Donald Trump

Donald Trump Suggests 'Second Amendment People' Could Stop Clinton SCOTUS Nominees

Clinton suggests presidential wannabes shouldn't endorse violence, except apparently when they're Secretary of State?

|

YouTube

It's Tuesday, and Donald Trump is looking to dominate the news cycle yet again with another off-hand remark that provides many in the media the cover they need to avoid covering the election more substantively.

Have you heard the one about Donald Trump suggesting someone shoot Hillary Clinton's Supreme Court picks? It's Donald Trump—maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but the soundbite is going to get a lot of play.

"If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks," Trump said in North Carolina today, "although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don't know."

His campaign released a statement quickly, clarifying that he meant the ballot not the bullet and blaming the "dishonest media" for misinterpreting a comment that spread like wildfire on social media.

"It's called the power of unification—2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power," wrote a Trump senior communications advisor. "And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won't be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump."

Trump's comments came in the context of talking about differences between him and Clinton, and his suggestion that Clinton wanted to "essentially abolish the Second Amendment."

Trump's comments:

"Hillary wants to essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know, but I'll tell you what, that will be a horrible day. If Hillary gets to put her judges, right now we're tied you see what's going on. We're tied because Scalia, this was not supposed to happen, Justice Scalia was going to be around for 10 more years a tleast and this is what happens. That was a horrible thing… You're not going to have a Second Amendment, you're not gonna have much of it left, and you're not going to be able to protect yourselves, what you need."

Trump also tut-tutted his short list of Supreme Court nominees, although as Damon Root has noted given Trump's apparent contempt for constitutionally limited government it's hard to expect him to choose constitutionalists for the Supreme Court. Earlier this month, Root spoke with a number of libertarian and conservative legal thinkers about where the Supreme Court was a "good reason" to back Trump. Read that here.

The Clinton campaign condemned the comments, saying that someone "seeking to to be President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way." Except, of course, when it comes to foreign policy. Clinton, of course, famously suggested to President Obama to use violence in Libya. It's also apparently OK for the campaign when it's rhetorical. When is something rhetorical? When you agree. When you disagree, take it literally.

Conservatives, meanwhile, are upset Trump's comments eclipsed the story of the Orlando shooter Omar Mateen's father attending a Hillary Clinton rally in Florida. My first impression of the Trump comments were that they reinforced the idea that Trump seems like a liberal caricature of a conservative.

Watch the full Trump remarks below (queued up relevant comments that start at 37:52)

NEXT: Trump Sort of Proposes Armed Uprising If Hillary Wins, Omar Mateen's Dad in the News, Fiorina Wants to Be RNC Chairperson: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Come on, Reason. This one is a stretch. Don’t go full blown MSM on us.

    1. do you guys even read the articles or do you have go-to comments for when Trump shows up in a headline? I read the comments, you can read the article lol

      1. Did you even read what Trump actually said? Or do you just have this garbage canned?

        1. Yeah I listened to what he said, then I transcribed it, then I read it. Then I thought about it. Then I wrote about it. And I put the full comment right up there in the block quote.

          1. And you still ran with it?

          2. Ed, it’s Trumptown.

          3. Oh my. Ed, Ed, Ed.

            Has everyone up there become pearl-clutchers? Is it now drama queens all the way down?

          4. Don’t listen to ’em, Ed, you’re one of my favs. I thought it was a great article (other than the last sentence), and an grateful for the full quote. Not at all what the headlines were reporting.

            1. I don’t think someone phoning in the talking points they downloaded from Journolist is going to go toe to toe with people hurling invective at them in the comments to defend their position. Whether he’s right or wrong, he’s no phony.

            2. [[slurp, slurp, slurp]]

      2. We don’t read the article, you’re not supposed to read the comments. That’s the social contract.

        1. The social contract is not a suicide pact!

          1. Ummm, I already drank the kool-aid. /keels over

          2. “Obama brings a gun to a knife fight

            By BEN SMITH 06/14/08 02:48 PM EDT

            The McCain campaign and RNC are pouncing on another line from the Obama pool report:
            “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said in Philadelphia last night.

            And why, exactly didn’t Ed include this reference?

            Oh, right, vagina.

            1. I didn’t use that one because I used this one: http://www.politico.com/story/…..ard-025891

              More TDS in action. And 95% from handles I don’t recognize at all.

              1. I just appreciate that you actually read the comments. Good on you for wading into this cesspool of scum and villainy.

              2. Saw that. “Punch back” is pretty tame. Bring a gun implies deadly force.

                You could have used Jefferson, but maybe you haven’t read history.

                “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

                1. The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

                  Thomas Jefferson

                2. That Jefferson, what a whack job.

                  I mean he was talking overthrowing the government. Who would want that, government is the thing we all BELONG to.

              3. To be fair, that’s because people change their handles too often around here.

                1. That’s exactly what I expected you to say, Tulpa.

      3. do you guys even read the articles or do you have go-to comments for when Trump shows up in a headline? I read the comments, you can read the article lol

        Yes?

    2. I’m not sure why you guys are jumping on Kre . . . Kray . . . Kreku . . . Ed about this – this has to be the most rational article this magazine has ever posted about Trump.

      He said what he said, the MSM and his opponents are running with a deliberate misinterpretation, clutching their pearls over conveniently imagined threats, and the opposing candidate is showing her blatant hypocrisy and complete lack of self-awareness – all of which is mentioned in the article.

