As much as I don’t want to encourage this, because it’s not the US I want to exist, but I feel like we’re quite past that point. Trump and his cabal have more blood on their hands than we could possibly imagine, and they intend to keep going further and further, very openly too. History has show us time and time again how “democracies” fall, the ruling liberals being “tolerant” and allowing this shit to happen while claiming that THEY are TOTALLY winning. Since the democrats aren’t even going to bother with any real campaigning or compromising to appeal to the people, what else is left? We are getting dangerously close to a kill or be killed scenario.
Well things are about to get a whole lot worse. That raised fist is going to be printed on all the right-wing crazy stuff and they will use this to justify violence against anyone opposing Trump.
It isn’t though. There is maybe a 0.01% chance that this was a false flag.
I know what’s happening is hard to swallow, and the ramifications are deeply troubling, but try not to succumb to baseless conspiracy theories.
There’s plenty of motive. An attendee was killed. The shooter was killed by Secret Service. There’s not really a reason to think this didn’t actually happen, except for cognitive dissonance.
Your point is that you think you’re allowed to spread misinformation if that misinformation sounds like it maybe could be true. This is the rationale of every conspiracy theorist ever. You’re not making an intellectually honest point here.
If your point is that you’re a dishonest person who cares more about narrative than facts, point received.
I think being unsure either way makes perfect sense. You gotta admit it doesn’t really line up with Trump’s character to be posing for the cameras if he’s actually being shot at. Though tou’re not wrong to say, that that isn’t proof of anything. It’s subjective feeling.
But, I think saying it’s entirely unlikely this was orchestrated isn’t right either.
Well, a conspiracy requires evidence, and without evidence there’s no reason to treat the conspiracy theory as credible.
Saying 0% would be unrealistic because there’s always a chance, but if you actually believe that this is a 50/50 toss-up, you’re just delusional and desperate to feel some sense of enlightenment like every other conspiracy theories moron in the world.
Given that there is precisely zero evidence of what you are claiming, I’ll estimate as close to zero as I can without pretending it’s impossible.
But make no mistake, you are deliberately spreading disinformation.
I’m not claiming anything. It’s just really, really early after the event.
My choice of words was not ideal, and I apologize for that.
I’m just saying being unsure of what happened isn’t crazy so soon after the event.
You’re out here saying what is and is not likely based on your own feelings about what you feel is true.
It’s simply too early to say anything definitive about what level of conspiracy existed (in the traditional sense, of more than one person, conspiring).
I am not saying this was staged. I’m saying you’re jumping the gun, to say so confidently it wasn’t.
Q-Anon level thinking that somehow Trump is a mastermind of this. The dude who can’t hide stolen files properly, can’t lie on his taxes properly, and loses money on a casino, somehow has the ability to rig a false flag assassination attempt.
Are NeoLibs that so far into the Kool-Aid that Dipshit Trump is also a grandmaster 5D chess player of this, while not being able to string words together? It’s not like he’s even been a good actor.
It’s fun to indulge in, and it doesn’t change the fact that shit is about to hit the fan, regardless of whether the shooter was someone with a legitimate desire or a paid gunman. Trump was just given and used a golden ticket to both rally republicans to vote for him, and to incite his diehard followers into another insurrection.
Sure, but I don’t think being an ironic conspiracy theorist on the levels of Q-Anon is going to make anyone seem better.
Trump was already going to do that. Trump would do it if someone sneezed on him. They already considered him a martyr. They already wanted/have an Enabling Act. The only thing this changes is a bit less blood in him, and 3 people died. Trump already had higher polling numbers.
It won’t make anyone here seem better, I agree. But at the same time, it’s not like we’re going to have the opportunity to joke around like this after the inevitable happens.
You are comparing faking an assassination attempt, which has been done before in history already, vs a bunch of idiots believing JFK is going to revive in the middle of the street just because.
You must be a republican bot trying to divert that possibility or something, it’s wild if you’re an actual person with this 0 creativity in mind
Faking an assassination attempt doesn’t take more than 2 braincells to pull, and he most likely didn’t come up with the idea himself either.
