeless HRC supporter?!

[Gelston]

It wasn't an actual example but because Obama said something that he could pretend was related he said it. "But Obama!"

Obama didn't tell George Bush he'd be in jail. Dick Cheney either.

If anything it represented Obama dodging the question of whether he'd bring them up for war crimes charges... and he didn't. Can you really say the same about Trump?

Obama didn't run against either of them. This has nothing to do with your question earliet.

[Warriorbird]

It shows the hypocrisy of the left. They shout and condemn at Trump supporters getting violent but then when one of their own assaults an elderly homeless woman all you can hear is crickets. Can you imagine the media coverage if this had been Trump supporters doing this to a elderly and homeless HRC supporter?!

How many crimes has Tgo01 rationalized over the past several years? I think Fallen's point (and he's way more of a centrist than I am) is that its Tgo turning it into something political to flip out about over actually caring about the woman. Conservative outrage culture... the very stuff that Tgo's complaining about the left doing.


Obama didn't run against either of them. This has nothing to do with your question earliet.

He didn't. Part of why it's ridiculous to equate Obama talking about them to Trump telling Hillary she'd be in jail.

[Tgo01]

You claimed he did. He didn't.

My bad, WB. He didn't "say" it, he just heavily implied it.

Talk about being pedantic.


You're literally losing your shit over this thread. Go back and read it, you're coming off as a crazy person convinced that all "liberals" squealed with glee about a black woman being assaulted for supporting Trump.

Hey WB, WB! I need you to defend my honor! When did I say liberals squealed with glee about a black homeless woman being assaulted for supporting Trump?


It's just odd and over the top. You're treating this like it's some condemnation of all Democrats that they didn't meet your standard of outrage. It's fucking odd.

No, I'm treating the lack of ANY CARING AT ALL as a condemnation of Democrats.

I saw this video on YouTube and I was outraged, yes I'll openly admit it. I was fucking outraged. This is just horrible.

And what do I see in the comment section of YouTube? Post after post from liberals saying it was the woman's fault because she was "bullying" those people. Yes, this scrawny 64 year old woman who weighs 80 pounds soaking wet was "bullying" that disgusting behemoth who assaulted her.

So I share this video on Facebook, do I see any of my die hard liberal family say anything about it? No, of course not, they're too busy saying what a horrible person Trump is because he said some mean things about women 10 years ago.

I post this video on here, does it get any condemnation from liberals? Zero.

There were probably around 50 people all watching this woman get treated the way she did, all of which were Democrats. About 10 people joined in on the mocking and humiliating her while she lay on the ground, and you come along and say I was "happy" she got assaulted then act all shocked when I get pissed at such an accusation.

[Warriorbird]

My bad, WB. He didn't "say" it, he just heavily implied it.

Talk about being pedantic.



Hey WB, WB! I need you to defend my honor! When did I say liberals squealed with glee about a black homeless woman being assaulted for supporting Trump?



No, I'm treating the lack of ANY CARING AT ALL as a condemnation of Democrats.

I saw this video on YouTube and I was outraged, yes I'll openly admit it. I was fucking outraged. This is just horrible.

And what do I see in the comment section of YouTube? Post after post from liberals saying it was the woman's fault because she was "bullying" those people. Yes, this scrawny 64 year old woman who weighs 80 pounds soaking wet was "bullying" that disgusting behemoth who assaulted her.

So I share this video on Facebook, do I see any of my die hard liberal family say anything about it? No, of course not, they're too busy saying what a horrible person Trump is because he said some mean things about women 10 years ago.

I post this video on here, does it get any condemnation from liberals? Zero.

There were probably around 50 people all watching this woman get treated the way she did, all of which were Democrats. About 10 people joined in on the mocking and humiliating her while she lay on the ground, and you come along and say I was "happy" she got assaulted then act all shocked when I get pissed at such an accusation.

How exactly did Fallen say that you were worse than the people who assaulted her again?

[Gelston]

How many crimes has Tgo01 rationalized over the past several years? I think Fallen's point (and he's way more of a centrist than I am) is that its Tgo turning it into something political to flip out about over actually caring about the woman. Conservative outrage culture... the very stuff that Tgo's complaining about the left doing.



He didn't. Part of why it's ridiculous to equate Obama talking about them to Trump telling Hillary she'd be in jail.

No, it doesn't compare at all. Hillary has been hit by scandal and investigation. There is a new thing popping up. Woman is shady.

[Tgo01]

How many crimes has Tgo01 rationalized over the past several years?

lol


I think Fallen's point (and he's way more of a centrist than I am) is that its Tgo turning it into something political to flip out about over actually caring about the woman. Conservative outrage culture... the very stuff that Tgo's complaining about the left doing.

Of course I care about the woman. I can't help but laugh at the irony of you telling me that -I- tam the one making this political. Did you even watch the fucking video? It was already political! Why was this woman attacked? Because of who she supports. You want me to divorce the motive from the actions. Fuck that shit.


He didn't. Part of why it's ridiculous to equate Obama talking about them to Trump telling Hillary she'd be in jail.

Oh right, again my bad. Obama just heavily implied he would jail the person he is seeking to replace rather than the person he is running against. Much better.

[Warriorbird]

No, it doesn't compare at all. Hillary has been hit by scandal and investigation. There is a new thing popping up. Woman is shady.

Any Democratic candidate would be labeled as "shady." It's the current Republican playbook. Bush Senior didn't say a word about Whitewater.

[Androidpk]

Name one other time the FBI gave 5 people immunity and indicted nobody.

More than 5 people got immunity deals.

[Warriorbird]

Oh right, again my bad. Obama just heavily implied he would jail the person he is seeking to replace rather than the person he is running against. Much better.

It was actually basically dodging any such implication. Then he followed through... in spite of people howling for blood over the WMD issue. Do you really believe that Trump's not going to attempt to throw Clinton in jail if he wins?

[Fallen]

You seem to be equating people on this board with people who committed and witnessed the assault. No one here was present for that incident, nor does anyone here condone those actions. I feel pretty confident in speaking for the group in this case.

Rest easy in the knowledge that all of us are against acts of physical violence taken against this person.

[drauz]

How many crimes has Tgo01 rationalized over the past several years? I think Fallen's point (and he's way more of a centrist than I am) is that its Tgo turning it into something political to flip out about over actually caring about the woman. Conservative outrage culture... the very stuff that Tgo's complaining about the left doing.

You have a presidental candidate who has been under FBI investigation TWICE while running for president (yes, stemming from one accusation). Can you tell me the last time that has happened? I can't bring myself to vote for Clinton or Trump. With Johnson acting the fool in the past weeks I will probably not vote for the President for the first time in my life. I will still vote for everything else as those are actually more important than who is President.

[Warriorbird]

You have a presidential candidate who has been under FBI investigation TWICE while running for president (yes, stemming from one accusation). Can you tell me the last time that has happened? I can't bring myself to vote for Clinton or Trump. With Johnson acting the fool in the past weeks I will probably not vote for the President for the first time in my life. I will still vote for everything else as those are actually more important than who is President.

Twice? Back to Lyndon Johnson. You might take that as evidence for or against your thesis.

I'm not especially comfortable with Clinton. I'm far less comfortable with Trump with a Congressional majority.

[Candor]

You have a presidental candidate who has been under FBI investigation TWICE while running for president (yes, stemming from one accusation). Can you tell me the last time that has happened? I can't bring myself to vote for Clinton or Trump. With Johnson acting the fool in the past weeks I will probably not vote for the President for the first time in my life. I will still vote for everything else as those are actually more important than who is President.

You might consider Evan McMullin - he is doing well in the polls in Utah largely due to an anti-Trump sentiment by the Mormon community.

https://www.evanmcmullin.com/

I am considering McMullin as an option myself, but haven't made a decision. His website is a start, but I still need to research him.