      Fucking well done K . . . Ed.

      1. This has to be the most rational article this magazine has ever posted about Trump.

        You just had to throw a backhanded dig in, didn’t you.

      2. Indeed.

        ‘Specially when the man used Trump le jour as a segue to Hillary, the Clinton machine, more Hillary, and a really nice parting shot.

        I enjoyed it.

    3. I’m making $96 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $120 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss.
      Just working on the internet for a few hours.
      This is what I do.——————- http://bit.do/GvGO0

    4. I’m making $96 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $120 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss.
      Just working on the internet for a few hours.
      This is what I do.——————- http://bit.do/GvGO0

      1. Are we allowed to threaten violence against spambots?

    5. This was informative, the story is there is no story. I’d heard the hubbub surrounding this and now that I know, I know this is probably the lamest controversy ever. When I heard his original comment gun violence hadn’t even occured to me… took a special decoder ring I guess.

  2. Just tell me when Hillary’s inauguration is.

    1. This is completely unrelated:

      So, at the end, what happened to that Reason subpoena from June 2015?
      Or is it still going on in court?

      1. Well, at first the prosecutor was offering a deal by which H&R commenters become government informants, but we were all like, “we would *never* do that!”

        Anyway, I really feel like smoking some marijuana, do you know where I could find some?

        1. Colorado.

          Mine was a serious question!

          1. Sorry.

            My understanding is that Preet backed down, but I don’t know for sure.

          2. There is a special place reserved in hell for people who ask serious questions*.

            *juvenile bluster

          3. Washington too!

          4. Nothing happened. Nothing was likely to happen – but its good to get your ducks in a row just in case – and the media attention made sure that it wasn’t going to go anywhere.

            So it just got filed. These things never really go away and they certainly won’t tell you if they decided to drop it but if its been a year and none of us have even gotten a suspicious flower deliver van parked down the street then I think its safe to say its done.

      2. IANAL, but I believe the subpoena was withdrawn after ken at popehat blogged about it and suddenly it went viral in the legal geek and liberty communities, several people who should have known better having been put rightly and publicly in their places wrt to 1a and all.

        1. Preet did place 3rd in the 2015 Censorious Asshat contest at Popehat largely based on that.

    2. “Just tell me when Hillary’s inauguration is.”

      I think you misspelled ‘indictment’. Oh, wait…

  3. He was totally suggesting people take up arms and engage in violence, and TOTALLY NOT suggesting that organized political opposition to gun-control was very strong and difficult to overcome.

    EVERYONE KNOWS THIS LIKE DUH

    Amazingly, the NYT actually is the least-hysterical here, saying only, “SOME SAW THREATS”…

  4. Jesus Christ, cancel my fucking subscription.

  5. If he works in a woodchipper reference, I’ll vote for him.

    1. Vote Woodchipper 2016!

  6. “President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way.”

    Isn’t violence basically the whole job description? What does Hillary think the executive branch is doing with all those guns, tasers, prisons, etc.?

    1. Isn’t actual violence or the threat thereof the ENTIRE basis for our current government?

      1. Or any government for that matter.

    2. Never happened before. No, Never.

      “Obama brings a gun to a knife fight
      By BEN SMITH 06/14/08 02:48 PM EDT

      The McCain campaign and RNC are pouncing on another line from the Obama pool report:
      “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said in Philadelphia last night. “Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

      1. There is a link to another instance of this kind of rhetoric not being new in the article you obviously didn’t read, as well as a line pointing out how its rhetoric when you agree and to be taken literally when you don’t.

        But yeah no TDS Trumpkins here lol.

        1. References to foreign policy? Again, not really appropriate. That’s not personal violence at home.

          I agree that Trump should have phrased things differently, but only because he gave the biased MSM fodder for their bleeting.

          1. He just saved $10M in advertising with this….still think he ‘misspoke’?

          2. “…only because he gave the biased MSM fodder for their bleeting.”

            Anyone who is an obstacle, or potential obstacle to Hillary’s coronation does this merely by continuing to draw breath.

    3. violence was how our nation was created. We fought a war of revolution against our own government of Britain.
      it began with their attempt to seize the armory at Concord,and was initially fought with the colonists own privately owned arms.
      the Founders recognized it might have to be done again,and thus included the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

      SO many US citizens failed to learn that,or have forgotten it.
      Some of them can’t even comprehend it,it’s “unthinkable” to them.

      1. Explain this to a lefty and they’ll just start dreaming about the National Health Service they could have had now had George III just grabbed those guns sooner…

    4. “We came, we saw, he died” *cackle* -Hillary Rodham Clinton, United States Secretary of State.

  7. Have you heard the one about Donald Trump suggesting someone shoot Hillary Clinton’s Supreme Court picks? It’s Donald Trump?maybe he did, maybe he didn’t, but the soundbite is going to get a lot of play.

    That’s generous in a way only Robby could possibly be.

    Its being willfully obtuse in order to pretend that hysterical over-reaction and intentional-misreads ISN’T mendacious, but rather ‘honest differences of opinion’. So open-minded.

    1. This is mendacious. The crowd reaction suggests a few supporters took it as a joke about shooting people. This hypersensitivity is starting to veer into Obamabot-like territory. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4yvvCv79QY

      1. You’re echoing the dumbest anti-trump “gotcha” that’s been circulated on front pages of every media-org today… and you’re complaining when the commenters laugh at you for playing along with that horseshit?