You have to be a bot to believe no human being or person in power has pulled dumb shows like these to fake an illusion of strength, it’s incredible how gullible you are
"All right ear me big sniper guy, it’s going to be an attempted assassination, the biggest ever, you are going to shoot me close, like danger close but don’t worry I’m the best president, really I’m the best and you are the best sniper, the best sniper in the whole country. So you shoot me near the ear, near enough that blood comes out, I know scary stuff, but we are tough guys, the toughest so you do it and I resist and together we make the best attempted staged assassination ever"
“blue maga” implies that there is a cult of personality around Biden like there is around Trump. That is simple not what anyone opposed to Trump believes in or rallies around.
You mean the primarys for this election that Biden is the sitting president? Or primarys four years ago when he was the guy pushed immediately to the top before the primarys?
Are you really comparing this being possibly staged, which is very easy to do and many other presidents around the world have done it before already to “show strength”, as an equal to a bunch of maggots who believed JFK was going to revive in the middle of the street? What?
You are mocking democrats for believing a conspiracy theory that says this shooting was most likely staged.
You are putting that conspiracy theory on the same level as any Qanon theory, like the one where people believed JFK was going to resurrect in the middle of the street for no reason at all.
How the hell do those two even compare in your world?
How? What did you mean then, by democrats falling for “stupid conspiracy theories”? Which theories? And how are they more stupid than being antivax, anti face mask, believing the earth is flat, believing JFK will resurrect and go to the place to camp for hours waiting for it, the whole elites drinking adrenochrome dumbshit and such?
Elections were meant to be bloodless revolutions. Unfortunately with First Past The Post voting, the right options were not available to vote for. But we can change how we vote. We can make peaceful revolution possible with a more representative electoral system.
What’s worse is that the MAGA crowd has Trump and some other figures intentionally playing conspiracies up and adding weight to them. The guys on the left don’t even have the excuse of Biden and company bullshitting.
But why would you even think that people on the left are different from people on the right? This is why I’m not into politics myself. Because it all builds on some fake idea that one side is right about everything, even good people, while the other is wrong about everything, and probably are bad people as well.
In reality, both sides are very similar and have much more incommon with eachother than they have with the politicians they are trying to support.
My understanding is that on average there are differences in psychology between conservative and progressive people. For example, conservative people tend to be okay with unfairness, since from their point of view society is a hierarchy and of course the people at the top are better off.
Anyway, given that conservative and progressive people have a different vision of an ideal society and also different ideas about how to get there, it is reasonable to expect them at act differently. We know that most politically motivated violence is from the right.
I’m sure conservatives have the same views on the other side, something negative, based in fear. If you think about it, all of politics is fear of change in a direction we don’t want, but others do.
In a family when this happens, family members talk about it and try to understand eachother. At least in a good family. In a dysfunctional one, family members go to war with eachother. And that’s what I see in politics. There is no feeling of being humans on a ball together at all.
Considering he is in a crowd of angry gun obsessed extremists who have been cultivated to reject reality, I think there is a decent chance that this was one of his own. Maybe someone was pissed that he softened his stance on abortion. The so-called “pro-lifers” have murdered before.
We’re never going to know for certain. If they have a dead “gunman” then Trump Inc. gets to write their backstory. Bets that it somehow ends up being a “liberal” with a secret manifesto to be found later.
One of the videos you can hear “shooter down” before he gets up. Elderly, near death experience, and monumental arrogance would help explain his reaction pretty well!
Shooting him isn’t the way - but I can see why someone was scared enough to think it was. Just remember kids, voting for Biden isn’t just voting against trumpler - it’s saying you would literally prefer someone who is probably senile overhim. It’s a solid insult, and you should go out there on polling day to make sure he hears it.
Do not advocate or celebrate violence, please. Comments advocating violence will be deleted and bans will be issued.
Also, please avoid promoting conspiracies. Discussing current events is fine but suggesting things like “it’s a false flag” without evidence is spreading a conspiracy.
