Faun said:
As many times as you're gonna claim Trump was too retarded to know that was a racist rally, organized by racists, sponsored by racists, promoted by racists, hosted by racists and attended by racists.
Got it. You think that someone would have to be retarded to not agree with you.
Nope, you don't "got it." I don't think that. There are many people who disagree with me here who I don't consider retarded.
That does not change the fact that you people lied and are still lying about what he said.
Nope, the liar is you. Most notably, I'm going by what he actually said. You're going by what you
think he actually meant.
That means that the voters were voting, making their choice based on FALSE INFORMATION.
Nope, you're lying again as the information wasn't false. There was a racist rally which led to a confrontation to counter the racists. Racism is evil. Fighting it is noble. Trump equated the two sides and idiotically claimed there were "very fine people on both sides."
Fraud by deception. THe election is thus, not legitimate.
Nope, you're just crazy.
Trump clearly condemned w.s. You are inventing confusion where there is none. To stonewall in defense of your big lie.
Trump: " -- we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America.
After how many days and a barrage of public pressure?I
Trump on Saturday condemned hatred "on many sides," which prompted backlash from both Democrats and Republicans alike
www.cbsnews.com
After zero days. The riot occurred sat morning, to lunch time, Saturday. Expanded quote. I was not trying to trick you.
Trump: "As I said on -- remember, Saturday -- we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence.
See, here we will see that your complaints are bullshit. You made a point that he waited days to condemn the riot. I just proved that that was not true. Now you will ignore this new information and hold to your position, without any adjustment.
Because, your position is based, at best on blind faith, and at worst on knowingly lying in the fact of clear proof.
What was the display of bigotry from the left?
<crickets>
What was the display of bigotry from the left?
Oh, sorry I missed that post.
Well, are you asking my opinion, or asking me to specify what Trump was referring to?
REgardless, I'm glad you are not denying that Trump was right to denounce the violence and hatred from both sides, including from the left.
The point is, Trump denounced both sides for their bad behavior, the violent and hateful left (antifa/blm) and the violent and hateful right?, (w.s.).
As he well should have.
How about answering the question?
It was a riot. I have no idea what particular act(s) he was referring to.
He made a statement condemning the violence, bigotry and hate on BOTH sides.
Nit picking over which act of bigotry from the LEFT he was referring to, is fucking stupid.
You are just trying to avoid dealing with the fact that he condemned the violence, bigotry and hatred, as he well should have.
His response was nearly perfect and you are nit picking like the asshole you are.
So what was this display of bigotry on the left he was talking about?
Answered above.
And sure like all the people Trump used eventually he threw Proud Boys under the bus too. No surprise.
Members of the far-right group, who were among Donald Trumpās staunchest fans, are calling him āweakā as more of them were charged for storming the U.S. Capitol.
www.nytimes.com
Members of the far-right group, who were among Donald Trumpās staunchest fans, are calling him āweakā as more of them were charged for storming the U.S. Capitol.
In a Nov. 8 post in a private channel of the messaging app Telegram, the group urged its followers to attend protests against an election that it said had been fraudulently stolen from Mr. Trump. āHail Emperor Trump,ā the Proud Boys wrote.
But by this week, the groupās attitude toward Mr. Trump had changed. āTrump will go down as a total failure,ā the Proud Boys said in the same Telegram channel on Monday.
That has no relevance to anything in this thread. You are bringing it up, BECAUSE it has no relevance.
You people lied. You people lied A BIG LIE.
One big enough to swing the election.
Thus, the election is not legitimate.
There were exit pollsā¦how many people listed Trumpās perceived ambivalence towards racists as a reason not to vote for him? (ambivalence he displayed over and over)
The blob did get the INCEL vote...
He got 99.9% of the racist vote. He wasnāt going to trade that for a minuscule increase in the black voteā¦he HAD to play footsie with the racists that supported him.
Trump lost because of COVID, period. If he had responded more effectively to the pandemic, he wouldāve been reelected.
You people are delusional. White Racists have been completely marginalized since the mid 60s. Which is why you people are so focused on fighting them.
Trump would love to have more of the minority vote. Hell, it has been a common point of discussion that without being able to do that, republicans are doomed as a national party.
Your lie here, is part of a larger lie, that republicans are wacist, so that you people can keep your lock on the minority votes.