        Poor baby.

        “Someone SOMEWHERE took it seriously! therefore you cannot criticize me for saying that it is a reasonable interpretation!”

        ok, ed. You’re the pro.

        1. Where am I echoing? What are you talking about? You don’t have to read the article but it helps.

            1. You quoted me saying maybe he meant something maybe he didn’t. You claim the media presented a “hysterical over-reaction,” but I don’t see that in your quote, or anywhere else in the post. You follow?

              1. You claim the media presented a “hysterical over-reaction,”

                See links in first post (cover of CNN, WaPo, etc)

                You quoted me saying maybe he meant something maybe he didn’t.

                Right, because one has to pretend that there are 2 legitimate potential-reads of what he actually said, when there actually aren’t.

                Ed, when you’re battling in the comments sections, you’ve already lost.

                because you’re begging for people to “treat you fairly”…

                ….despite your own article being entirely about keeping an open-mind in order to apply the most-unfair, dishonest read of someone else’s statements. You seem to want things to be one way, but its the other way.

                1. It’s not about “legitimate potential-reads.” I probably should’ve just written “who gives a shit, it doesn’t matter” up there. The rest of the post bears that out, if you read it. You accuse me of a “hysterical over-reaction” then of trying to “keep an open-mind.”

                  I don’t care if you “treat me fairly.” You are in the comments section and that’s good enough for me. I do find it interesting how the Trumpkins hop into the comments section first, commenting largely based on assumptions about the article that came from just reading the headline. It’s a pattern. Later the rational people (for Trump or not) come along and go WTF? to the Trumpkins. The comment thread here bears that out. I thought I should let you know that I know. TDS is real but it afflicts pro-Trump and anti-Trump folks. So, you know, you want things one way but they’re the other.

                  1. The rest of the post bears that out, if you read it.

                    I thought the entire basis for your piece was that its perfectly A-OK for people to selectively choose bits of statements, and then make a big deal about what that *might mean* (or how *some* people might take it)?

                    Why, its almost like you believe you should have the final word on how other people are supposed to understand your statements.

                    I’m not sure this, “Everyone who dislikes my tabloid-work is probably a Trump-supporter“-line does much to improve things.

                    As i said above = when you’re in the comments trying to push “What you *meant* to say”, it means you already blew it.

                    Also – telling READERS they’re “Trump Deranged” is pretty rich

                    1. You’re not readers if that’s your list. The “could Trump start a cold war” bit was mostly about Democrats’ hypocrisy on Russia and their irresponsible fear-mongering.

                      I wouldn’t have to explain what I “meant” to say if the first blizzard of comments was by people who at least perused the article. But the TDS got a little too much. Like I said, I jumped in to let you know that I know. TDS isn’t just something for people who don’t like Trump.

                    2. You’re not readers if that’s your list.

                      That link was an attempt to answer the question, “How fixated on Trump is Reason Magazine?”

                      So people used a variety of methods to try and measure the degree of dis-proportionality of total-coverage

                      (not the +/- nature of the coverage, as you seem to assume; which again, neither i nor many care about)

                      that was just a sampling of total-articles written on each candidate (based on Reason’s own article tags) from the end of June-Aug 2 or so.

                      the ~2X Trump to ‘anything else’ ratio wasn’t surprising to most. If the period hadn’t also caught the tail-end of Hillary’s FBI woes, it would have been much higher. The fact that the DNC-hack also happened during the period, and got a collective yawn, was also notable.

                      in short, re: your “TDS” handwaving? – heal thyself, physician

                2. Had it been Hillary committing this sort of ‘gaffe’ Ed’s story wouldn’t be the gaffe, it would be ‘some people’ over reacting to a non-gaffe.

                  Bank on it.

              2. Maybe Ed is a child molester and maybe he isn’t.

                Now do you see how bullshit that tactic is?

                1. When I was a middle school teacher I had a parent tell another teacher, right in front of me, that “maybe Mr. K was a racist.” I looked up from the grade book and said “maybe I am.” She complained to the VP, he laughed but said I shouldn’t do that again. Maybe you have a reading comprehension problem, maybe you are just a Trumpkin contrarian.

                  1. IOW you admit to being a pedophile.

          1. You used single quotation marks.

            Everyone knows you use double quotation marks for scare quotes.

            1. “scare quotes”

          2. When you say “maybe he did” suggest that the Second Amendment people should assassinate Hillary’s judicial picks, I think its safe to say you are echoing.

            The only justifiable response to this hysterical over-reaction and intentional-misread is to point out that its dishonest and a little nuts to claim that he is calling for assassinations. It reminds me way too much of the uproar over the “crosshairs” on targeted districts causing the shooting in Tucson back in the day.

            1. When you say “maybe he did” suggest that the Second Amendment people should assassinate Hillary’s judicial picks, I think its safe to say you are echoing.

              The only justifiable response to this hysterical over-reaction and intentional-misread is to point out that its dishonest and a little nuts to claim that he is calling for assassinations.

              But if that’s your point of view, RC – then, well, you probably didn’t read the article and you’re acting like an obamabot or something, because criticizing ed for playing dumb is Not Okay.

              1. Someone here is being willfully obtuse, that’s for sure.

            2. So saying maybe when he says second amendment people can do something about it (but he doesn’t know) he’s suggesting somebody is doing the killing is “echoing” a hysterical over-reaction and intentional-misread? Hysterical overreactions usually don’t have maybes, right?

