Tone Down the Rhetoric?

[Lesh]

Not a lot in the grand scheme of things.

What he was, was an ActBlue donor, who literally made his donation the day xiden got sworn in. It’s sad, he was radicalized by ActBlue, harris and xiden, to put trump in the bullseye

Both these guys were anti-Trump. After being proTrump

A lot of Republicans are.

 

[JohnDB]

Trump: “I have nothing to do with Project 2025.”

Heritage Foundation: “We have everything to do with Project 2025 and we don’t have anything to do with Trump.”

Heritage Foundation Trustee: “I’m literally on the board of the Heritage Foundation and I actually endorse Kamala.”

Kamala: “TRUMP IS GONNA RUN WILD WITH PROJECT 2025!!! REEEEEEEE

 

[M14 Shooter]

Trump: “I have nothing to do with Project 2025.”
Heritage Foundation: “We have everything to do with Project 2025 and we don’t have anything to do with Trump.”
Heritage Foundation Trustee: “I’m literally on the board of the Heritage Foundation and I actually endorse Kamala.”
Kamala: “TRUMP IS GONNA RUN WILD WITH PROJECT 2025!!! REEEEEEEE

No one ever said leftists base their narrative in fact and reason.

 

[struth]

Both these guys were anti-Trump. After being proTrump

A lot of Republicans are.

Correct anti gop nominee and doing all they could to help the demafacist party. Clearly radicalized by their hate speech and violent rhetoric

 

[berg80]

The question I ask myself is what the goal of trump's lies and bombast is seeing as they are so easily debunked.

Misinformation has surged following Hurricane Helene. Here's a fact check.

Officials have said baseless claims, amplified by former President Trump and others, are hindering recovery efforts.

www.cbsnews.com

I believe the goal is to so muddy the waters people don't feel they know who or what to believe. What they should do is start with the assumption everything trump says is a lie and do their own research from there.

 

[YoursTruly]

Not the question. You made the claim. But you don’t know whether he ever took aim at that location, or not. Taking aim doesn’t require pulling the trigger.

I stated that there's no way to "almost shoot" anything, unless they pull the trigger. I stand by that.

Nobody cares what you think you’re confident of. Since you have no such information, your confidence means nothing. You are merely guessing.

We're all guessing. Except for the part about only on person has pulled the trigger.

I’m sure he could live as well or better without publicity generated by would be assassins.

Also beside the point. The only point is that you claimed he hadn’t aimed his weapon at President but you don’t know if your speculation is true or not.

He at the end of hole 6. Trump was somewhere on hole 5. Still too far for him to accurately take a shot.

 

[Road Runner]

Watch this

A fourteen minute video? Is it possible for you to use timestamps for the point that you're trying to make?

 

[sealybobo]

A fourteen minute video? Is it possible for you to use timestamps for the point that you're trying to make?

It does start off a bit silly but funny. Lighten up and enjoy. But if you must skip to 6 minutes in where he (Trump) threatens Zuckerburg with life in prison.

 

[sealybobo]

Both these guys were anti-Trump. After being proTrump

A lot of Republicans are.

Elon Musk is buying votes for $47. Talk about $ influencing our elections. Trump loves him.

 

[Lastamender]

Yeah, but you're not a critical thinker. You just repeat whateverr Trump tells you to think. Trump says the 2020 election was stolen, you mechanically ape him.

I demand evidence. You know, like every court to laugh your Big Lie out the door, resulting its in perfect record of incompetent failure.

Which is why Jack from Twitter just saying shit is hardly a standard of evidence. And every reference to the 'physical altercation between Biden and Harris staffers' is either some guy named Jack on Twitter saying it must be so.

Or someone quoting some guy name Jack on Twitter saying it must be so.

Is it just Jack, citing himself?

I am a critical thinker. It is why I know the 2020 election was obviously stolen.

 

[Lesh]

I am a critical thinker. It is why I know the 2020 election was obviously stolen.

Thinking has nothing to do with why you do

 

[sealybobo]

I am a critical thinker. It is why I know the 2020 election was obviously stolen.

Based on what Trump tried to do in GA (find me 11,000 votes) tells me MI was stolen in 2016. GOP Governor, and Trump appointed his his boss' wife to run the Department of Education. Quid Pro Quo.

And even THEY won't endorse Trump again.

 

[YoursTruly]

I am a critical thinker. It is why I know the 2020 election was obviously stolen.

Critical thinking is realizing the entire election system is rigged. And it's not rigged by one side or the other. But by both sides, to keep them both in power.

Believing that one side is more crooked than the other, is simply being brainwashed.

 

[Lesh]

Critical thinking is realizing the entire election system is rigged. And it's not rigged by one side or the other. But by both sides, to keep them both in power.

Believing that one side is more crooked than the other, is simply being brainwashed.

Save your both siderism

Jan 6 puts the lie to that

 

[Lastamender]

Critical thinking is realizing the entire election system is rigged. And it's not rigged by one side or the other. But by both sides, to keep them both in power.

Believing that one side is more crooked than the other, is simply being brainwashed.

I never said it was not both sides. Pay attention.

 

[Lastamender]

Based on what Trump tried to do in GA (find me 11,000 votes) tells me MI was stolen in 2016. GOP Governor, and Trump appointed his his boss' wife to run the Department of Education. Quid Pro Quo.

And even THEY won't endorse Trump again.

Start reading at page 20. All these things have or can be proven. The election was unconstitutionally given to Biden.

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/SCOTUSFiling.pdf

• Intrastate differences in the treatment of voters,
with more favorable allotted to voters – whether
lawful or unlawful – in areas administered by
local government under Democrat control and
with populations with higher ratios of Democrat
voters than other areas of Defendant States.
• The appearance of voting irregularities in the
Defendant States that would be consistent with
the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity
protections in those States’ election laws.
All these flaws – even the violations of state election
law – violate one or more of the federal requirements
for elections (i.e., equal protection, due process, and
the Electors Clause) and thus arise under federal law.
See Bush v Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 113 (2000) (“significant
departure from the legislative scheme for appointing
Presidential electors presents a federal constitutional
question”) (Rehnquist, C.J., concurring). Plaintiff
State respectfully submits that the foregoing types of
electoral irregularities exceed the hanging-chad saga
of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from
both state and federal law. Moreover, these flaws
cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won
the 2020 election and threaten to cloud all future
elections.

 

[BackAgain]

Then perhaps you've got some evidence of the physical altercation between Biden and Harris staffers in the White House?

Lol. Because if I don’t have “physical evidence” of some alleged altercation happening a few hundred miles away from where I live, it must have never happened?

You failed logic 101 don’t you?

So far it’s just 'Jack from Twitter' saying it must be so.

Well. So far it’s just Jack citing unspecified sources from the WH. But if you don’t accept info from specified (alleged) sources, you would do well to reject almost all reporting from the New York Slimes (etc).

Among your ilk, that's the gold standard. But for anyone with critical thinking skills, its some pretty weak tea.

You should boil down that advice to its essence and apply it to yourself liberally. That way morons like you and your ilk won’t be so cocksure when you cite the NY slimes and so forth.

Laughing.....it’s okay, Back. No one expects you to have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

That’s hugely ironic coming from a hack like you Psycholar.

Thanks for the laughs.

 

[struth]

The question I ask myself is what the goal of trump's lies and bombast is seeing as they are so easily debunked.

Misinformation has surged following Hurricane Helene. Here's a fact check.

Officials have said baseless claims, amplified by former President Trump and others, are hindering recovery efforts.

www.cbsnews.com

I believe the goal is to so muddy the waters people don't feel they know who or what to believe. What they should do is start with the assumption everything trump says is a lie and do their own research from there.

The only offficals saying they are baseless are the harris admin folks

 

[Lastamender]

 

[BackAgain]

I stated that there's no way to "almost shoot" anything, unless they pull the trigger. I stand by that.

You stated that ALSO. Of course, that’s irrelevant to what else you said which is what I pointed to.

We're all guessing. Except for the part about only on person has pulled the trigger.

Two would be assassins. One (not “on”) pulled the trigger and actually hit the President. The other one may not have pulled the trigger. But, then again, he was denied the chance to be an assasssin before he could get a shot off. (I assume he didn’t pull the trigger.)

He at the end of hole 6. Trump was somewhere on hole 5. Still too far for him to accurately take a shot.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.