[Methais]

This thread is AIDS

[Neveragain]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud_MQi79VwU

I think time4fun or ashliana are featured in this video.

[drauz]

This thread is AIDS


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtJdUEaw8aY

[Kembal]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoZ_utS0LuA

Such pathetic animals, a group of grown men and women physically assaulting and intimidating a small black lady and destroying her few possessions because she dares to have an opinion they don't like.

Oh but wait! Trump is the one who instigates violence! Right?

You should honestly be ashamed of yourself for supporting such a vile piece of shit who actively encourages such attacks and says NOTHING when this shit happens. Oh but Hillary will cry crocodile tears and demand Trump drops out when some poor misunderstood protester gets shoved at one of his events.

Spin some more shit liberals. Spin that shit.

It's wrong, and everyone involved should get prosecuted.

Have no idea why you ascribe blame for what happened in this video to the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party. Can you show your proof of active encouragement from either of these two entities encouraging these people to beat this woman up?

[Tgo01]

It's wrong, and everyone involved should get prosecuted.

Have no idea why you ascribe blame for what happened in this video to the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party. Can you show your proof of active encouragement from either of these two entities encouraging these people to beat this woman up?

Lol

I see the exact responses from Democrats that I thought I would see.

[Neveragain]

It's wrong, and everyone involved should get prosecuted.

Have no idea why you ascribe blame for what happened in this video to the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party. Can you show your proof of active encouragement from either of these two entities encouraging these people to beat this woman up?

Because it may have been Republicans that were there to support the guy posing as a public employee destroying the sidewalk.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMux_UHmpvc

Quit pretending this is not a thing.

[Jhynnifer]

Or the fact that no one in the crowd stepped forward to help the lady.

Too busy filming it to enflame internet nerds into raging at each other to help.

I guess I think that these people are going to be wastes of life regardless of whether it's their political views, the election in general or that last mcgriddle.

[Kembal]

Lol

I see the exact responses from Democrats that I thought I would see.

Random left-leaning people beating a Trump supporter up != those people were actively encouraged by the Clinton campaign or Democratic Party.

Again, show your evidence that these people were told, encouraged, or otherwise induced by the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party to assault this woman.

[Wrathbringer]

Democrats are terrorists.

[Neveragain]

Random left-leaning people beating a Trump supporter up != those people were actively encouraged by the Clinton campaign or Democratic Party.

Again, show your evidence that these people were told, encouraged, or otherwise induced by the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party to assault this woman.

I believe some of the e-mail content covers the fact that the Hillary camp was indeed bird dogging. At this point I'm not even sure what all the e-mails cover, we just found 650,000 more.

[Kembal]

Because it may have been Republicans that were there to support the guy posing as a public employee destroying the sidewalk.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMux_UHmpvc

Quit pretending this is not a thing.

Pretending what? That there are people on both sides who have stirred up by whatever rhetoric is out there and taking it out on the other side's supporters? Sure. It's wrong and it needs to stop.

Have you seen Hillary Clinton say it's ok to "knock the crap out of" Trump supporters and offer to pay the legal fees of those who do? I haven't. I've seen Trump do so with protesters at his events.

Tgo's claim is that the Clinton campaign and/or the Democratic Party are actively encouraging people to beat up random Trump supporters. I am challenging him to show such proof.

[Methais]

Pretending what? That there are people on both sides who have stirred up by whatever rhetoric is out there and taking it out on the other side's supporters? Sure. It's wrong and it needs to stop.

Have you seen Hillary Clinton say it's ok to "knock the crap out of" Trump supporters and offer to pay the legal fees of those who do? I haven't. I've seen Trump do so with protesters at his events.

Tgo's claim is that the Clinton campaign and/or the Democratic Party are actively encouraging people to beat up random Trump supporters. I am challenging him to show such proof.

Do you not know about the Chicago Trump rally or something, and the dude on video bragging about how they went there to incite violence? Or are you just pretending it didn't happen?

"But but there's no video of Hillary herself gave the direct order for that!" will be the response I'm sure. Unfortunately that's about as deep as left wing thinking gets.

[Kembal]

Do you not know about the Chicago Trump rally or something, and the dude on video bragging about how they went there to incite violence? Or are you just pretending it didn't happen?

"But but there's no video of Hillary herself gave the direct order for that!" will be the response I'm sure. Unfortunately that's about as deep as left wing thinking gets.

I know about the video. James O'Keefe hasn't released the raw unedited video of that interview, and given that he's deceptively edited videos in the past (and that he has a criminal conviction), I'm unwilling to give him the benefit of the doubt that the edited video he posted online is accurate.

[Tgo01]

Random left-leaning people beating a Trump supporter up != those people were actively encouraged by the Clinton campaign or Democratic Party.

Again, show your evidence that these people were told, encouraged, or otherwise induced by the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party to assault this woman.

Trump says illegal immigrants bring crime with them.

Democrats: He's saying all Mexicans are rapists and murders! He's inciting violence against Mexicans! froth froth

Trump says we need to put a moratorium on Muslims entering the country.

Democrats: He's saying all Muslims are terrorists! He's inciting violence against Muslims! froth froth

Trump said some mean things about women over a decade ago.

Democrats: He's saying all women are sluts and pigs! He's inciting violence against women! froth froth

Hillary literally calls Trump supporters (only half of them though!) racists, sexists, homophobics, who are irredeemable and unAmerican.

A bunch of Hillary supporters use much of this same language while assaulting, berating, humiliating, and destroying the personal property of a homeless Trump supporter.

Democrats: I don't see the connection.

Fuck off.

[Methais]

I know about the video. James O'Keefe hasn't released the raw unedited video of that interview, and given that he's deceptively edited videos in the past (and that he has a criminal conviction), I'm unwilling to give him the benefit of the doubt that the edited video he posted online is accurate.

I'm sure he edited out the part where he was like, "Here, memorize these lines and make it convincing."

Unless I missed it, the Clinton camp hasn't made any "this is deceptively edited bullshit!" claims yet either.

[Parkbandit]

So... Michelle Obama has special rules because why again?

Let's think of all the people who you've implied aren't humans over the past several years. But this one's important!

Hopefully Trump gets elected so you can talk about throwing everybody who disagrees with you in jail. We're subhuman after all.

Time4fun is MIA.. Packlash is looking for a liver transplant.. so look who thinks he can finally get the title!

Well played.

[Parkbandit]

This is a weird thread. People are more happy that this happened to this woman so that they can point at it as some sort of example than they are sorry that some old black lady was assaulted.

Sucks the lady was hurt.

That's what you got out of this thread? Show me one person that is happy that this lady was beaten. And Warriorbird doesn't count.. he just didn't care.

[Methais]

Hopefully Trump gets elected so you can talk about throwing everybody who disagrees with you in jail. We're subhuman after all.

You really think Trump said that to Hillary because she disagrees with him?

[Kembal]

I'm sure he edited out the part where he was like, "Here, memorize these lines and make it convincing."

Unless I missed it, the Clinton camp hasn't made any "this is deceptively edited bullshit!" claims yet either.

He's got a track record of deceptive editing. It's been proven in previous videos when he posted the raw footage later, and you can see that he took a statement out of context and made it seem like an answer to another question. This time, he's not posted the raw footage. Can't give it credence until he does. Even articles about the video note that the video is edited in a way that it's unclear whether the answer given was for the question supposedly asked.

[Kembal]

Trump says illegal immigrants bring crime with them.

Democrats: He's saying all Mexicans are rapists and murders! He's inciting violence against Mexicans! froth froth

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/a-trump-inspired-hate-crime-in-boston/401906/


Trump says we need to put a moratorium on Muslims entering the country.

Democrats: He's saying all Muslims are terrorists! He's inciting violence against Muslims! froth froth

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/18/us/politics/hate-crimes-american-muslims-rise.html
http://bridge.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/When-Islamophobia-Turns-Violent.pdf


Trump said some mean things about women over a decade ago.