              1. Ed, ed, ed.

                The hysterical overreaction is saying that Trump called for assassinating judges.

                The echoing is saying “maybe he did”.

                This ain’t rocket surgery.

                1. That’s not what “echoing” means at all. It’s like the opposite.

                  1. You’re right, Ed.

                    You weren’t echoing the hysterical overreaction. You were validating it. Probably without giving it much thought at all, granted.

                    1. Not validating either, but at least you admit the idea it was “echoing” anything is bunk.

                    2. Actually Ed, echos in acoustical terms, are always filtered and subtly changed by reflections, they are not an exact copy of the original source. Neither science nor semantics will save your argument.
                      Go fish.

                2. Let Mandi help you out.

                  Or do I need to go lower than Yahoo Answers for you and Dennis to understand?

                3. LOL. So many are just too dumb to realize he wasn’t suggesting it was “do something about judges”,it was Criminal HILLARY he was suggesting somebody might do something about.
                  then her selection of judges become moot.

                  People just don’t LISTEN to what’s being said these days. they jump to conclusions,too.

            3. After reading what he said, I can’t say I’m sure he wasn’t making a half-joking statement about shooting people. “Calling for assassinations” doesn’t seem like a fair thing to call it in any case.

        2. Please now Dennis. This “shoot Supreme Court nominees” controversy comes nowhere near the “his logo looks like a penis” allegation in the dumbest anti-Trump gotcha sweepstakes.

          PS – on WINS Newsradio this morning in NYC, they were citing as fact that Trump was calling for Hilary’s assassination.

      2. So… at worst, the crowd took it as a joke about shooting people. Which is rather different from a suggestion.

      3. This is mendacious. The crowd reaction suggests a few supporters took it as if she seriously meant that she was going to raise taxes on the middle class.

        FTFY

    2. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know, but I’ll tell you what, that will be a horrible day.

      If there’s any misreading, it’s because Trump doesn’t English speak my friends, well.

      1. Idiocracy is coming sooner than expected. I can’t wait to finally use all of those Starbucks gift cards I’ve been saving.

        1. People with fourth grade educations vote too.

          I applaud Trump for actually trying to win an election.

      2. Yeah, the initial reaction when he says stuff like this, especially when you read it transcribed, is that he sounds half-mad or drunk, like a homeless guy on the bus lecturing whoever is unfortunate enough to sit near him. But I can’t shake the doubt that maybe this is some kind of genius doubletalk he’s mastered, where he intentionally says things that sound incoherent but are shaped enough like actual thoughts that the listener can fill in the blanks and hear him saying whatever they want to hear.

    3. Have you heard the one about Donald Trump suggesting someone shoot Hillary Clinton’s Supreme Court picks? It’s Donald Trump?maybe he did, maybe he didn’t, but the soundbite is going to get a lot of play.

      That’s generous in a way only Robby could possibly be.

      Its being willfully obtuse in order to pretend that hysterical over-reaction and intentional-misreads ISN’T mendacious, but rather ‘honest differences of opinion’. So open-minded.

      I took that part as a bit of humor poking fun at the people who are using this to drum up faked outrage – especially based on the tone of the rest.

  8. At this point, if Trump said “I like pie,” the legacy media would fall all over themselves shrieking that he wants to start WWIII.

    1. “Pie” is well known slang-term/code-language for racist-lynch mobs

    2. Well pi is an irrational number. And we all know how irrational Trump is.

      The smarter blogs will also point out that there are 2 pi radians in a circle. And radian sure sounds a lot like radical. Ergo, Donald Trump is Too irrationally radical to be president.

      Simple logic.

      1. WRONG!

        Radian sounds like Randian, which means Libertarian.

        Ergo, Donald Trump is Too irrationally reactionary to be president

    3. Prove it! Trump probably never even ate the pie he was talking about. What a lying racist.

  9. Donald Trump is looking to dominate the news cycle yet again with another off-hand remark that provides many in the media the cover they need to avoid covering the election more substantively

    Two thoughts:

    (1) That’s a good way to frame it.

    (2) By “many in the media”, you are including yourself? 😉

    1. By “many in the media”, you are including yourself? 😉

      No way man, Ed’s independent-thinking cuts through the contrived narrative like a hot knife through wet toilet paper.

    2. Except I spent the day working on the balanced budget post then trump did something trump-like and the media did something media-like so I wrote that up because everyone is an idiot. Except the commenters. Who agree with me.

      Of course that piece didn’t have Trump in the headline, just the body of the text, so the Trumpkins didn’t show up. I mean it’s so transparent at this point. I wrote a piece a few weeks ago (a few of them) about how the idea that Trump is more dangerous than Clinton is ridiculous and the Trumpkins complained about the treatment of Trump.

      1. I’m supporting Hillary for president*
        (*because you all deserve it)

        Not everyone who thinks shit like this is super-dumb cares about Trump qua Trump.

        1. Vote Hillary 2016!
          Because you deserve it, good and hard!

      2. Except I spent the day working on the balanced budget post then trump did something trump-like and the media did something media-like so I wrote that up

        You know, you didn’t have to join the media herd on this, Ed.

        1. This article is very different from the hysterical over-reaction elsewhere and offers context and substance not offered elsewhere. Unfortunately you decided to use this comments section to respond to those other articles.

          1. This article is very different from the hysterical over-reaction elsewhere and offers context and substance not offered elsewhere.

