Trump ignites new firestorm: Gun backers might stop Clinton

[joeyg]

12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

On 8/10/2016 at 8:11 PM, joeyg said:

 

 

[boomerangutang]

46 minutes ago, slipperylobster said:

Not a chance.

Just a lot of bad news reporting by mainstream media (dominated by Demagogue Democrats).

Public being led by their silly noses, believing this garbage about Trump. 

His weakness is his failure to fall into the square peg of political correctness.  If Trump were to copy the traditional lying pattern of traditional politicians....he would just be worse than Hillary.

Total Rubbish Reporting...

 

Trump is the poster boy for INSIDERS.  He was mega-manipulalive in Atlantic City, NYC and wherever else he's dabbled with losing businesses.  He brownoses authorities (inspectors, loan officers, etc), gets chummy with judges, throws parties for mafia and big shot politicians, sleeps (or at least gets some touchy-feely) with every A-list woman within grabbing distance (He himself alluded to that).  He is the insider of insiders.  Do some research if you're not sure.    

[Pinot]

20 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

 

Do you really believe that? I have never owned a gun in my life and I am not firmly on either side of the debate. However, I do not entertain the slightest doubt that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and much of the left would take people's guns away if they had the chance. They refuse to admit it because it would cause them problems politically, but if the tide ever changes, they will do the same thing they did with gay marriage and suddenly "evolve" on the issue. IMO, firm believers in the 2nd amendment have every reason not to trust them.

 

I want your guns. I want them out of the hands of the paranoid wingnuts who own most of the guns. The NRA has a made America into a battle zone. 

 

I'd love to have either the Supreme Court reinterpret what the 2nd Amandment says, not the right to bear arms bullshit. I'll tell you what, all the gunowners get to own as many muskets as you went. We'll take the automatic weapons. 

 

Or...(there was an "either" up there) have them declared a health risk and just crush them all. You can also charge insurance to cover the damage they do. Really, really expensive insurance. 

 

Screw you people with guns. They're dangerous. I hate guns.  

[Publicus]

On 8/10/2016 at 1:49 PM, Pimay1 said:

Only an ignoramus would believe a person running for president would publicly before the world advocate killing their opponent. I can't believe what some of you guys are posting.

 

 

Anyone who might be befuddled now might want to look the other way rather than to read these quotes.

 

The first is from an NBC network journalist who's been following Trump since he descended the escalator in Trump Tower, and the second is from the Obama 2012 national campaign manager....

 

Katy Tur writes for Marie Claire about her experiences covering Donald Trump’s presidential campaign:

The complexion of the crowd reflects Trump’s base, which, according to polls, is white and male. They dress in all-camouflage, or all red, white, and blue, or — because they are meeting a billionaire – all suits, gowns, and formal wear. There are moms, cute kids, and roaming packs of young people. The pre-game parking lot can feel like a state fair without the Ferris wheel.

 

Trump is a room-reader. He’ll slow down a line, rephrase a point, work in a pause, and ride the energy of his audience wherever it takes him. For 45, 60, even 90 minutes, he’ll run through classic riffs, like bomb the hell out of ISIS, build a wall, make America great again. 

 

            

David Axelrod was quoted by Bloomberg, on Donald Trump’s “Second Amendment people” comments.

 

“I don’t think he thought it through. It was a red meat line he tossed off carelessly to signify solidarity with the crowd… But that is the problem: When you are the president of the United States you can’t do that. The things you say can send armies marching and markets tumbling. And he seems incapable of controlling himself. This is at the core of worries about him.”

 

One notices btw the Trump posters are so very calm and measured, if somewhat depressed, in contrast to the language they used against President Obama for seven years day in and day out, 24/7.

 

The fact remains, in Donald Trump we see what we'd get if the presently subdued but previously raging pararightwhingenoids had their way in the USA...and globally. 

 

This election I'm going to really enjoy my election night popcorn.

[Skywalker69]

Donald Trump Isn’t Crazy, He’s Something a Whole Heck of A Lot Worse.