Democrats: He's saying all women are sluts and pigs! He's inciting violence against women! froth froth

Yeah, no Dem I know of has said that he's inciting violence against women. That's you attacking a strawman.


Hillary literally calls Trump supporters (only half of them though!) racists, sexists, homophobics, who are irredeemable and unAmerican.

A bunch of Hillary supporters use much of this same language while assaulting, berating, humiliating, and destroying the personal property of a homeless Trump supporter.

I think that statement by Hillary was a terrible characterization and undeserved. I know some Trump supporters. Some of them work for me. All of them are nice people. They know I'm a Democrat and have no issue with it. (does it help I actively encourage everyone in our company to vote, regardless of political affiliation? probably.)

You're being willfully obtuse about one part in your argument here: Trump has actually called for people to knock out protesters at his rallies. i.e. He sees violence as ok. Clinton has not.

It is the statements against group + personal call for violence that increases the odds of violence much more than just statements against group.

That "personal call for violence" is not in Clinton's rhetoric.

Provide proof that that the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party (not even Clinton herself!) is actively calling for violence, and I'll change my mind. (the O'Keefe video does not work, for reasons I've already stated.)

Also, suggestion: read the book "Amongst the Thugs" by Bill Buford. Good study of violence in general.

[Parkbandit]

You're being willfully obtuse about one part in your argument here: Trump has actually called for people to knock out protesters at his rallies. i.e. He sees violence as ok. Clinton has not.

Very true. Clinton has never said to cause violence at rallies.. she's just paid people to do it.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/18/activist-who-took-credit-for-violent-chicago-protests-was-on-hillarys-payroll/

Speaking of being willfully obtuse...... how you doing Kembal?

[Tgo01]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/a-trump-inspired-hate-crime-in-boston/401906/

I don't see the connection.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/18/us/politics/hate-crimes-american-muslims-rise.html
http://bridge.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/When-Islamophobia-Turns-Violent.pdf

I don't see the connection.

Also it must be great to just be able to Google and find all sorts of news stories of these Trump supporters causing trouble, you even have a study in there someone has done about what a terrible person Trump is for his rhetoric. But you can't find one news story about the video in question here, can you? I mean obviously other than right leaning news sites.


Yeah, no Dem I know of has said that he's inciting violence against women. That's you attacking a strawman.

http://bluenationreview.com/trumps-violent-incitement-against-hillary-stochastic-terrorism/


This man openly incited violence against a woman, who also happens to be a presidential candidate – which makes his exhortation possibly criminal, too.

I am, of course, concerned for Hillary. Additionally: This, like every iteration of gross misogyny and threats directed at her publicly, isn’t just about Hillary, but about how we treat women culturally.

And from Hillary herself:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/asked-if-she-worries-trump-will-incite-violence-against-her-hillary-says-she-wont-be-bullied/


Well, I despise the association Trump has, he retweets a white supremacist who writes under the handle “White Genocide,” he puts the man in charge of the Breitbart site, which traffics in conspiracy theories and really tries to create an emotional atmosphere in which people feel somehow aggrieved, and they are told to take it out on immigrants, take it out on African-Americans, take it out on Jewish people, take it out on women, take it out on somebody. It is a toxic brew.

Fuck off.


I think that statement by Hillary was a terrible characterization and undeserved. I know some Trump supporters. Some of them work for me. All of them are nice people. They know I'm a Democrat and have no issue with it. (does it help I actively encourage everyone in our company to vote, regardless of political affiliation? probably.)

That's great you disagree with Hillary's words, that doesn't change the fact that she uttered them.


You're being willfully obtuse about one part in your argument here: Trump has actually called for people to knock out protesters at his rallies. i.e. He sees violence as ok. Clinton has not.

Talk about being "willfully obtuse." Trump said that in regards to rumors he heard that protesters were going to throw tomatoes at him during his speech and he said if anyone saw someone about ready to throw a tomato at him to knock them out. Now, granted, that was pretty stupid to say, but you are (purposefully) taking his comment out of context. Throwing a tomato at someone, as "funny" as it sounds, is assault, so Trump was saying if you see someone about to assault me then step in and help. You know, like those pieces of shit in the video should have done for that homeless lady.


It is the statements against group + personal call for violence that increases the odds of violence much more than just statements against group.

Trump has actually called for violence towards Mexicans, Muslims, and women? He has specifically said "Go out and attack dem Mexicans because they taking our jobs?"

I know you're lying through your teeth but I'll try anyways; link?


That "personal call for violence" is not in Clinton's rhetoric.

Right. Right. She just insists Trump incites violence towards just about every group of people except straight white men, and literally calls half of Trump supporters sexists and racists who are irredeemable. Oh but she didn't utter the words "attack some homeless lady on the street then laugh at her while she cowers in fear on the ground." She didn't literally say those words so she's in the clear. I honestly can't believe this pathetic argument you are putting forth.


Provide proof that that the Clinton campaign or the Democratic Party (not even Clinton herself!) is actively calling for violence, and I'll change my mind. (the O'Keefe video does not work, for reasons I've already stated.)

Provide evidence that I find credible! I won't believe evidence I don't find credible! Let me guess it has to come from Politifact, MSNBC, or SNOPES! Right?


Also, suggestion: read the book "Amongst the Thugs" by Bill Buford. Good study of violence in general.

Let me guess; it pins most/all of the blame on the right or people like Trump?

[drauz]

http://bridge.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/When-Islamophobia-Turns-Violent.pdf

Wow... This is ..research?? Holy piece of biased crap... This was one of my favorites:


Significantly, as Trump discussed shutting down mosques, antiMuslim hate crimes (a disproportionate number of which targeted mosques) tripled. In fact, in November 2015, there were thirty-five (35) incidents of anti-Muslim violence. Of course, this escalation in anti-Muslim violence followed the Paris terrorist attacks and the mass shooting in San Bernardino, California that same year.

Oh so its not what Trump was saying, but the fact that muslim extremists massacred people in CA and France... Way to make two conclusions in a single paragraph.

[Tgo01]

Oh so its not what Trump was saying, but the fact that muslim extremists massacred people in CA and France... Way to make two conclusions in a single paragraph.

But Trump said something and bad things happened, so of course Trump.

[Latrinsorm]

It goes further than that. Consider Michelle Obama's passionate speech the other day condemning hate speech/actions towards women...THIS MUST STOP...etc...notice she only mentioned a political opponent. She didn't mention the extremely misogynistic lyrics of her buddy Common, she didn't mention the absolute degradation of women under even "mainstream" Islam...she politicized it. In doing so she missed a great opportunity to spread a really good message to others besides her base.

THIS is what drives me batshit crazy about the left. Principle left the building decades ago. There is nothing left but disagreeing with the other side, no matter what it is. Nobody fights for something anymore, they just fight against the other person.

If you believe in something, it must be absolute. If you have a message, you must say it regardless of opposition.I read an interesting piece (http://freebeacon.com/columns/crisis-conservative-intellectual/) the other day on this topic, I wonder what you'll think about it.

[Warriorbird]

I read an interesting piece (http://freebeacon.com/columns/crisis-conservative-intellectual/) the other day on this topic, I wonder what you'll think about it.

Thondalar might even read that.


You really think Trump said that to Hillary because she disagrees with him?

I think if Sanders had been nominated Trump would've said he'd throw Sanders's wife in jail and brought up Sanders's Judaism.

[Neveragain]

Also, suggestion: read the book "Amongst the Thugs" by Bill Buford. Good study of violence in general.

I'll give a brief summary:

Humans act like animals, the end.

[Kembal]

Very true. Clinton has never said to cause violence at rallies.. she's just paid people to do it.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/18/activist-who-took-credit-for-violent-chicago-protests-was-on-hillarys-payroll/

Speaking of being willfully obtuse...... how you doing Kembal?