            You used the same cookie-cutter as this guy, only *you* added sprinkles. Move over, Ed Murrow.

            1. It’s a fucking blog post, not the feature article for the month.

              1. It offers context and substance not offered elsewhere.

                his words, not mine

            2. Ed’s comparing reactions on his post about a balanced budget vs. his post insinuating somebody called for Supreme Court assasinations.

              This is like complaining that everybody went to see a Batman movie instead of an economics documentary.

              Thinking maybe you lack more than you should in the awareness and critical thinking departments, and that Reason needs to give you a lot less leash.

          2. You can’t “offer context and substance” on such an idiotic topic.

            In fact, the two main candidates for POTUS have said nothing of relevance for months, Trump because gibberish comes out when he opens his mouth, and Clinton because what she says and what she does bear no relationship. So, stop reporting on the election, it’s pointless.

  10. Another meaningless Twitter-fight, to be forgotten by the weekend.

  11. Inb4 defensive Trumplings deny he–Dammit!

  12. although as Damon Root has noted given Trump’s apparent contempt for constitutionally limited government it’s hard to expect him to choose constitutionalists for the Supreme Court.

    Opinion journalist cites other opinion journalist’s opinion. That shit may fly with your professors at Columbia but not here, Ed.

    1. Damon and Ed both exhibiting one of the main symptoms of TDS:

      When he says something you don’t like, he totally means it, (and, optionally, its code for something worse).

      When he says something reasonable, he totally doesn’t mean it, because Trumpitler.

      And Ed manages to hit both ends of this in one article!

      1. “When is something rhetorical? When you agree. When you disagree, take it literally.”

  13. Et tu Ed?
    Light the Trumptarian signal. I despise Trump but come on, are you guys trying to get him elected by showing bias?
    Cue 500 comment thread in 3,2,1…

    1. I’d trade a Trumpkin commenter in for a dozen Johns. Even Dunphys for that matter

      1. I can only think of one Trump supporter around these parts – SIV.

        Are there others?

        Pointing out the shoddy quality of Trump coverage =/= being a Trump supporter, you know.

        1. Whatever you say. Wasn’t this SIV’s schtick for a while? Haven’t really noticed him changing but there’s a wave of TDS in the comments. At first I thought it was a long-running inside joke. Boy was I surprised.

          1. Haven’t really noticed him changing but there’s a wave of TDS in the comments.

            Yeah well we learned it from watching you!

          2. TDS is a real thing, Ed. Only a mentally ill person could dislike Trump. He’s the best ever.

            Hopefully you will freed from your false consciousness shortly.

            1. TDS is a real thing.

              You don’t have to be mentally ill to not like Trump (for instance I’m not mentally ill and I don’t like Trump).

              These things can both be true at the same time.

          3. Wasn’t this SIV’s schtick for a while?

            I was merely exhorting my fellow commenters to stand on the RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY and they answered the clarion call.

        2. Pointing out the shoddy quality of Trump coverage =/= being a Trump supporter, you know.

          Unpossible.

          1. Maybe he does, maybe he doesn’t, Playa.

            1. He’s clearly on the fence.

              1. I’m the Christopher Columbus of H&R-regular Trump-touts

        3. The media pushed many people into supporting Trump with their incessant hysterical pants shitting.

          Whatever faults I see in this article I wouldn’t include Ed in that category.

          1. Seems the media did that on purpose, and it worked.

        4. C’mon RC, what about John? He has gone unhinged (as he is wont to sometimes do) in a number of Trump articles.

      2. I dislike Trump supporters as much as the next guy (even if I can understand why they support him), but none of them are as bad as Dunphy. Not even Tony. (Well maybe Tony.)

        1. You know, I used to have hopes for Tony; every now and then you could see him change his opinion, just a little. So of course, he got scared and stopped coming around.

          1. The problem with that is Tony’s a sock. As soon as the constant exposure starts getting through to one handler he’s switched out for another and we start back at zero.

            Seriously, we’ve gotta be on like the 11th Tony since I started frequenting this site back in ’07.

  14. Random Robby disclaimer: It’s true that guns have killed many people.

    1. Ed needs to start using Robby Disclaimers.

      While it’s true that a case could be made that the media is blowing this out of proportion, it’s also true that Trump sounds a lot like Hitler in everything he does so their feelings might be justified.

  15. *peeks in thread*

    Nope, getting the fuck out of here.

    1. Random Robby disclaimer: It’s true, many H&R threads turn to shit.

    2. I READ IT ALL AND I ENGORGED MY EYES ON IT. NOM NOM NOM

  16. OK, someone use really small words and explain to me how what Trump said isn’t (at best) a joke about assassinating judges and/or Hillary? I don’t like Trump, despise Clinton, but I am not seeing the TDS here, it seems like a pretty ugly statement however you parse it.

    1. Is “retard” too long of a word?

      1. If you can’t explain it just say so. I get the ‘lighten up Francis’ angle , I also get the exposing PT Barnum angle. I happen to see more of the latter and less of the former in this case.

        1. OK, so that would be a “yes.”

          1. Gotcha, you’re incapable of making a point that a retard like myself could understand, thanks for trying nonetheless.

            1. This is why I read the comments lol

              1. It’s Trumptown, Ed. Keep telling yourself. No one comes out sane.

    2. Don’t worry, every single person in this thread will say that they actually don’t support Trump. They just apparently give him the benefit of the doubt at every turn. I’m sure they gave Obama the same leeway when he made the joke about killing the Jonas Brothers with a drone strike.