 

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/donald-trump-isnt-crazy-hes-something-a-whole-heck-of-a-lot-worse/

[Publicus]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Also ironic being harbored by Ecuador, a nation that has massively cracked down on their own free press.

 

Speaking of the devil, from the Daily Beast of July 3, 2012 discussing what turned out to the the final Assange show on Russia Today...

 

Rafael Correa, the president of Ecuador, told Assange in a previous episode: "Welcome to the club of the persecuted."

 

A month later, while the show–entirely prerecorded–was airing, Assange sought asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he remains.

 

Viewers catching up with The Julian Assange Show may now experience a reality-TV buzz followed by a pang of anxiety. Correa's a smooth-faced ball of ranting populist energy, exuding an all-too-familiar fanatical certainty, while Assange, sporting some questionable blond stubble, appears more laid back. What's to become of Assange if he actually ends up not in Correa's club, but in his country, on the run from rape charges? Yikes.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/03/i-love-the-julian-assange-show.html

 

Trump, Putin and Correa would almost undoubtedly work out a deal to get Assange free again and on the loose again -- the guy who is still under a Justice Department investigation.  

 

Just a couple of years before however Assange had been publicly crowing about how his Wikileaks had the goods on Vladimir Putin too. Then Assange began to get anonymous emails pointing out to him what happens to journalists who cross Putin. Suddenly and since, Vlad and Julian have been BFF. Meanwhile, no Wikileaks about Russia -- not then and not ever.

 

Assange is Putin's bich. 

Edited August 11, 2016 by Publicus
Revise and reduce

[Ulysses G.]

1 hour ago, Pinot said:

 

I want your guns.  

 

So do Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama and many other left-wingers. The difference between you and them is that you will actually admit it.

[Publicus]

Cowboys and other right wingers love humanity and they love guns.

 

It's people they can't stand. 

 

Liberal progressives number one and Hillary Clinton most of all.

 

Just ask Donald Trump. 

[StevieH]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

So do Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama and many other left-wingers. The difference between you and them is that you will actually admit it.

 

nobody in america should have guns. fewer people would die awfully. it's really, really simple. fewer kids would die. fewer innocent people would die. this argument is done, there's no longer any defence for the ease of access to high-powered firearms in the US, whatever the republicans are clinging to. grow up. move on. get past it. stop killing people who have no need to die. it's really, really straightforward. any president with a soul would try to stop american citizens having as many guns as they do. it's the human thing to do. where's the complication?

[Ulysses G.]

33 minutes ago, StevieH said:

 

nobody in america should have guns.

 

 

There are a lot of people who agree with you. Unfortunately, the politicians that do, lie about it. That is why gun owners do not trust them to regulate sales any more than has been done already.

[Andaman Al]

2 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Speaking of the devil, from the Daily Beast of July 3, 2012 discussing what turned out to the the final Assange show on Russia Today...

 

Rafael Correa, the president of Ecuador, told Assange in a previous episode: "Welcome to the club of the persecuted."

 

A month later, while the show–entirely prerecorded–was airing, Assange sought asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he remains.

 

Viewers catching up with The Julian Assange Show may now experience a reality-TV buzz followed by a pang of anxiety. Correa's a smooth-faced ball of ranting populist energy, exuding an all-too-familiar fanatical certainty, while Assange, sporting some questionable blond stubble, appears more laid back. What's to become of Assange if he actually ends up not in Correa's club, but in his country, on the run from rape charges? Yikes.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/03/i-love-the-julian-assange-show.html

 

Trump, Putin and Correa would almost undoubtedly work out a deal to get Assange free again and on the loose again -- the guy who is still under a Justice Department investigation.  

 

Just a couple of years before however Assange had been publicly crowing about how his Wikileaks had the goods on Vladimir Putin too. Then Assange began to get anonymous emails pointing out to him what happens to journalists who cross Putin. Suddenly and since, Vlad and Julian have been BFF. Meanwhile, no Wikileaks about Russia -- not then and not ever.