Still not trusting that video. Sorry....you all can keep going on about it, but until he releases the full unedited video, I won't give it credence. He's deceptively edited too many of his sting videos to believe this one is suddenly accurate.

[Tgo01]

I think if Sanders had been nominated Trump would've said he'd throw Sanders's wife in jail

So you agree it has nothing to do with jailing his political opponent simply because it's his political opponent? Glad we got that cleared up.

[Kembal]

Also it must be great to just be able to Google and find all sorts of news stories of these Trump supporters causing trouble, you even have a study in there someone has done about what a terrible person Trump is for his rhetoric. But you can't find one news story about the video in question here, can you? I mean obviously other than right leaning news sites.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-homeless-woman-posts-video-protecting-trump-walk-of-fame-star/

CBS mainstream enough for you?



And from Hillary herself:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/asked...nt-be-bullied/

OK, she's wrong there.


Trump has actually called for violence towards Mexicans, Muslims, and women? He has specifically said "Go out and attack dem Mexicans because they taking our jobs?"

Failure of reading comprehension. I'll walk you through it again:

- "Knock the crap out" -> Ok to punch someone -> personal call for violence
- Anti-Muslim ban or Mexican illegal immigrants are all rapists or murderers -> statements against groups

It's an escalation. It does not need to be specifically targeted statements against groups that call for violence - the listener makes that connection on their own.


Provide evidence that I find credible! I won't believe evidence I don't find credible! Let me guess it has to come from Politifact, MSNBC, or SNOPES! Right?

Hell no, I'll even take a wikileaks email. O'Keefe has no credibility without releasing the unedited video. That's been my stand since Methais brought it up.


Let me guess; it pins most/all of the blame on the right or people like Trump?

Nope, it's about English soccer hooligans in the late 80s/early 90s.

[drauz]

Still not trusting that video. Sorry....you all can keep going on about it, but until he releases the full unedited video, I won't give it credence. He's deceptively edited too many of his sting videos to believe this one is suddenly accurate.

"Well you know what? We've been bussing people in to deal with you fuckin' assholes for fifty years and we're not going to stop now. We're just going to find a different way to do it."

Would love to see how this was edited to make this guy appear worse than he really is. What question could have been asked that would illicit this response?

[Kembal]

Wow... This is ..research?? Holy piece of biased crap... This was one of my favorites:



Oh so its not what Trump was saying, but the fact that muslim extremists massacred people in CA and France... Way to make two conclusions in a single paragraph.

There's a second study - that's what the NYTimes article was referring to.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3110202-SPECIAL-STATUS-REPORT-v5-9-16-16.html

You may find this one more tightly written and researched. Pages 26-34 of this report evaluates whether there was a Bush effect in reducing anti-Muslim violence after 9/11 and whether there is a Trump effect that is increasing anti-Muslim violence.

[Kembal]

"Well you know what? We've been bussing people in to deal with you fuckin' assholes for fifty years and we're not going to stop now. We're just going to find a different way to do it."

Would love to see how this was edited to make this guy appear worse than he really is. What question could have been asked that would illicit this response?

I have no idea. It may be as bad as this video shows. But O'Keefe gets no credence for that until he releases the full unedited video.

[Tgo01]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-homeless-woman-posts-video-protecting-trump-walk-of-fame-star/

CBS mainstream enough for you?

LMFAO. Oh my fucking goodness. How did I know if this turned up on the "mainstream media" they would spin the ever living shit out of it to make the woman look like the bad guy?

Holy fucking shit. You just went ahead and proved my point, Kembal. THANK YOU!


Los Angeles police are searching for the woman who is a Donald Trump and was harassed and fell to the ground as she apparently protected the presidential candidate’s Hollywood Walk of Fame star.

First of all "who is a Donald Trump"? No, that alone should disqualify this as a legit source, but moving on.

Right, right. She just "fell to the ground."


A video uploaded to YouTube Thursday shows the woman displaying pro-Trump signs complaining about immigrants and President Obama, The Los Angeles Times reported.

Gotta make sure we know in the third paragraph that she's the bad guy!


A man bumps against her, she pushes back and falls to the ground, staying there as the crowd jeers.

She "pushed back" and fell to the ground. LAUGHING. OUT. LOUD.


LAPD Officer Tony Im said Friday that the woman incited the crowd with racial slurs and police at the scene “kept the peace.”


Koali Fikator, who shot and posted the video, wrote on YouTube that the woman told the crowd to “let her be” when some offered help and that she eventually got up and made a new sign disparaging Mexicans and urging people to vote for Trump.

The bitch!


She starts calling a few people “b----.”

Well she certainly got what she deserved.

I especially love this part:


On Twitter, Trump fans were quick to blame Clinton supporters for “attacking” the homeless woman.

Why is "attacking" in quotes? It was an attack.

What a fucking pathetic article. It spends half the time making sure we know exactly what a bitch she was and how she deserved, and then it's like "But...yeah maybe the crowd went too far."

Contrast this to your article about the moron Trump supporters that spends the entire article on the crime committed and how Trump's campaign "brushed the attack off." Well that's funny, why didn't CBS reach out to Hillary's camp to get her word on this? Is it possible because Hillary's campaign would also "brush it off" and they didn't want to report on that now did they?

Yeah, you sure showed me, Kembal! The only source you could find is a source that spends half the time attacking the woman and her supporters themselves. Good job, dude. Good job. Two thumbs WAY up!


OK, she's wrong there.

Yeah no shit, she still said it.


Failure of reading comprehension. I'll walk you through it again:

lol.
no.

I told you the context of that "knock them out" bit, so since you have been totally destroyed with that argument you now need to provide an actual example of Trump calling for violence.


- "Knock the crap out" -> Ok to punch someone -> personal call for violence
- Anti-Muslim ban or Mexican illegal immigrants are all rapists or murderers -> statements against groups

It's an escalation. It does not need to be specifically targeted statements against groups that call for violence - the listener makes that connection on their own.

Well that's an interesting theory. Trump makes an offhand comment telling people to knock someone out if they are about to assault him, and separately he calls for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the country and says illegal aliens bring crime with them, and the listener jumps to conclusions...but when Hillary accuses Trump of inciting violence on just about everyone but straight while males, then calls Trump supporters irredeemable deplorables it's not a reasonable leap for people to hear this and think it's okay to attack a defenseless homeless woman because she happens to be a Trump supporter?

[Tgo01]

I especially love the LA times article mentioned in the CBS article.

Headline reads: "LAPD searches for Trump supporter harassed after allegedly making racial slurs in Hollywood"

Yes, gotta make sure we establish right in the headline that the homeless lady was asking for it.

[drauz]

There's a second study - that's what the NYTimes article was referring to.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3110202-SPECIAL-STATUS-REPORT-v5-9-16-16.html

You may find this one more tightly written and researched. Pages 26-34 of this report evaluates whether there was a Bush effect in reducing anti-Muslim violence after 9/11 and whether there is a Trump effect that is increasing anti-Muslim violence.

I didn't have time to look at the entire article, but I was able to skim some of it. What I saw was pretty piss poor evidence that Trump has any effect on anti-muslim violence. I'm referring to page 29-33. There are so many other factors that he doesn't seem to take into effect.

Then there is the fact that there is no "center for study of hate and extremism". It is literally just the author. Its a letterhead "center".

https://rkeefe57.wordpress.com/tag/center-for-the-study-of-hate-and-extremism/

[Tgo01]

Then there is the fact that there is no "center for study of hate and extremism". It is literally just the author. Its a letterhead "center".

https://rkeefe57.wordpress.com/tag/center-for-the-study-of-hate-and-extremism/

:lolwave:

[Warriorbird]

So you agree it has nothing to do with jailing his political opponent simply because it's his political opponent? Glad we got that cleared up.