That’s not a justification for more violence, two wrongs don’t make a right. He was wrong for doing what he did and this is wrong as well. This is because political violence in it’s entirety is wrong. Jesus, do people not have principles anymore? Seeing all the supposedly moral people turn into Q anon level conspiracy theorists who condone violence is depressing.
Really? You don’t realize that the US didn’t join a war that started in 1939 until 1941 when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor … so was only part of the war for less than 4 years?
I think this poster is saying: “since you believe two wrongs don’t make a right, then when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, the correct thing to do in your view would to turn the other cheek.”
No, I’m just pointing out that your comparison is flawed. We didn’t know about the Holocaust until the war was almost over. The Soviets were the first to discover and liberate the camps back in 1944 (too bad they ended up having their own brutal camps) and the Americans liberated the first camp they discovered (Ohrdruf) in April 1945… the war in Europe was over in a month. That’s when the then general Eisenhower ordered the American soldiers to find the other camps, free the captives, and take pictures of everything they came across so Nazi crimes can be thoroughly documented and the American public can be made aware of them.
My point is that we didn’t intervene in the war because of what the Nazis were doing like you seem to imply, we intervened because we got attacked and declared war on.
Fair, but the situation is similar to what’s happening to Uyghurs in China right now. We know something is going on there, but it’s not exactly sufficient grounds to invade China and intervene.
I mean one could argue that Tibet is an invaded country, but that’s besides the point. The only way we would realistically intervene is if China decides to either invade an American ally like Taiwan, Japan, or South Korea or if they directly attack and declare war on the US proper. Even then, it would be quite a stretch for us to have soldiers reach western China, but if we did and if our soldiers found camps where people are imprisoned, then we would have a similar reaction to what we saw towards the end of WWII. However, until then, we don’t have sufficient grounds to invade a major world power.
The reasonable conservatives have already jumped off ship a long time ago and are now mostly either apolitical, independent, disenfranchised Democrat, or still a minority Republican opposing Trump. The only ones left that support Trump are his cult, and they will never see reason. However, we can’t get rid them with violence. It’s like what America tried to do with the Taliban or Israel is trying to do now with Hamas or what Saudi Arabia has tried to do with the Houthis, you can’t use violence to get rid of ideologies. The way to get rid of ideologies is to make them irrelevant. This can happen either by defeating them in democratic elections or using their track records to delegitimatize them or ignoring them or providing better alternatives or whatever. Political violence will only fuel them, and that is something I don’t want to see.
When it’s used as a means to achieve power in a democracy. Normalizing violence is not okay in general, but especially during democratic elections, and this applies to everybody regardless of who does it.
the word right has different meaning in different contexts, I assumed you were talking about human rights as in the legally protected privileges that are granted to people… idk wtf you’re talking about
The US invaded Iraq under GW Bush on a lie about WMD’s. Killed Saddam and countless Iraqis, including journalists, for nothing. The US invaded Afghanistan rather than negotiate with its ruling power to hand over Bin Laden, then didn’t get their hands on him for another decade even though the US won the war and took over the country from day 1. 20+ years of bloody occupation later you lost the war and the Taliban is back in power. Another pointess war started with deception. Don’t get me started on Vietnam. You guys have some twisted idea of democracy where the ‘Democrats’ don’t even elect their own candidates. Please stop exporting democracy. The world doesn’t want your perverse version. Hitler killed himself btw.
At a news conference in Islamabad, the Taliban ambassador said he was sorry that people had died in the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon last week, but appealed to the United States not to endanger innocent people in a military retaliation.
“Our position on this is that if America has proof, we are ready for the trial of Osama bin Laden in light of the evidence.”
Conflating a government or regime with an international terrorist organisation is the lie the propaganda told you to accept invading and occupying an impoverished foreign country that had just gone through a famine.
But these are vastly different situations. For the record, all three of these individuals used political violence to achieve political aims, that’s one of the reasons why history doesn’t remember them fondly. The constantly killed people they didn’t like under the justification that it’s for the greater good or self defense. Saddam Hussien did that when he genocided the Kurds in Iraq and the invasion Kuwait, Hitler did that with the Holocaust and the invasion of Europe, and Bin Laden did that with 9/11 and the other terrorist attacks he launched.