 

Assange is Putin's bich. 

 

I think Assange intends to make HRC his bitch! He has the dirt, and HRC was one of the most vociferous in terms of trying to get Assange over to the USA. It's easy. Sign my get out of jail free card i.e a legal document saying I will not be extradited , in return I will not release emails the day before the first debate.

 

 

 

 

[slipperylobster]

5 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

 

I think Assange intends to make HRC his bitch! He has the dirt, and HRC was one of the most vociferous in terms of trying to get Assange over to the USA. It's easy. Sign my get out of jail free card i.e a legal document saying I will not be extradited , in return I will not release emails the day before the first debate.

 

 

 

 

 

Threats against Presidential Candidates are taken seriously.....this was not.   So there was no threat implied.  It was all created in the minds of Dufus Demagogue Democrats (The "DDD").  Couch Potato Liberals with tinfoil hats somehow implied Trump was going to Assassinate Hilary...or wanted that to happen.   How incredibly dumb.   If I told you that  2nd Amendment people could influence MacDonalds to give out large fries for free....would that imply they would go in with guns blazing?

 

 Hillary is having epileptic fits over all her scandals, and is really groping to get some kind of legal case against Trump.   Her face gets all contorted and out of control.  She shunned reporters for months, trying hard not to implicate herself. I do believe that the meatiest part of her scandals are being held by Assange...for release just before the elections....and she is coercing main stream media into doing a "scrabble game of word mixups" on Trump.   Her blind supporters are also deaf to what is actually being said.

 

Lets see what happens...lol

 

 

Edited August 12, 2016 by slipperylobster

[Pinot]

HRC has got to be the greatest liar in the history of the world. When you consider what the wingnuts have accused her of and the fact that they never pin anything on her when the facts come out, she has to be the world's best liar ever. 

 

The above nonsensical diatribe is so typical. Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Hillary Clinton. Slippy should really consider a long break from politics. 

[Publicus]

8 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

 

I think Assange intends to make HRC his bitch! He has the dirt, and HRC was one of the most vociferous in terms of trying to get Assange over to the USA. It's easy. Sign my get out of jail free card i.e a legal document saying I will not be extradited , in return I will not release emails the day before the first debate.

 

 

 

 

 

Republicans and other rightwhingers always have the pie in the sky dreamcloud that there is this one thing that will take down Hillary Clinton -- the Clintons.

 

For 25 years going back to when Bill was governor of Arkansas and Hillary worked at Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, to Whitewater to Lewinsky to so many 'scandals' imagined or matters blown out of all proportion, there is always something new the rightwhingers concoct to grab hold of what will finally, at long last, decidedly and conclusively, bring down HRC and the Clintons.

 

The right is always in the state of expectation that one of 'em will suddenly step out in front of Hillary Clinton, pull out a crucifix, hold it in front of her face and watch her melt like the wicked witch of the left. Now Trump raises the right's most sick hope that a local hero will step forward with the silver bullet that will stop the evil creature of the night -- the werewolf's wife or some such lunacy.

 

So the new heroes of the 2016 election and the pararightwhingenoids are the Assange-Putin axis...or one should say the Putin-Assange master and servant dominant-submissive interactions.

 

After HRC is elected Potus November 8th the Republicans and the right will have something new yet again for sure, guaranteed. A major Trump latest line is that the election is rigged, i.e., the electing of HRC Potus is invalid, illegitimate, corrupted. But we who constitute the vast majority of centrist and moderate middle Americans will continue to dismiss and ignore the perpetual crying of wolf by the hard core chronic extremist dividers.

 

The 21st century Confederates.

[Scott]

Please stay on topic and the topic is about a firestorm that was ignited by Trump.  