You claiming stuff that people didn't say at all seems to be pretty standard in this thread. Jane Sanders hasn't been threatened because Sanders isn't his political opponent.

[Tgo01]

You claiming stuff that people didn't say at all seems to be pretty standard in this thread.

So you are saying Trump wants to lock up his political opponents? Trump might have went up against Bernie's wife? wut?

[drauz]

You claiming stuff that people didn't say at all seems to be pretty standard in this thread. Jane Sanders hasn't been threatened because Sanders isn't his political opponent.

Did Trump threaten any of the Republican's wives he was running against?

[Warriorbird]

So you are saying Trump wants to lock up his political opponents? Trump might have went up against Bernie's wife? wut?

Just because your goal is to be belligerent doesn't mean he wouldn't have used the strategy. Then we would've had some dogwhistling on Sanders's Judaism mixed with bashing him for atheism at the same time. Its Donald Trump. He's reprehensible.


Did Trump threaten any of the Republican's wives he was running against?

Funny you'd say that because yes.

[Tgo01]

Just because your goal is to be belligerent doesn't mean he wouldn't have used the strategy. Then we would've had some dogwhistling on Sanders's Judaism mixed with bashing him for atheism at the same time. Its Donald Trump. He's reprehensible.

I'm just curious why you think Trump would have threatened to jail Sanders' wife instead of Sanders himself, but Trump threatens to jail Hillary herself?

If he's going after political opponents for the sheer fact that they are his political opponents then why isn't he being consistent here?

[drauz]

Funny you'd say that because yes.

Are you talking about Ted Cruz's wife?

[Warriorbird]

I'm just curious why you think Trump would have threatened to jail Sanders' wife instead of Sanders himself, but Trump threatens to jail Hillary herself?

If he's going after political opponents for the sheer fact that they are his political opponents then why isn't he being consistent here?

He goes after the the easiest possible attack point, valid or not. He would've tried to have Jeb Bush prosecuted (if he made it that far) but he threatened Ted Cruz's wife. Pretty standard dictatorial rise to power stuff. Later on he threatened Cruz himself.


Are you talking about Ted Cruz's wife?

Yep!

[Tgo01]

He goes after the the easiest possible attack point, valid or not.

So he "goes after" people who have been accused of breaking the law?

The bastard. Doesn't he know the political elite are immune from prosecution?

[drauz]

He goes after the the easiest possible attack point, valid or not. He would've tried to have Jeb Bush prosecuted (if he made it that far) but he threatened Ted Cruz's wife. Pretty standard dictatorial rise to power stuff.

You mean after a super PAC posted ads of a nude Melania Trump? What was the threat? Be careful or I'll spill the beans on Heidi... Thats a pretty small threat.

[Warriorbird]

So he "goes after" people who have been accused of breaking the law?

The bastard. Doesn't he know the political elite are immune from prosecution?

People that've never been accused as well. He threatened the Ricketts family for solely running ads against him. Naturally you'd like that sort of thing.


You mean after a super PAC posted ads of a nude Melania Trump? What was the threat? Be careful or I'll spill the beans on Heidi... Thats a pretty small threat.

The combination of outting her mental health status and getting her in legal trouble over what she did at Goldman might be small to you but was likely not small to them.

Melania's stuff had also been public for years. He bragged about it on Stern.

[Tgo01]

People that've never been accused as well. He threatened the Ricketts family for solely running ads against him. Naturally you'd like that sort of thing.

I had to Google this because I've never heard of it before. All I could find was Trump threatening to take out ads on the Ricketts and that he said they "better be careful."

[Methais]

I think if Sanders had been nominated Trump would've said he'd throw Sanders's wife in jail and brought up Sanders's Judaism.

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/adventuretimewithfinnandjake/images/d/d5/Zoidberg_This_Post_Is_Bad.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130618000157

[Warriorbird]

I had to Google this because I've never heard of it before. All I could find was Trump threatening to take out ads on the Ricketts and that he said they "better be careful."

"I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $'s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 22, 2016"

http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-cubs/cubs-chairman-ricketts-its-surreal-when-donald-trump-threatens-your-mom


http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/adventuretimewithfinnandjake/images/d/d5/Zoidberg_This_Post_Is_Bad.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130618000157

I'm sorry that I say true stuff about your candidate that makes you feel uncomfortable. Remember when he attacked a judge his Vice Presidential candidate appointed because he was born in Mexico?

[Tgo01]

"I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $'s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 22, 2016"

Yeah that's like, what I said.

So from that you get that Trump was threatening to put them in jail if he became president?

I think you're getting a bit unhinged, WB.

[drauz]

The combination of outting her mental health status and getting her in legal trouble over what she did at Goldman might be small to you but was likely not small to them.

Melania's stuff had also been public for years. He bragged about it on Stern.

Did he get her in trouble or did the Cruz family just get outed for doing something illegal?

[drauz]

Yeah that's like, what I said.

So from that you get that Trump was threatening to put them in jail if he became president?

I think you're getting a bit unhinged, WB.

He won't be able to come up with a single instance outside of HRC that he said he would throw someone in jail. He is broadening what was originally being discussed because he is realizing his "true stuff" ain't so true.

[Warriorbird]

Yeah that's like, what I said.

So from that you get that Trump was threatening to put them in jail if he became president?

I think you're getting a bit unhinged, WB.

I forgot. You're the only one who's allowed to make claims.


He won't be able to come up with a single instance outside of HRC that he said he would throw someone in jail. He is broadening what was originally being discussed because he is realizing his "true stuff" ain't so true.

You can deafen yourself to the threats if you want. It doesn't mean they weren't made.

[drauz]

You can deafen yourself to the threats if you want. It doesn't mean they weren't made.

I'm not saying they aren't threats, even Tg01 I believe will agree to that. That wasn't the discussion though was it? You said he would threaten to send Sander's wife to jail because he said he would send HRC to jail. If he was threatening Bill you would have a stronger argument but you haven't made that case. Its funny to me because there are so many legitimate reasons to hate the guy, why the fuck would you need to make shit up?

[Warriorbird]

I'm not saying they aren't threats, even Tg01 I believe will agree to that. That wasn't the discussion though was it? You said he would threaten to send Sander's wife to jail because he said he would send HRC to jail. If he was threatening Bill you would have a stronger argument but you haven't made that case. Its funny to me because there are so many legitimate reasons to hate the guy, why the fuck would you need to make shit up?

I haven't made anything up. He has a pattern of threatening his opponents. There's a reasonable suspicion that he would've targeted Sanders's wife, like Cruz's. If he hadn't beaten down Cruz's campaign he likely would've gone after Cruz himself. He would've gone after Rubio personally, because that would've been an easy claim for him to make.

EDIT:

Now Bill is being pursued... as we spoke.

[Tgo01]

I haven't made anything up. He has a pattern of threatening his opponents. There's a reasonable suspicion that he would've targeted Sanders's wife, like Cruz's. If he hadn't beaten down Cruz's campaign he likely would've gone after Cruz himself. He would've gone after Rubio personally, because that would've been an easy claim for him to make.

And again Obama made a vague threat about going after Bush (the person he was seeking to replace) if he became president.

Your beef seems to be that Trump is more upfront about his attacks than most. Well, other than Hillary calling over a quarter of the country irredeemable deplorables.

[Warriorbird]

And again Obama made a vague threat about going after Bush (the person he was seeking to replace) if he became president.

Your beef seems to be that Trump is more upfront about his attacks than most. Well, other than Hillary calling over a quarter of the country irredeemable deplorables.

That wasn't a vague threat of going after Bush. That was saying he wouldn't.

Suggesting Trump's voters were deplorable (which unlike Trump, she apologized for.... no wonder you like him) isn't a threat.