      (obviously no two situations are exactly the same – Obama has actually killed people w/ drones, Trump has [as far as we know] not killed anyone with guns; but Obama was at least clearly joking [even though the joke was in extremely poor taste, which is why many libertarians rightly condemned the remarks] whereas Trump was also joking but the delivery was poor)

      Just because conservatives get a raw deal from the media doesn’t mean we have to go to bat for every single stupid comment made by a guy whose political ideology lines up at least as much with leftist ideas as conservative ones. It’s embarrassing.

      1. Oh my god I loved you in Night at the Roxbury.

        1. Richard Grieco’s third-best work.

    3. I don’t know why it would be such a surprise if it were a joke like that. Trump isn’t exactly famous for his discretion in what he says. I’m not sure that’s what he was doing, but I don’t see why so many are certain that it wasn’t.

      I don’t care either way. He can say what he wants.

    4. Well,when the election and voting process is corrupted and not honest,what other avenue is there?
      Criminal Hillary should not even BE a candidate,BY LAW. the law REQUIRES she be disqualified from any gov’t position or employment.

      Far too many people don’t realize;when the Rule of Law is gone,it’s gone for everybody,not just us peons.

      1. She sucks, but I don’t think there’s any doubt that she’s at least 35 years old, a natural born citizen, and has been a resident for the last 14 years. She is therefore, unfortunately, by law, legally qualified for the office.

        1. the crimes that Criminal Hillary committed with her server are proven by the evidence,and the law requires she be disqualified for those crimes.
          18 U.S. Code ? 2071
          (a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
          (b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

    5. Looked to me like he was talking about the political clout of 2nd Amendment supporters.

      1. I agree. Everybody fucking taking a chill pill already. JFC.

      2. That’s certainly what it sounded like to me. If they’re any complaints it’s that he might have cribbed it from NRA or Gun Owners of America. Half of it sounds exactly like stuff on their Facebooks.

    6. What part of “joke” don’t you understand?

  17. Jeezuz give Ed a break:

    The Clinton campaign condemned the comments, saying that someone “seeking to to be President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way.” Except, of course, when it comes to foreign policy. Clinton, of course, famously suggested to President Obama to use violence in Libya. It’ also apparently ok for the campaign when it’s rhetorical. When is something rhetorical? When you agree. When you disagree, take it literally.

    You guys need to go read more Robby articles, fer fucksakes.

    1. It’s not in the headline so it doesn’t exist. Who even has time to read the sub-headline?

      1. See this one yet…. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ3fTFHQ0KA the hillary camp is unhinged with threats

    2. I saw that, and its nice and all, I guess, but its a category error.

      Calling for judicial assassinations is not in the same bucket as calling for an aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

      Now, Hillary or one of her minions encouraging pro-illegal immigration rallies at Trump events, knowing full well they have a bad habit of turning violent, that would be apples to apples.

      1. Except the campaign didn’t condemn candidates for calling for judicial assassinations it condemned candidates for calling for violence, a category under which domestic assassinations and foreign wars both fit. So maybe you’re not a Trump supporter. Just a flavor-of-the-month contrarian.

        1. To be fair, we’re libertarians. Being a contrarian asshole comes with the territory.

          1. To be fair, we’re libertarians. Being a contrarian asshole comes with the territory.

            *exhales … realizes this explains much about my life*

            1. *pats DWB on the shoulder* it’s OK, man, you’re home now, it’s gonna be OK

      2. Calling for judicial assassinations is not in the same bucket as calling for an aggressive interventionist foreign policy.

        You’re right, some would argue and make a good point that the former is less of a horrific net loss than the latter.

  18. I wipe my own ass.

  19. in trump’s defense, i doubt he even knows what he really meant by all those words.

  20. All those screaming that this is a uniquely outrageous reaction: what is “that … horrible day” that Trump is talking about?

  21. He wasn’t suggesting anything, he was making another one of his stupid jokes. And yeah the joke was about shooting people (though it’s not clear whether he meant Hillary or the justices). He has no filter, and that specific trait is what has gotten him this far. If he thinks something will be funny, he’ll say it.

    Wonderful election we’re having, isn’t it?

  22. Not exactly a revolutionary, but WDATPDIM?

      1. Communists. They’re everywhere.

  23. Not even Mongo that stupid…

  24. 1. I am sure Trump is joking …

    2. Yeah, he insinuated violence.

    1. You’re being unfair and dishonest. You’re just another in the DemOp Media.

    2. He barfs up a word salad.

      The media seizes on it, as Ed correctly observed, to distract from the even worse things going on around Hillary’s campaign. Now, its only a distraction if you pretend it was in any way serious. So, the media has to pretend he really did call for judicial assassinations. Which is hysterical over-reaction.

      Honestly, Ed’s article is mostly on point, His attempted “to be sure” about Hillary missed the boat, and he couldn’t quite resist validating, just a little, the hysterical overreaction. Which we then hysterically overreact to, because we have a commenting legend to maintain.

      1. you’re fucking with me.

        +100 woodchippers

        1. Ed, this really is my honest nutshell take on your article. Mostly not bad, with a couple of missteps, which the unhinged ids in the commentariat (definitely including me) teed off on.

          1. This comment I totally get, and this kind of feedback is why I look through the comments regularly. Don’t agree on the validation, but it’s definitely something to think about. I am concerned about the TDS on both sides. But at the top of the thread it felt like people were responding to a totally different article than the one posted here.