 

 

[maewang99]

Chomsky had the right analysis of this, as always, all along.... when William Clinton swung the Democrats to the right and accelerated globalization and corporate privileges.... he forced the GOP to go too far further to the right... such as only being able to give out even more tax cuts.. and differentiate themselves from the Democrats by stonewalling everything... and now they are in their final death throes.. which forms an apex as it just does... along with religion in general as well, which is also a great part of this nonsense. the "Bible is my favorite book" and "the USA is not a planet" etc etc... it ain't pretty... it's almost insane... and it ain't gonna mean we have a chance in hell of avoiding going back to the Pliocene.  the good news is, Hillary Clinton is obviously just as much a creature of the Cambrian Explosion as any of us are but not so old to not get caught in it even in the USA but definitely too fat, along with Trumpie, to ever be able to join Elon on any of his rockets to Mars.

Edited August 12, 2016 by maewang99

[Opl]

I'm afraid DT does not even need to win this election, he already has the most effective power of nuisance that will  last long after november wether he is elected or not. 

 

[Scotwight]

15 hours ago, Pinot said:

 

I want your guns. I want them out of the hands of the paranoid wingnuts who own most of the guns. The NRA has a made America into a battle zone. 

 

I'd love to have either the Supreme Court reinterpret what the 2nd Amandment says, not the right to bear arms bullshit. I'll tell you what, all the gunowners get to own as many muskets as you went. We'll take the automatic weapons. 

 

Or...(there was an "either" up there) have them declared a health risk and just crush them all. You can also charge insurance to cover the damage they do. Really, really expensive insurance. 

 

Screw you people with guns. They're dangerous. I hate guns.  

That is why people will vote for Trump and don't believe he meant Hillary any harm by his statements.  The opposition (you) is as wingnutty as the wingnuts.  Don't you realize your post is a temper tantrum designed to encourage a response in kind?  You live in Thailand and I live in Thailand - chill out.  

 

Many American Republicans and Democrats had guns and bombs and all matter or ordinance in Thailand and didn't many Thais (Vietnam era).  Relax you can trust us.  Not guns nor any other inanimate object is not dangerous nor is anything that Trump utters as an aside to another conversation.   

 

Stop watching CNN for a while and your life will get better.  They made up the whole Trump thing anyway.  Sad they can't find anything more substantial to rant about.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Scotwight

[iReason]

^^^ @Post 198

 

"Sad they can't find anything more substantial to rant about."  

2 hours ago by Scotwight

 

A massively ignorant and uninformed statement.

Unbelievable.

Indicative of a true Trumpeteer.

 

There is a wealth of information out there to show the Bloviator is an incompetent, lying, racist, bigoted, scamming, draft dodging,

tax evading, shady business scumbag. ( That's just a short list )

 

I know. Because I have posted reams of it.

Knowing full well the Lemmings will choose to ignore it.

Consistently.

They have to, because they have no defense for it. They got Nothin'.

 

Edited August 12, 2016 by iReason

[Pinot]

3 hours ago, Scotwight said:

That is why people will vote for Trump and don't believe he meant Hillary any harm by his statements.  The opposition (you) is as wingnutty as the wingnuts.  Don't you realize your post is a temper tantrum designed to encourage a response in kind?  You live in Thailand and I live in Thailand - chill out.  

 

Many American Republicans and Democrats had guns and bombs and all matter or ordinance in Thailand and didn't many Thais (Vietnam era).  Relax you can trust us.  Not guns nor any other inanimate object is not dangerous nor is anything that Trump utters as an aside to another conversation.   

 

Stop watching CNN for a while and your life will get better.  They made up the whole Trump thing anyway.  Sad they can't find anything more substantial to rant about.

 

I don't get CNN. I thought that up by myself. I'll bet if we a national referendum about banning guns, it would win in a landslide. It's a good rant and I stand by it. You can't call me a wingnut. Wingnuts own this gun issue. Radically opposing guns still doesn't make me a wingnut. It actually makes me a normal person. 

 

Gun nuts weren't going to vote for Hillary. As usual, Trump is wrong. I think it's beautiful he's still up there swinging. He can't even foul one off at this point.  

[GuestHouse]

A Prickly Pear... 