[drauz]

I haven't made anything up. He has a pattern of threatening his opponents. There's a reasonable suspicion that he would've targeted Sanders's wife, like Cruz's. If he hadn't beaten down Cruz's campaign he likely would've gone after Cruz himself. He would've gone after Rubio personally, because that would've been an easy claim for him to make.

EDIT:

Now Bill is being pursued... as we spoke.

You should run for office, you dodge questions well.

[Tgo01]

That wasn't a vague threat of going after Bush. That was saying he wouldn't.

Wut?


Suggesting Trump's voters were deplorable (which unlike Trump, she apologized for.... no wonder you like him) isn't a threat.

She apologized, give me a break. It wasn't like a spur of the moment comment she made on the campaign trail while answering some reporter's question, it was a planned out speech. She's only sorry for the backlash it caused, not because she felt sorry.

And you're right, it wasn't a threat, it was an attack. You said Trump would have "went after" Cruz if Cruz started winning. By "go after" did you mean attack, or threaten? I'll grant you he would have attacked Cruz, but this is nothing new in American politics.

If you meant threaten (with jail especially since that was your original point) then that's just speculation on your part.

Heck, Hillary was implicit in her threat on Obama's life in 2008. Here, even SNOPES! says it's true.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-rfk-comment/

And yes this is a "BUT DEMOCRATS!" comment because you seem to be making the case that Trump is special in his attacks on his political opponents. Which is just strange.

[Warriorbird]

Wut?



She apologized, give me a break. It wasn't like a spur of the moment comment she made on the campaign trail while answering some reporter's question, it was a planned out speech. She's only sorry for the backlash it caused, not because she felt sorry.

And you're right, it wasn't a threat, it was an attack. You said Trump would have "went after" Cruz if Cruz started winning. By "go after" did you mean attack, or threaten? I'll grant you he would have attacked Cruz, but this is nothing new in American politics.

If you meant threaten (with jail especially since that was your original point) then that's just speculation on your part.

Heck, Hillary was implicit in her threat on Obama's life in 2008. Here, even SNOPES! says it's true.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-rfk-comment/

And yes this is a "BUT DEMOCRATS!" comment because you seem to be making the case that Trump is special in his attacks on his political opponents. Which is just strange.

If you believe that the Ted Cruz affair stuff wouldn't have been pursued and attempts made to launch investigations on Heidi for Goldman stuff and Ted for his affairs I have a bridge to sell you.

Please tell me how you were harmed other than in your sense of indignation because Hillary called you deplorable.

[Tgo01]

If you believe that the Ted Cruz affair stuff wouldn't have been pursued and attempts made to launch investigations on Heidi for Goldman stuff and Ted for his affairs I have a bridge to sell you.

Of course he would have went after Ted Cruz and the "affair stuff." Shit, Hillary and every Democrat are going after Trump and his rape allegations, aren't they? What point exactly are you trying to make here?

And yeah, well, if Heidi did break the law, then why shouldn't there be inquiries into it? I don't understand this line of argument. And then you go on to liken this to dictators. Serious question, is this how dictators came into power, threatening to investigate the crimes political rivals had committed prior to being elected into office?

Or did dictators charge their political rivals with new crimes after they came into power? Or were they charged on trumped up charges? Or were they tried for fake charges in a kangaroo court?

Saying politicians shouldn't be tried for the crimes they have committed seems to be the exact reason some people are supporting Trump to begin with.

[Warriorbird]

Of course he would have went after Ted Cruz and the "affair stuff." Shit, Hillary and every Democrat are going after Trump and his rape allegations, aren't they? What point exactly are you trying to make here?

And yeah, well, if Heidi did break the law, then why shouldn't there be inquiries into it? I don't understand this line of argument. And then you go on to liken this to dictators. Serious question, is this how dictators came into power, threatening to investigate the crimes political rivals had committed prior to being elected into office?

Or did dictators charge their political rivals with new crimes after they came into power? Or were they charged on trumped up charges? Or were they tried for fake charges in a kangaroo court?

Saying politicians shouldn't be tried for the crimes they have committed seems to be the exact reason some people are supporting Trump to begin with.

It's telling just how good you are at rationalizing the tactics that you then complain about other politicians doing.

I'm sure you'll be gratified if he wins and we all get thrown in jail because we're "subhuman" after all.

I wonder who else called people subhuman?

[Tgo01]

It's telling just how good you are at rationalizing the tactics that you then complain about other politicians doing.

Huh?

[drauz]

If you believe that the Ted Cruz affair stuff wouldn't have been pursued and attempts made to launch investigations on Heidi for Goldman stuff and Ted for his affairs I have a bridge to sell you.

Well of course they would be pursued, but Trump wouldn't have to do anything but light the fire. New organizations would take care of the rest. What do you think this proves?

[Warriorbird]

Well of course they would be pursued, but Trump wouldn't have to do anything but light the fire. New organizations would take care of the rest. What do you think this proves?

He attempts to put his political opponents (or their close relatives) in jail. Exactly what I stated to begin with.

Tgo01 seems to think he's a saint and those of us who oppose him are subhuman.

[Tgo01]

I'm sure you'll be gratified if he wins and we all get thrown in jail because we're "subhuman" after all.

I wonder who else called people subhuman?

Oh Jesus Christ, are you calling me a Nazi now?

Let me guess, I'm also a racist and was "dog-whistling" when I called them thugs too, right?

[Tgo01]

Tgo01 seems to think he's a saint and those of us who oppose him are subhuman.

You are seriously becoming unhinged. When did I say everyone who opposes me is subhuman?

[Warriorbird]

Oh Jesus Christ, are you calling me a Nazi now?

I don't know. There's a whole collection of thrilling people who call people subhuman (yet miraculously seem to think they have some sort of moral high ground.) I was thinking of another group but if you want to be a Nazi... I know you want to be called things because that makes you feel validated in being belligerent on the Internet and raging out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch

I was just referencing Ted Nugent.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/24/nugent-insists-subhuman-mongrel-comments-not-racist-promises-to-stop-calling-people-names/


You are seriously becoming unhinged. When did I say everyone who opposes me is subhuman?

You've got a "stuff you posted" problem. Much like Trump. We're also apparently "pathetic degenerates."

Were you drunk?

Did you have a psychotic break?

Are you multiaccounting your PC posts?

[drauz]

He attempts to put his political opponents (or their close relatives) in jail. Exactly what I stated to begin with.

Well you're certainly entitled to you opinion, I think you're way off on this though.

[Tgo01]

I don't know. There's a whole collection of thrilling people who call people subhuman (yet miraculously seem to think they have some sort of moral high ground.) I was thinking of another group but if you want to be a Nazi... I know you want to be called things because that makes you feel validated in being belligerent on the Internet and raging out.

*****https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch*****

Uh...so the group you were referring to was indeed Nazis? What?


You've got a "stuff you posted" problem. Much like Trump. We're also apparently "pathetic degenerates."

Were you drunk?

Did you have a psychotic break?

Are you multiaccounting your PC posts?

You might need to step away from the computer for a bit. I said most Democrats are subhuman, yes it was a bit of hyperbole on my part but considering I said "proof" then relinked the original video I thought it was pretty obvious what I was referring to.

I never once said or even came close to implying that everyone who "opposes" me is subhuman. If you think I'm going to apologize or feel bad for calling out subhuman behavior when I see it then you are very mistaken.

[Warriorbird]

Uh...so the group you were referring to was indeed Nazis? What?

Ted Nugent fans.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/24/nugent-insists-subhuman-mongrel-comments-not-racist-promises-to-stop-calling-people-names/



You might need to step away from the computer for a bit. I said most Democrats are subhuman, yes it was a bit of hyperbole on my part but considering I said "proof" then relinked the original video I thought it was pretty obvious what I was referring to.

I never once said or even came close to implying that everyone who "opposes" me is subhuman. If you think I'm going to apologize or feel bad for calling out subhuman behavior when I see it then you are very mistaken.