            1. Then something else for you to think about:

              My first impression of the Trump comments were that they reinforced the idea that Trump seems like a liberal libertarian caricature of a conservative.

              Fixed that for you.

              Remember, the GOP isn’t entitled to the libertarian vote, they have to earn it. And now, those fucking #Nevertrumpers are obviously just a bunch of neosocons who won’t vote for my guy like they should! See the difference? Yeah, me neither.

            2. It’s nothing to think about, Ed. We all understand the rhetorical device of “maybe, maybe not.” It’s only the willfully obtuse that are giving you shit about it. You were indicating that you aren’t interested in whether Trump was alluding to violence or not – you wanted to talk about the hypocritical reaction to it – but they NEED you to take a position on this. Because if you’re not going to step forward and wholly defend Trump’s spewing mouth, then you have TDS and are virtue signalling and all that other bullshit.

      2. Maybe a dozen commenters are foolish to post hundreds of comments a day defending said barfer of word salad, especially when they also coyly say they aren’t voting for him.

  25. We could have had an interesting discussion about amphiboly.

    We could have had.

    1. We could have had.

      Because you SF’ed the link?

        1. There is not a single bootylicious ass or ‘Thug Life’ reference on that page.

          What did you do to the real Mulatto?

            1. Like a true Catholic you try your best to ruin everything fun.

              1. Hey, at least *one of us* posted a video.

              2. To be fair Crusty, they’re not all bad. They did invent crippling alcoholism and Catholic schoolgirls, which teenage me did appreciate.

                1. More than once* I have been tasked with going bar-to-bar to find a drunk Jesuit, so I am aware of the Catholic proclivity for alcohol.

                  *I have done this twice.

            1. A cunning linguist for sure.

  26. “Like a madman who casteth firebrands, arrows, and death,
    So is the man that deceiveth his neighbour, and saith, Am not I in sport?”

  27. It’s like a disembodied Id somehow assumed human form.

  28. I didnt get the TDS vibe from Ed.

    I also didnt get the idea that Trump seriously suggested shooting anyone.

    I will pose a question: what the hell is the second amendment in the bill of rights for?
    Is the greatest danger to liberty forign power or a domestic despot? This only makes Trump more popular.

    1. Fuck this mobile commenting
      I will rant when i get home

      Im the designated driver so i cant even drink

      1. You done fucked up, son.

        *cracks 3rd beer*

    2. It was Ed simultaneously saying maybe he did seriously call for assassinations, and reflexively discarding Trump’s entirely MOR judicial shortlist, that raises suspicions of TDS.

    3. Obviously, it’s for hunting deer and rabbits-so long as you have the appropriate training, tax stamp, and lockable storage.

      1. At least Trump doesnt need reminding of that.

        Neither does Cankles. She hates the second because it is the ultimate obstacle to her realizing her ambitions and so she has vowed to destroy it.

        1. If she wins she will destroy it, if not by legislation then by EO.

          1. That is what she said she would do

            I wonder how that will turn out?

            1. I wonder how that will turn out?

              Years after she issues her regs and EOs, with millions of guns confiscated and the civilian ammo supply drying up, a case will make its way to SCOTUS, which will say “Under Heller, which we totally don’t overturn, these are reasonable regulations and are upheld.”

              1. This is probably correct, unfortunately.

    4. What is 2A for? Ask TJ:

      ” “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

      Trump, even in the worst interpretation, is merely channeling Jefferson.

      I like Trump more each day. I just wish he had included that quote rather than paraphrasing.

    5. I didn’t get the idea that Ed was saying that he might have seriously been suggesting shooting anyone. He was either making a bad joke, talking about something that could happen without encouraging it, or talking about non-violent political action. I have no idea what Trump’s intention was, but it sounds more like one of the first two to me.

    6. will pose a question: what the hell is the second amendment in the bill of rights for?
      Is the greatest danger to liberty forign power or a domestic despot? This only makes Trump more popular.

      you make an interesting point. If Trump suggested that people will take arms if a SC tries to destroy the second amendment how is that inconsistent with the second amendment?

    1. Just look on your refrigerator.

      1. It’s all macaroni art from Jew Camp.

        1. This satisfies Moses.

          1. I just want to get down on my knees and please Moses.

            1. Careful, Moses rod may not be what it seems.

            2. Hey, its Wednesday and I can watch reru…fuck, its only Tuesday.

              1. You can feel his salvation all over your face tomorrow.

    2. A Smart, Umami-Laced Trick for Making Buttered Popcorn Even Better

      basically a parm, garlic, sriracha, soy compound butter

      1. Will I believe what happens next?

        1. Probably not. They’re claiming that these tiny little seeds allegedly expand to 20 times their original volume and become a delicious snack food. Sounds like bullshit to me.

        2. Your asshole belches flame?

          1. Me? Yeah. But I haven’t done that in a long time. It’s really dangerous.

            1. Sorry, was replying to GILMORE replying to jesse re: delicious popcorn coating. But that sounds like a neat party trick.

              1. And by GILMORE, I meant Diane Reynolds. Derp.

      2. Swap out the soy for Maggi and you have a winner.

        1. I like the way you think.

          1. In this case I would go with the classier (and more importantly, more expensive) red Maggi. It has a different and more poignant depth along with the right balance of semisweet. Yellow Maggi is slightly better for certain “Asian” stuff IMO.