 

https://youtu.be/PsqKyv86pEY

[boomerangutang]

18 hours ago, Pinot said:

 

I want your guns. I want them out of the hands of the paranoid wingnuts who own most of the guns. The NRA has a made America into a battle zone. 

Screw you people with guns. They're dangerous. I hate guns.  

 

You're feeding in the paranoia of gun-owners. And that's not HRC's position.  She's against assault-and military type weapons.  She's ok with non-assault and non-semi-automatic weapons owned by law-abiding citizens.

 

15 hours ago, StevieH said:

 

nobody in america should have guns. fewer people would die awfully. it's really, really simple. fewer kids would die. fewer innocent people would die. this argument is done, there's no longer any defence for the ease of access to high-powered firearms in the US, whatever the republicans are clinging to. grow up. move on. get past it. stop killing people who have no need to die. it's really, really straightforward. any president with a soul would try to stop american citizens having as many guns as they do. it's the human thing to do. where's the complication?

 

Similar to my missive above in response to Pinot, you're feeding into gun huggers' intransigence by saying 'nobody in America should have guns.'  In a near-perfect world with sane people, sure, that would be plausible.  But we live in a very imperfect world, and there are a lot of crazies out there - some of whom look like the most upstanding citizens .....until they go bezerk.

 

Perhaps your statement it too sweeping.  Law enforcement and military should be allowed to have serious weapons while on duty.  As for everyone else, ....that's debatable.  And I include vets, ex-cops, and nearly everyone else in that category (of not owning assault weapons), because they're all human. By being human, they're subject to losing their temper and going apeshit, like just about anyone else.  Let them go apeshit, but doing so with a loaded weapon in their hands, makes them a lot more of serious problem waiting to happen.   Gun lovers will try to convince us that their friends and family are all too cool-headed and responsible to ever go postal with guns.  Uh Huh.  Every criminal is loved by his mother too.   They're all likeable until the moment they go beserk.

[Scotwight]

16 hours ago, StevieH said:

 

nobody in america should have guns. fewer people would die awfully. it's really, really simple. fewer kids would die. fewer innocent people would die. this argument is done, there's no longer any defence for the ease of access to high-powered firearms in the US, whatever the republicans are clinging to. grow up. move on. get past it. stop killing people who have no need to die. it's really, really straightforward. any president with a soul would try to stop american citizens having as many guns as they do. it's the human thing to do. where's the complication?

I didn't know this was an anti American - anti gun thread.  If it is I'll sure would like to respond to all you wingnuts.  But I have the feeling that my response would be off topic.  Now, what I want to know is your post off topic?  Is what's good for the goose (Democratic wingnuts) also good for the gander (Republican wingnuts)?

[Scotwight]

15 minutes ago, GuestHouse said:

A Prickly Pear... 

 

https://youtu.be/PsqKyv86pEY

Unless this is "say anything stupid as long as it's anti Trump thread", your post is way off topic.

[Scotwight]

8 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 

You're feeding in the paranoia of gun-owners. And that's not HRC's position.  She's against assault-and military type weapons.  She's ok with non-assault and non-semi-automatic weapons owned by law-abiding citizens.

 

 

Similar to my missive above in response to Pinot, you're feeding into gun huggers' intransigence by saying 'nobody in America should have guns.'  In a near-perfect world with sane people, sure, that would be plausible.  But we live in a very imperfect world, and there are a lot of crazies out there - some of whom look like the most upstanding citizens .....until they go bezerk.

 

Perhaps your statement it too sweeping.  Law enforcement and military should be allowed to have serious weapons while on duty.  As for everyone else, ....that's debatable.  And I include vets, ex-cops, and nearly everyone else in that category (of not owning assault weapons), because they're all human. By being human, they're subject to losing their temper and going apeshit, like just about anyone else.  Let them go apeshit, but doing so with a loaded weapon in their hands, makes them a lot more of serious problem waiting to happen.   Gun lovers will try to convince us that their friends and family are all too cool-headed and responsible to ever go postal with guns.  Uh Huh.  Every criminal is loved by his mother too.   They're all likeable until the moment they go beserk.

Nother anti gun post.  Why don't you anti gun wingnuts start a thread and go whole hog.

[Scotwight]

26 minutes ago, Pinot said:

 

I don't get CNN. I thought that up by myself. I'll bet if we a national referendum about banning guns, it would win in a landslide. It's a good rant and I stand by it. You can't call me a wingnut. Wingnuts own this gun issue. Radically opposing guns still doesn't make me a wingnut. It actually makes me a normal person. 

 

Gun nuts weren't going to vote for Hillary. As usual, Trump is wrong. I think it's beautiful he's still up there swinging. He can't even foul one off at this point.  

Of course I can call you a wingnut.  The thread is about Trump trying to have Hillary killed not an anti gun thread.  Only a wingnut would go so consistently off topic.  

[thaibeachlovers]

On 10 สิงหาคม 2559 at 7:16 AM, ClutchClark said:

Anyone happen to have a link to a video.

I want to see context of that statement.

I saw it. The context was that he was telling people that Clinton wants to stop them having guns and that people that want guns can stop her. If he meant to say that they could vanish her it was obviously tongue in cheek, and if he meant they could vote against her it isn't a story. Either way there's nothing to get excited about. First time I saw it I didn't even think it was an issue worth scrutiny.

He's not a politician and he says silly things. Which of us hasn't? I know I've said lots.

 

 

[Scotwight]

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I saw it. The context was that he was telling people that Clinton wants to stop them having guns and that people that want guns can stop her. If he meant to say that they could vanish her it was obviously tongue in cheek, and if he meant they could vote against her it isn't a story. Either way there's nothing to get excited about. First time I saw it I didn't even think it was an issue worth scrutiny.

He's not a politician and he says silly things. Which of us hasn't? I know I've said lots.

 

 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/08/10/cnn-host-gets-into-angry-exchange-with-ex-secret-service-agent-over-trump-comments-cut-off-my-mic/

 

Video link of CNN trying to stop discussion of an opposing view by a secret service agent.

[iReason]

Seems the Crazy Bloviator's campaign is not concerned at all about threats of gun violence:

 

Ex-Trump staffer sues campaign, alleges gun incident in North Carolina

 

"A former North Carolina staffer is suing Donald Trump's presidential campaign, saying a top employee in the state working,

on the Republican's White House bid once pulled a gun on him and that after he reported it, the campaign took no action."

 

"Vincent Bordini, who said he was hired in December 2015 as a software trainer, said Earl Phillip, then Trump's North Carolina state director,

pointed a pistol at his kneecap while the two were in a car together in February, according to a lawsuit dated Wednesday and filed in state court."

 

"Bordini said he reported the incident to several Trump campaign officials, including then-campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, with no result,

according to the lawsuit, which was posted online by the New York Daily News. The lawsuit names Phillip and the Trump campaign as defendants."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-lawsuit-idUSKCN10M1VN

 

The Clown Car: dangerous in more ways than one...

Edited August 12, 2016 by iReason

[Scotwight]

6 minutes ago, iReason said:

Seems the Crazy Bloviator's campaign is not concerned at all about threats of gun violence:

 

Ex-Trump staffer sues campaign, alleges gun incident in North Carolina

 

"A former North Carolina staffer is suing Donald Trump's presidential campaign, saying a top employee in the state working,

on the Republican's White House bid once pulled a gun on him and that after he reported it, the campaign took no action."

 

"Vincent Bordini, who said he was hired in December 2015 as a software trainer, said Earl Phillip, then Trump's North Carolina state director,

pointed a pistol at his kneecap while the two were in a car together in February, according to a lawsuit dated Wednesday and filed in state court."

 

"Bordini said he reported the incident to several Trump campaign officials, including then-campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, with no result,

according to the lawsuit, which was posted online by the New York Daily News. The lawsuit names Phillip and the Trump campaign as defendants."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-lawsuit-idUSKCN10M1VN

 

The Clown Car: dangerous in more ways than one...

Just trying to stay current.  What topic are you posting about?