Keep in mind, we actually have a justice system in this country that actually works. If we want Trump to face justice it has to go through the justice where he faces trial and is found guilty based on evidence… which has already happened btw for one of his crimes. That’s how justice is handled in a civil democracy. We can’t have randos going on self righteous terrorism crusades killing political candidates they don’t like. If someone tried assassinate Biden, would you being say the same? Probably not, and rightfully so, but the terrorist who tried to kill would be making similar justifications to what you’re trying to make right now. The very idea is wrong.
Donald Trump intentionally and maliciously mishandled an epidemic and allowed it to turn pandemic for his own stupid and shortsighted political gains. He then intentionally hindered national response.
And then he intentionally incited a literal insurrection. He has absolutely employed political violence.
I’m not here to defend him. He’s one of the worst of the presidents in our history. His list of horrendous acts goes far beyond his pandemic response and the insurrection, and it goes was past his presidency too. He’s truly awful. But with that being said, things like assassinations and terrorism should not become normalized as a legitimate way of achieving political means.
The ends don’t justify the means politics, that’s how you end up with terrorism, tyrannical governments, and atrocities. I’m all for bringing Trump to justice, but it has be done through civil and democratic means via the established criminal justice system. If Trump goes through trial and is found guilty, which has already happened for one of his crimes, then our criminal justice system will punish him accordingly. If the punishments aren’t deemed harsh enough then we reform our punitive laws. We can’t have self righteous assholes going on terrorism crusades assassinating political candidates they don’t like. That’s a sign of a failed state.
True, which is why now is the most important time to condemn political violence, get people politically active, and vote to keep the fascist wannabes out of power.
There is a difference between background-level bulk sniffing and someone-here-maybe-incited-violence targeted sniffing. The former is data collection, which is passive in the form practiced by “the feds”. The latter is data connection, putting effort into connecting a subset of the data that has been collected to form a story. Data connections need a framing, a nucleation seed, an impetus for why the feds might think such a connection is interesting or relevant or worth adding to their story about a larger incident. Collecting data is cheap and done in bulk, partly because it can be done passively and partly because the US govt paid a lot of money on storage and collection mechanisms. Connecting data is something that requires a lot more time, effort, patience, and vetting to make sure you are doing it right.
Or you can give the job to generative AI and hope it doesn’t hallucinate that someone innocent is guilty; with a large enough data pool (ie the internet, reality, what-have-you) it’s possible to select a misleading subset to support whatever hallucination you want.
It’s easy to do wrong, which is exactly why you don’t want the feds sniffing around. Especially now that they have the tools to automate doing it wrong, and might not know how to use them yet.
yeah obviously, but it’s all the same at the end of the day. And they definitely have people actively sniffing around social media posts surrounding this at the moment.
Babbitt plus suicides, and other “natural” deaths.
On March 7, the District of Columbia’s Police and Firefighters’ Retirement and Relief Board declared that Metropolitan Police Officer Jeffrey Smith’s suicide in the days after the Jan. 6 riot was a line-of-duty death. The board concluded “that Officer Smith sustained a personal injury on January 6, 2021, while performing his duties and that his injury was the sole and direct cause of his death.
Well, yeah, I mean, we can go back a hundred years, conservatives will always be pushing violence and division whatever era you look at since they can’t hold power without it, I mostly mean it’s come out fully into the open since 2016. The mask dropped off completely and they’re no longer even pretending to be anything but the Confederacy 2.0.
I take issue with inaccurate language. This is how trains crash. A conspiracy is where 2 or more people plan something in secret. A conspiracy theory is where an outsider speculates about the nature of such plans. Also, without wanting to speculate myself, logically it was either a lone actor or a group conspiring, since it clearly wasn’t publicised in advance. I personally doubt it was some grand conspiracy.
Obviously someone set this up, bullets don’t just appear out of nowhere. It may have just been the gunman who acted entirely alone. We have no evidence that anyone worked with the gunman but what’s that saying about the absence of evidence?