So you said what I said you said but "I need to step away from the computer."

I think you might want to reflect on that a bit.

[Tgo01]

So you said what I said you said but "I need to step away from the computer."

I think you might want to reflect on that a bit.


Tgo01 seems to think he's a saint and those of us who oppose him are subhuman.


Why am I not surprised to see we couldn't have another rare moment like that for this story? Simple answer: most liberals are sub human.

Proof:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoZ_utS0LuA

Yes, I really do think you need to step away from the computer.

[Warriorbird]

Yes, I really do think you need to step away from the computer.

You said most people who oppose you are subhuman. I'm not the one who has a problem with the majority of 50% of the population. Most implies a majority.

I mean... you take your cues from Ted Nugent, after all.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/20/ted-nugent-who-wants-obama-hillary-killed-stars-in-new-trump-ad.html

Classy guy. Unless you still want to own that Nazi thing?

[drauz]

Oh and HRC never actually apologized for her "deplorables" comment. I think its actually really funny that she calls racists irredeemable, you know since her "mentor" was a former KKK member.

[Warriorbird]

Oh and HRC never actually apologized for her "deplorables" comment. I think its actually really funny that she calls racists irredeemable.

Something's better than the nothing from the Trump camp. Hell, I've even spent a couple of days trying to give a fair shake to somebody who declared that most of 50% of the population are subhuman.

[drauz]

You said most people who oppose you are subhuman. I'm not the one who has a problem with the majority of 50% of the population. Most implies a majority.

I mean... you take your cues from Ted Nugent, after all.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/20/ted-nugent-who-wants-obama-hillary-killed-stars-in-new-trump-ad.html

Classy guy. Unless you still want to own that Nazi thing?

Do you support everything every HRC supporter does, just because you also support Hillary?

[Tgo01]

You said most people who oppose you are subhuman. I'm not the one who has a problem with the majority of 50% of the population. Most implies a majority.

I mean... you take your cues from Ted Nugent, after all.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/20/ted-nugent-who-wants-obama-hillary-killed-stars-in-new-trump-ad.html

So I'm a Nazi who wants to kill Harry Ried, Hillary, and Obama because I used the word subhuman to describe what I viewed as subhuman behavior? And oh yeah, I want Trump to get elected so he can jail everyone who "opposes" me.

And oh yeah, I'm racist for referring to thugs as thugs. Did I miss any other wild accusations based on my usage of two words?

[Warriorbird]

So I'm a Nazi who wants to kill Harry Ried, Hillary, and Obama because I used the word subhuman to describe what I viewed as subhuman behavior? And oh yeah, I want Trump to get elected so he can jail everyone who "opposes" me.

And oh yeah, I'm racist for referring to thugs as thugs. Did I miss any other wild accusations based on my usage of two words?

Ted Nugent's not a Nazi. He's a Republican.

I wasn't suggesting you were a Nazi. You came to that all yourself. You want it badly so it can play into your persecution complex... after calling most of 50% of the population subhuman.

[Warriorbird]

Do you support everything every HRC supporter does, just because you also support Hillary?

I don't. I don't suggest that most of the people who oppose me are subhuman and expect to somehow have the moral high ground over Hillary though.

[Tgo01]

I wasn't suggesting you were a Nazi.

Right. Right. The Nazis started a whole movement be describing people they didn't like as subhuman, Ted Nugent apparently referred to one person as subhuman one time, CLEARLY you were referring to Ted Nugent.


You came to that all yourself.

:rofl:


You want it badly so it can play into your persecution complex...

:rofl:

[Warriorbird]

Right. Right. The Nazis started a whole movement be describing people they didn't like as subhuman, Ted Nugent apparently referred to one person as subhuman one time, CLEARLY you were referring to Ted Nugent.



:rofl:



:rofl:

So why exactly did you use that phrase? What's the etymology of it?

Absolutely your persecution complex.

"Let me dogwhistle so people will call me racist! Yes! Validation!"

Then you somehow think you're better.

[Tgo01]

I don't. I don't suggest that most of the people who oppose me are subhuman and expect to somehow have the moral high ground over Hillary though.

Oh is that what your point is?

Cute. I'm not running for president in case you haven't noticed. I'm not trying to be a leader of an entire nation while calling a quarter of said entire nation irredeemable deplorables.

If Hillary wanted to be a real leader and still stick to her "But Trump's supporters are racists! LOL!" She would have made the point that while they may be racist, with the right kind of leadership and policies and leading by example they too can be "good" Americans one day.

Instead she went in the entire opposite direction and said these people are irredeemable un-Americans. Yeah, because that's what you want to hear from your future president.

[Tgo01]

"Let me dogwhistle so people will call me racist! Yes! Validation!"


Let me guess, I'm also a racist and was "dog-whistling" when I called them thugs too, right?

Did I call it or what?

It's scary how good I am sometimes, maybe I should run for president.

[Warriorbird]

Oh is that what your point is?

Cute. I'm not running for president in case you haven't noticed. I'm not trying to be a leader of an entire nation while calling a quarter of said entire nation irredeemable deplorables.

If Hillary wanted to be a real leader and still stick to her "But Trump's supporters are racists! LOL!" She would have made the point that while they may be racist, with the right kind of leadership and policies and leading by example they too can be "good" Americans one day.

Instead she went in the entire opposite direction and said these people are irredeemable un-Americans. Yeah, because that's what you want to hear from your future president.

That's classic.

"I just did this thing but Hillary can't!"

Why exactly don't you extend the same concept to Donald Trump?

Oh wait! You don't have a leg to stand on. Got it.


Did I call it or what?

It's scary how good I am sometimes, maybe I should run for president.

You used a phrase that came to English from Nazi ideology, is frequently used by the KKK, and is most kindly ascribed to a total nutcase... and you think I have a problem?

I wonder what phrases you can use next to play to your persecution complex. Will the next one be about Hispanics?

[drauz]

That's classic.

"I just did this thing but Hillary can't!"

I'm pretty sure its the whole part about him not running for President but she is..

I don't agree with TG and think his liberal comment was stupid, but he also isn't running for President. That does make a huge difference.

[Warriorbird]

I'm pretty sure its the whole part about him not running for President but she is..

I don't agree with TG and think his liberal comment was stupid, but he also isn't running for President. That does make a huge difference.

She wouldn't have been my first choice (and I voted for Bernie in the primary)... but when the comparison is Donald Trump it's kinda tough to act like he's somehow better.

[drauz]

I don't. I don't suggest that most of the people who oppose me are subhuman and expect to somehow have the moral high ground over Hillary though.

He also didn't have a KKK mentor ( I hope) who reformed and then say racists are irredeemable. Sounds rather contradictory, no?

[Warriorbird]

He also didn't have a KKK mentor ( I hope) who reformed and then say racists are irredeemable. Sounds rather contradictory, no?

From his housing lawsuits to the Central Park Five to his comments about Mexicans (in spite of Tgo01's valiant rationalization of them) he has zero leg to stand on. Neither one really do in that regard, given "super predators" and the like. They're both going to steadfastly declare they have no racial issues.

I prefer Hillary's immigration policies.

[drauz]

She wouldn't have been my first choice (and I voted for Bernie in the primary)... but when the comparison is Donald Trump it's kinda tough to act like he's somehow better.

I agree that he isn't better. I think she is better but its not by much and the bar is so low for this election that we may need James Cameron to find it for the next one.

[Tgo01]

You used a phrase that came to English from Nazi ideology

Well that's strange, according to Merriam-Webster the word has been used in English since 1793, pretty sure that was a while before Nazis arrived. But don't let facts get in the way of your righteous indignation.

[Warriorbird]

Well that's strange, according to Merriam-Webster the word has been used in English since 1793, pretty sure that was a while before Nazis arrived. But don't let facts get in the way of your righteous indignation.