You are lying assholes like that.
He wasnāt willing to condemn racists because they supported him. We all know it.
All Republicans are not racist. Most racists VOTE Republican. That is nobodyās fault but Republicans.
He repeatedly and clearly condemned ws.
Your denial is you being a liar.
That you lie, shows that you fear that if the voters knew the Truth, they would vote against you.
Only after public pressure. Each and every time he was first asked to condemn someone or some thing having to do with white supremacy he equivocated. When public pressure over his equivocation would mount, then he would come out with a prepared statement. (Prepared by someone else)
if you can't be honest about this, "and Iām not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists"
what are the odds you can be trusted to tell the truth about "only after public pressure" or " he equivocated"?
Rhetorical question. You are a horrific liar. Your words, your judgements, have no weight.
I posted links, cultist.
You people lied as a group and stuck and are sticking to your lies, even when the actual transcripts are repeatedly shoved in your face.
NOTHING YOU SAY, about any situation with any ambiguity has any credibility.
No, that is not strong enough,
Anything you say, in any situation with ANY ambiguity, has ANTI-CREDIBILITY.

I absolutely adore how reporting exactly what Trump said is ālyingā about him.

Would you like more links about Trumpās tacit approval of racists? Okay!
WASHINGTON (AP) ā Why doesn't President Donald Trump just unequivocally condemn white supremacists? It's a jarring question to ask about an American president.
apnews.com
The president was silent when journalists asked whether he rejected the support of nationalist groups.
That silence was cheered by the white supremacist website Daily Stormer: āWhen asked to condemn, he just walked out of the room. Really, really good. God bless him.ā
What does it tell you when the racists believe he supports them?
You are perpetuating a lie. Go get yourself a treat, and get off the internet. Thanks.
Nope, just reporting on what the former President said and did. Whether or not Trump actually is racist we may never know. There is plenty of evidence to support the theory that he is, but the racists believe he is. What does that say?
You will never "know" because you can interpret "not them" as "them", in your search for "evidence" to support your self serving conclusions.
Oh, I think we could know. Like if the Apprentice tapes get released.
It is a fact that the racists believe that Trump is one of them. What does that tell you?
No, you are too warped to tell the difference between, "not them" and "them". THe problem is not Trump but your fucked up thinking.
You're lying again, lying dumbfuck. Trump never said, "not them."
On Aug. 15, 2017, President Donald Trump held a press conference to discuss an executive order he had signed on infrastr
www.politifact.com
"and Iām not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally."
You, are retarded.
So? We've already established it's the Proud Boys and neo-Confederates he thinks are
"very fine people"
No. That is not established. We have established the Jan. 6th was a set up.
And by 'established', you 'allege'.
Allegations are like assholes.
Allegations were good enough for 2 impeachments. You are dumb.
Neither of which went anywhere. Just like your Big Lie.
It is your lie that is failing. There are 13 states that want forensic audits.
you don't want forensic audits, as you've ignored any such audit that has ever been done. Like the one done by the Maricopa County Election Board, lead by republicans.....which found no irregularities.
You want to ignore any forensic audit that contradicts your conspiracy. Any election result, any hand count, recount, any offcial tally or certified result, any electoral vote, from anyone, regardless of party, experience, position or expertise....
.....if they don't ape your conspiracy.
Just like any other conspiracy theorist.
I told you those audits were done with Dominion there. The company being audited. The means shit and are as useless as you.
And you can recount illegal ballots as many times as you want, dummy.
What you told me was another conspiracy theory you could't back up....to support the first conspiracy theory you couldn't back up. Remember, its not just Dominion you're ignoring.
You've ignored EVERY official vote count.
EVERY recount
EVERY hand count
EVERY forensic audit
EVERY official tally
EVERY certified result
EVERY electoral count
EVERY court decision on the topic. All the way up to the Supreme Court.
And it doesn't matter the source. Republican, Democrat, Trump appointee, Obama appointee, trial judge, federal judge, Supreme Court, election board (republican led or otherwise), secretary of state, or election manager.....
.per you, they're all 'fake' if they don't ape your fantasy.
And you don't know what you're talking about. So why would I ignore every source that you do? Especially when these sources that contradict you are ACTUALLY experts?