You can’t use the English language in an openly misleading fashion and expect that people are going to go along with it, not in a situation like this. The expression “someone set this up” clearly implies the existence of a second person.
What made you think that another person is involved? Nothing. If we were to look at historical evidence, we would find that a lot of these situations are done by so-called lone wolf attackers. So if we’re going to blindly speculate, we should at least be consistent with historical evidence, and we should certainly speak unambiguously.
I know you have to say this, but holy shit do I disagree.
This person advocated significant violence and contributed to the deaths and loss of human rights of thousands. A good whack of the world would turn up hungover to work tomorrow after celebrating only a few inches over.
The best thing Trump could do is just die of natural causes after a long illness, so everyone can see his death coming and get used to the idea, and with no focusing point his merry band of lunatics dissolve back into the etha. They have always existed, but Trump acts as a catalyst to get them all worked up.
Trump is the problem since he is the leader of the cult. Without him they dont know who to follow. If Hitler had been assassinated in one the many attemps there might have still been a WW2 but depending on how early on he was assassinated millions of people would not have been killed in concentration camps. This would have been early enough to prevent much damage Trump will do. Better would have been 2016 but that didnt happen sadly.
Trump is absolutely the problem when he’s the mouthpiece of American fascism. Why are we pretending his death would be bad? We’re a couple years from having concentration camps in the US if he wins and everyone’s wringing their hands over this attempt at saving millions of lives by taking one.
Yea it might cause a civil war, that looks unavoidable at this point anyway. I’d rather civil war than concentration camps
And how do you kill the ideology? By having the most successful voice of it ultimately accomplish nothing and die as a sad old man.
There’s a reason his rhetoric has been: “The election was stolen!” Because that feeling is powerful, that they were right on the cusp of doing something great, if only the enemy hadn’t poisoned it. It’s got the right mix of victimization and hope that really motivates a movement. You’ll get that 10x now that he’s victimized. And you’d get it 20x if he’s martyred.
The only effective end to the tyrrany of their ideology when it had enough momentum wasn’t strong words and voting. MAGA is about three small steps from turning the US into a literal fascist state.
The only thing that holds authoritarian regimes like the MAGA crowd together are narcissists like Trump. They would collapse without someone as good at stoking their anger, and he really is the only one that is personally revered by the MAGA crowd. Sure, other grifters make money and get ciews, but nobody cares when the other grifters like Alex Jones face some justice.
He’s the only one because he’s still around. If he died yesterday we’d have someone new leading the charge by election time.
You’ve specifically pointed out ideologies that weren’t allowed to die because of how oppressed they were. I’m not suggesting we shouldn’t have fought the Nazis, but victory inherently creates an oppressed underdog that people love to rally around.
The ideologies that die are the ones that fail on their own and people lose faith in. Think monarchies, feudalism, mercantilism, the OG version of Communism, colonialism, etc… So ideally we won’t want to use force if at all possible. Let them lose election after election until they realize they’ve alienated too many people to ever be successful.
Ron DeSantis already tried. He only failed because Trump is still around. The GOP learned that they need to wait for him to leave the scene before they try again.
We can educate and shame a population for voicing their support for said fascism. In fact it was working pretty well until Trump made it ok to be a bigot publicly again. That’s what’s the whole MAGA thing is about
Advocating for violence to prevent a fascist from abolishing the democracy is the only acceptable violence. Sometimes a democracy has to be protected violently if it is too weak to protect itself. Trump allies always say its why they have the second amendment. Now that it is used against them they cry about it.
Violence is rarely good for anything as we have seen it just now. It would be better even if this guy shot at Biden that’s how counterproductive it is.
Modern problems aren’t solved with blood but with marketing. You cannot kill an idea but you can ridicule it
You cannot just eradicate everyone who opposes you. China tried, Soviets too. Now they have something vastly better - troll farms.
Eh I think you guys see what you want to see in my comment. I was talking about Russia. putin attacked Ukraine, it was insane in any case and what did he got out of it really?
The violence on Ukraine was just plain stupid.