Nice job not reading about Untermensch. Kinda a cute purposeful dodge you worked on. I wonder if we can find some other groups that call people subhuman.

Will your next word be about Native Americans? Asians?

[drauz]

From his housing lawsuits to the Central Park Five to his comments about Mexicans (in spite of Tgo01's valiant rationalization of them) he has zero leg to stand on. Neither one really do in that regard, given "super predators" and the like. They're both going to steadfastly declare they have no racial issues.

I prefer Hillary's immigration policies.

Honestly I don't like either of their immigration policies. Once I heard her say she would like to take a lot more Syrian refugees, I was off that ship.

[Warriorbird]

Honestly I don't like either of their immigration policies. Once I heard her say she would like to take a lot more Syrian refugees, I was off that ship.

Easier to blatantly spy on Muslims here. We blatantly spy on everyone.

[drauz]

Nice job not reading about Untermensch. Kinda a cute purposeful dodge you worked on. I wonder if we can find some other groups that call people subhuman.

Will your next word be about Native Americans? Asians?

Untermenschen
German word meaning "sub-humans," used by Nazis to refer to the groups they deemed "undesirable."

Or rather people who are irredeemable perhaps?

[drauz]

Easier to blatantly spy on Muslims here. We blatantly spy on everyone.

Do... you actually believe that?

[Warriorbird]

Untermenschen
German word meaning "sub-humans," used by Nazis to refer to the groups they deemed "undesirable."

Or rather people who are irredeemable perhaps?

So, again, he's not better than somebody he critiques? Yeah, I follow.

I still wish we had Vice Presidents to pick from. I'd probably go for Kaine but I actually respect Weld quite a bit.


Do... you actually believe that?

If the choice is between here and Europe? Yes. We do a better job than the EU. I'd prefer they remain in countries with similar varieties of Islam though.

[drauz]

So, again, he's not better than somebody he critiques? Yeah, I follow.

Agreed, hes not better but hes also not about to become the most powerful person in the US. You aren't comparing things that are a like.


I still wish we had Vice Presidents to pick from. I'd probably go for Kaine but I actually respect Weld quite a bit.

So you support Ted Nuget's idea to kill HRC?!

[Warriorbird]

Agreed, hes not better but hes also not about to become the most powerful person in the US. You aren't comparing things that are a like.

I prefer her nonsense to Trump's.


So you support Ted Nugent's idea to kill HRC?!

I'd like it if they somehow both cancelled each other out, Trump and Hillary, but sadly it doesn't work like that. I'm embarrassed when I explain about both of them to the foreign exchange students that show up to my class.

[drauz]

I prefer her nonsense to Trump's.

I can't bring myself to vote for her, even though I think she is better than Trump (not by much). I think that her position are all over the fucking place. She changes her "ideals" with whatever flavor of the month it happens to be. She doesn't seem to have any real morals, nothing that she has stood up for throughout her life. There is nothing I have seen with her that is constant.

[drauz]

Want to know something fun I just found out yesterday and was just remembering. The guy who shot up the CIA HQ in 93'(?) used to work in my office.

[Methais]

I'm sorry that I say true stuff about your candidate that makes you feel uncomfortable. Remember when he attacked a judge his Vice Presidential candidate appointed because he was born in Mexico?

Since when does straw man = true stuff?

How is this "true stuff"?


I think if Sanders had been nominated Trump would've said he'd throw Sanders's wife in jail and brought up Sanders's Judaism

Typically if something starts with "I think if..." means that it's opinion, as opposed to fact.

Do you know the difference between fact and opinion? I'm sure instead of answering this, you'll respond with typical WB deflection and start on some other random unrelated shit in hopes that the question being asked will be forgotten.

Trump wants to put Hillary in jail because she's a criminal.

Lefties want to put Trump in jail because he hurts their feelings with mean safe space violating words.

[jumbodog]

Why is HRC a criminal exactly? All we have for evidence is the fact that she's been investigated a crap ton of times and each time been acquitted/not been prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. To me, that makes her more, not less, trustworthy.

[Parkbandit]

Why is HRC a criminal exactly? All we have for evidence is the fact that she's been investigated a crap ton of times and each time been acquitted/not been prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. To me, that makes her more, not less, trustworthy.

lolwut?

[Wrathbringer]

Why is HRC a criminal exactly? All we have for evidence is the fact that she's been investigated a crap ton of times and each time been acquitted/not been prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. To me, that makes her more, not less, trustworthy.

People like you are the problem.

[crb]

Why is HRC a criminal exactly? All we have for evidence is the fact that she's been investigated a crap ton of times and each time been acquitted/not been prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. To me, that makes her more, not less, trustworthy.

The head of the FBI said she broke the law, but he said that "no prosecutor would take this case." Do you understand the difference? He didn't say they lacked evidence, he laid out the evidence very clearly and said it was factual, he said a prosecutor would not take the case.

Why is this? Because she is Hillary Clinton and running for president. She is above the law, she isn't innocent.

[Neveragain]

So you support Ted Nuget's idea to kill HRC?!

They don't call him the motor city madman for nothn'


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNLmi0_216g

That fucking rocks.

[Parkbandit]

They don't call him the motor city madman for nothn'


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNLmi0_216g

That fucking rocks.

He's a lunatic.

[Warriorbird]

Since when does straw man = true stuff?

How is this "true stuff"?



Typically if something starts with "I think if..." means that it's opinion, as opposed to fact.

Do you know the difference between fact and opinion? I'm sure instead of answering this, you'll respond with typical WB deflection and start on some other random unrelated shit in hopes that the question being asked will be forgotten.

Trump wants to put Hillary in jail because she's a criminal.

Lefties want to put Trump in jail because he hurts their feelings with mean safe space violating words.

Busting your candidate on stuff he said is not a "straw man."

I absolutely know the difference between fact and opinion. It was entirely unconnected to my previous reference.

But it's typical that you follow it up with pretending Trump's never done anything to be accused of.

[Wrathbringer]

Busting your candidate on stuff he said is not a "straw man."

I absolutely know the difference between fact and opinion. It was entirely unconnected to my previous reference.

But it's typical that you follow it up with pretending Trump's never done anything to be accused of.

He's not a politician. Why are you surprised when he doesn't talk like one?

[Methais]

Busting your candidate on stuff he said is not a "straw man."

I absolutely know the difference between fact and opinion. It was entirely unconnected to my previous reference.

But it's typical that you follow it up with pretending Trump's never done anything to be accused of.

I know what Trump said about that judge. I also wasn't referring to that.

Let's try again. Explain how this is fact and not opinion:


I think if Sanders had been nominated Trump would've said he'd throw Sanders's wife in jail and brought up Sanders's Judaism

[Methais]

Why is HRC a criminal exactly? All we have for evidence is the fact that she's been investigated a crap ton of times and each time been acquitted/not been prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. To me, that makes her more, not less, trustworthy.

I didn't know time4fun had a troll account.

[Androidpk]

Why is HRC a criminal exactly? All we have for evidence is the fact that she's been investigated a crap ton of times and each time been acquitted/not been prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. To me, that makes her more, not less, trustworthy.

:lol2:

[Warriorbird]

I know what Trump said about that judge. I also wasn't referring to that.

Let's try again. Explain how this is fact and not opinion:

That simply wasn't what I was referring to. I'm sorry that doesn't play into your "OMG GOTCHA" game that helps insure the thread is terrible.

[Methais]

That simply wasn't what I was referring to.

But it's what I was referring to. From your post. I'm sorry that confuses you so much.

[Latrinsorm]

The head of the FBI said she broke the law,"We cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges [against Secretary Clinton] on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

You are wrong, and you have always been wrong.

[Taernath]

You are wrong, and you have always been wrong.

http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Faye-Valentine-Shots-Fired-On-Cowboy-Bebop-Anime.gif

[drauz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIAjIByVgdk