BangkokReady

The bat is next to Trump, not next to Bragg. It certainly isn't next to Bragg's head. Do you honestly see the bat next to Bragg as you claim? You don't see Trump in the photo between the bat and Bragg?

Silly quote? I'm replying in kind to the quote written to me. If you're going to jump into another discussion, at least read what has been said previously. You're slipping into ad-homs now.

I would agree that Kathy Griffin didn't really hold up Trump's severed head, and if someone tried to claim that it was his real severed head I would say that they were lying. That is as far as that relates to what I am saying here.

I'm not confused in the slightest. The montage shows a picture of Trump holding a baseball bat next to a picture of Bragg. The claim is that the photo shows a baseball bat next to Bragg's head.

I still don't think that the reporting of the photo makes the tweet a direct threat of violence as is being reported. They may be an expression of Trump's overall attitude, but that doesn't mean they are related. "Trump threatens death and destruction" is simply not the same as "Trump implies it's a bad idea to charge him because his supporters may riot".

Not ridiculously at all. It doesn't show a baseball bat next to Bragg's head, therefore to say it does is a lie.

But he didn't do it, so what does it have to do with what is being discussed?

Still a little too direct, since Trump isn't suggesting that anything will happen to Bragg. Also "don't blame me" is far more of a direct threat than what Trump wrote. Perhaps it's more like: "It would be a very stupid member of staff here to hit me for no reason, as the people that like me might be angry and express their anger by attacking the place of business."

Stated clearly previously in the thread.

Perhaps they will, but I find it difficult to believe that the court will draw a link between the photo and the twitter post, nor the twitter post and Bragg.

You think Trump sent a death threat and white powder to Bragg?

That's an implied direct threat. Not the same as saying "if you do this thing then it will cause other people to do another thing".

Well, if you jump in to another discussion... Not at all. I'm merely commenting on the accuracy of the reporting. Nothing wrong with that at all. If they say something that isn't true, is that a lie?

The realism is the issue, as that is what I was discussing. My point was that it is being reported as though Trump is directly threatening some sort of violence if he is charged, when in reality he could easily be suggesting that people might riot. When discussing whether claims made in a news report are accurate or not, realism of course matters a great deal. It doesn't matter if the posting of the picture was good or bad, or who agrees or disagrees with it, it still has to reported honestly.

Not at all. I'm asking you if that's your stance. Why not just answer the question instead of evading?

That's your opinion. I don't find it to be realistic. Personally, I don't believe that Trump is actually going to beat Bragg with a baseball bat if he chooses to charge him.

What? The only context is the photograph and whether you honestly see a baseball bat next to Bragg's head. That's all I asked you.

So that makes it OK for the media to lie in your opinion? "We the media know who the bad guys are, so it's OK for us to lie to the people in order to stop them." Is that what you're getting at? And you don't see any problem with that?

You believe the "death and destruction" is Trump attacking Bragg with a baseball bat if he doesn't drop the charges? You seriously believe that?

I read the OP. But, seriously, do you honestly look at that photograph and see a baseball bat next to Bragg's head?

Possibly hinting that people might riot if he is "falsely charged". Not necessarily threatening anything. The baseball bat clearly isn't next to Bragg's head. Whether you like Trump or not, and whether you agree that he should say such things or not, it's interesting to see the level of misrepresenting of facts that the media does when it comes to Trump, along with how easily people who hate Trump accept lies uncritically and repeat them as fact.

Is that really your perception of the photograph? I'm intrigued as, when I look at the photograph, I see a picture of Trump holding a baseball bat, I see a picture of Bragg standing at a media lectern, but the baseball bat really couldn't be further from Bragg's head. The bat is actually closer to Trump's head than it is to Bragg's. The bat certainly isn't next to Bragg's head. Do you genuinely believe that the baseball bat is next to Bragg's head? Do you not know what "next to" means? Or are you lying? I know lying about Trump is pretty much a national past-time in the US, but it seems so weird to me that people do it so blatantly. "Here's a photo of Trump without a baseball bat next to someone's head, but I'm going to lie and tell people that the photo shows Trump with a baseball bat next to someone's head because it makes Trump sound worse." It's just so bizarre.

How did he injure the three that he didn't shoot? Or do they mean shot 6, killed 3 and injured 3? Such bad reporting.

But they could have come down on either side of it. It is. They could have been "woke" and allowed it, saying that "trans women are real women" and anyone who is complaining is simply "transphobic", but they didn't. They took the "non-woke" route and protected women.

I think they were more triggered by the "anti-woke" agenda of the previous posters, so they wanted to strike back at this. Hence their point unwound over the course of the discussion.