I am kinda surprised and amused you take me for some pacifist goodie two shoes, other cheek blah blah. funny from my pov. Idk how you extracted that from my comment, I bet you will now continue to argue with something that doesn’t exist. My congratulations
Appeasement of an aggressor never works. History has taught this over and over and over again. We still haven’t learned I see. I’m mainly talking about Ukraine. Palestine is a lot more complex.
Not sure what you mean, but Ukraine and Zelensky have been marketing themselves all over the place. They need all the help they can get, and they are doing whatever they can to boost support. So far pootin hasn’t achieved his goals so it’s working.
Your last point is actually not a bad analysis - but it is missing that the ones operating their propaganda and troll farms already also control the violence monopoly. And both entities also use violence where they deem it practical.
Communism, not Fascism, or to protect workers’ rights if you go back far enough. We only got involved in fighting fascism because we were drawn into the war, otherwise it’s never been that big of an issue to Americans and many schools aren’t even allowed to teach about it anymore because “kids shouldn’t have to feel bad about something like that” or whatever excuses the far right is currently using to prevent their schools from teaching about Anne Frank, concentration camps, slavery, anything else they want to implement themselves.
NEW YORK — The leader of a conservative think tank orchestrating plans for a massive overhaul of the federal government in the event of a Republican presidential win said that the country is in the midst of a “second American Revolution” that will be bloodless “if the left allows it to be.”
Why, exactly, should we simply lie over and do nothing? How is calling for violence over this bad?
He said Monday’s decision — which gives presidents broad immunity from prosecution — is “vital” to ensure a president won’t have to “second guess, triple guess every decision they’re making in their official capacity.”
😬😬😬
Yeah, last thing I want is for the president to have to think through their decisions.
The post in question was removed for advocating violence. The mod log is public, including the original content, so it is not necessary to repost a removed comment for transparency.
Advocating for, or not advocating for, violence is a political stance. Many people defend Israel’s ongoing genocide and are not blocked from doing so. That doesn’t feel like the rules being consistently enforced. The people speculating on whether or not this is staged have access to the same information as everyone else, and in the spirit of true discourse, if it was seen to be false you could figure that out by discussion rather than censorship.
If you have evidence that it was staged, feel free to share it. If you don’t, then we ask that you not speculate. It’s no different than any other claim for which we’d require a basic amount of credible substantiation.
Speculating on an event that has already occured is not a “life or death situation” in the way spreading information that discourages the use of life-saving vaccines is.
So you’re making moderation policy based on an assumption that people who have been exposed to the idea that the shooting may have been staged are more likely to incite violence than people who haven’t been? You don’t have source for that stance do you? One could argue that believing it is a failed assassination attempt would also incite people to violence. If a comment in particular calls for violence, thats one thing, but what you’re saying is not logical.
You said you are restricting discussion on whether the assassination was staged because it is a life or death situation. You have not provided compelling evidence that one form of speculation is more or less “life or death” than another.
No, we did not. We are not restricting discussion (those are your words) because this is a life and death situation. We are requiring sources for life or death claims, and we are removing purely speculative and baseless assertions of fact, because this is a life and death situation.
We are not restricting discussion (those are your words) because this is a life and death situation.
we are removing purely speculative and baseless assertions of fact, because this is a life and death situation.
So one, like I said, it’s not really a life and death situation. And secondly, in the immediate aftermath of an event, practically everything is speculation.
So you’re kind of just imposing your opinion about the “life or death” situation thing. I see tons of posts advocating trans-medicalist views, that I would consider a life or death situation… but the comments removed are the ones using appropriately harsh language to call them out.
And yes, esp w the recent news that the shooter was a conservative. It makes sense to speculate.
NEW YORK — The leader of a conservative think tank orchestrating plans for a massive overhaul of the federal government in the event of a Republican presidential win said that the country is in the midst of a “second American Revolution” that will be bloodless “if the left allows it to be.”
It’s INSANE to me that you’d suggest we do nothing or even promote political violence over this.
The Lemmy.World content policy prohibits advocacy of violence. We are enforcing the rules of Lemmy, not our own personal preferences. If you prefer an instance without such limitations, you are free to engage with another instance.
Yet you seem to think acting like a petulant child is appropriate. Some of us have had our hands slapped because we crossed a line. But you can still act like an adult when it happens.
If you don’t like the rules, fine. Then go elsewhere.
“widely speculated” … like I said, I don’t think it was staged, but it’s clear that most of what is being stated the day after this event is speculation.
Saying that someone who shot a president is likely an assassination attempt is not a logical fallacy. There are pretty much 2 possibilities: targeted attack and random acts of violence. The fact that he seemed to be aiming at Trump suggests the former.
True: confirmed information. False: unconfirmed information of a speculative nature. Do you see a specific issue you disagree with or are you just trying to argue?
You are just moving the problem around via definitions not actually saying what method you used to know exactly what happened yesterday.
All I asked is how you arrived at the truth. Did you see evidence that the general public didn’t? Because what I am seeing is you all are so absolutely certain you have literally compared it to Covid misinformation. Amazing, a 30 hour news event is so well understood you can compare our knowledge of it to the single most studied virus in human history months after a new variant had appeared.
It is not unreasonable how you were able to obtain information the rest of us apparently do not have and how you were able to eliminate all other alternatives so quickly.
I know this is off-topic, but can we please go back to saying “conspiracy theory”? Conspiracy and conspiracy theories are not the same. There are actual conspiracies (a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful) , and there are theories of conspiracies. They should not be confused.
Surprised you’re not already banned just for the c-word. I mean, if someone crashes their car through a storefront, I could speculate without evidence that the driver was excessively old, young, drunk, or just plain stupid and it’s left up to the reader to take my comment with a grain of salt, but if I so much as entertain the possibility of this shooting being anything besides what is being reported by official channels, I must be silenced.
How do the people get justice for a convicted criminal that’s above the law? Is there a reason why the constitution has an amendment for guns? Why are so many platforms against the constitution and against the need for correct course when apt?
Seems like he was convicted, thus not above the law.
You keep him from being president by getting enough people to vote against him, or you accept the will of the people.
The 2nd Amendment was originally to make sure militias weren’t disarmed, in a time when militias were more relevant. Has nothing to do with political assassination.
How about when said political candidate openly calls for violence and murder against his opponents, to the point of asking the Supreme Court if he could assassinate people.
Maybe the 2nd amendment comes in to play a little? Last I checked we didn’t vote king George off our shores.
We did not vote Gore or Hillary into office. They got more popular votes and lost in electoral votes, and only electoral votes count for president. They lost fair and square, in the system we have.
No the difference between republics and monarchies is not “talking about assassinating rivals.” You can say anything, that is anyone’s right. In the context from above, this difference is why political assassination is not acceptable in a republic. It would be insane to say that political assassination is OK if the person had ever talked about assassinating rivals. The penalty for distasteful speech is not death.
He left after his last stand Jan 6. There is lots of news coverage of that, with many arrested as well. There are plenty of vids of Trump talking about Jan 6 people, not condemning them.
Also answer one question: What was Trump asking Pence to do on Jan 6?
Trump was asking Pence to return legally cast electoral votes to the states for reconsideration on false pretenses. Yes obviously bad and we don’t want a president who would do such a thing. But not assassination worthy.
While they await sentencing? If a judge allows it, obviously yes. People have lives and jobs, if they might not even get prison time it would be cruel to force them into all the downsides of prison time (lose your job, child care difficulties) and then let them go.
Trump would be more impacted by his inability to campaign, but we only have one justice system and I don’t want to betray my beliefs on how the justice system works just because I don’t like this guy’s politics.
Most sit in jail until sentencing, and the time spent waiting will be accounted with the sentencing. I say most, because only the king walks around free.
Also convicted criminals people should not run for president. The corrupted courts made a new law, something they don’t have the power to do, where the criminals can run, explicitly the hitler felon.
Also convicted criminals people should not run for president. The corrupted courts made a new law, something they don’t have the power to do, where the criminals can run, explicitly the hitler felon.
No, they didn’t. There’s just nothing that requires a candidate for president not be a convicted felon, other than the willingness of people to vote for them.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.