            My go-to sweet-savory chicken wings, chicken/pork satay marinade: Worcestershire, “yellow” Maggi, sugar, and pulverized garlic cloves.

            1. There’s red Maggi?

              I’m out. Hangry.

              1. Yes. After I kicked a small bottle labeled in Polish language, I found a monster 27oz (800ml) bottle (pictured in red) for $20 at my go-to Asian market, a product of Germany. Seemed like a bargain because the red Maggi goes from between $5-8 for a small bottle at places like H-Mart; cheapest haunt I’ve seen is a Polish market in this area. I’m not even going to bother getting another bottle of yellow Maggi for the time being.

                1. What’s the difference in composition? Maggi yellow is basically soy sauce without soy, so it’s a good meat companion. Perfect on skirt steak.

                  1. Curious about the base.

                    I’m doing dumplings and other dim sum for dinner tonight. I live in a Chinese food desert, so when I’m traveling, I try to take advantage.

                    1. I have a bottle. I’ll show you tomorrow.

                      Don’t worry, it’s vagetarian.

                    2. I have a particular fondness for vage, so perfect.

                  2. When I first heard about “red cap” vs “yellow cap” my first reaction was to think “bullshit, gotta be placebo effect”, so I went and gave the red a try. My take on red is as I described above – more full-bodied taste and a bit sweeter. Could still be a sort of “red food coloring makes water taste like cherry” effect, but I’m not so convinced they are identical. I would see more advantage to making some flavour tweaks to intended markets.

                    In terms of the red ingredients, the site I link to above says: “Water, salt, hydrolysed soya protein, Sodium glutamate, Disodium inosinate (E631), Yeast extract, Citric acid, acetic acid, wheat and “aroma.””

                    For yellow cap composition, some Dutch site I pulled up lists: “Hydrogenated plant protein, water, wheat, protein, salt, water, flavour enhancer, monosodium glutamate, disodium inosinate, salt.”

                    1. Oh and my two cents based on the comparison of the two ingredient lists, the main takeaway is that MSG still fucking rules and is the king of flavour amplifiers, and also that yeast fucking rules.

                    2. MSG is good. Yeast extract is better. I have a whole jar in my cupboard. It makes everything taste “meaty”. Best soups I’ve ever made.

                      The Disodiums (inosinate and and guanylate) are synergistic to MSG. Usually used in a 98%/2% blend.

                      I was pretty sure that Maggi liquid yellow cap is mostly fermented wheat. Now I’m going to have to go check.

                    3. If you’ve got it on hand, let me know. Otherwise I will also check.

                    4. Christ.

                      From what I can tell, there are about 40 different formulations, depending on what county you live in.

                      And given where I shop, mine probably isn’t the American version.

    3. Do you have a cast-iron skillet?

      1. Yes. 12″ Lodge and a cast Iron Wok.

        I also have a liter of avocado oil that I got at Costco yesterday. Smoke point is over 500 degrees.

      2. Does the Pope take a shit in the woods?

  29. Since SCOTUS has had a significant part in destroying the rule of law, they earned to live by the consequences of the law of the jungle. Fuck ’em.

    Dear Trump,

    More of this please.

    Thanks.

    P.S. It is quite hilarious how you play the entire pundocrat like fucking puppets. More please and pass the popcorn.

    1. Yeah, this was intentional.

      1. Of course it was. And some of the people who cheered understood. And the next president and senate sure as fuck had better.*

        *This is in no way to be construed as a threat to anyone anywhere, especially in government, Federal, State, or local or to endorse any specific woodchipper manufacturer.

  30. Truth be told, if Hillary nominates someone who thinks they can take away my natural rights I will ignore them and exercise my god given rights anyway…

      1. Do you see a string of question marks in JWW’s comment?

    1. I sympathize but it’s difficult to exercise your natural rights in prison.

      1. It’s also really hard to start throwing people in prison when the military largely agrees with your victims.

        1. Yes it is. Now you know why they are so keen in letting as many illegal immigrants in the military as possible. They are more likely to be willing to shoot Americans and such if told to do so than natives.

            1. He’s selling bulletproof tinfoil hats now.

          1. No, this is why they are arming the fuck out of the Bureaucracy. Because bureaucrats don’t give a fuck about your constitutionally protected god given rights and the military does.

          2. It’s gotta be a joke. Not even John is this… John

  31. Clearly, “second amendment people” means “assassins,” not “people who support the second amendment.” Anyone can see that.

    1. Trump’s a walking talking Rorschach test.

      1. That explains why I’m so aroused. Everything looks like boobs.

      2. spot on analysis. well said, Grinch

  32. I have always said that BLM chooses close cases and ignores instances of obvious police misconduct because the entire point is to sow racial division not solve the problem of police brutality. Turns out that I was right.

    http://thefrontierlab.org/wp-c…..Part-1.pdf

    1. Turns out? You did nail it but i thought it was pretty obvious to everyone with a brain.

      1. Now we have proof beyond the overwhelming circumstantial evidence.

        1. There’s a sliver, a sliver of white America that hates white supremacy and that hates
          capitalism. These are the folks that you need to organize with.

          Yeah, I’m totally on board with BLM.

          1. a sliver of white America that hates white supremacy and that hates
            capitalism

            Also… a sliver of white America that hates white supremacy and that hates cupcakes/sunshine/kittens

            Ergo, if you like cupcakes/sunshine/kittens you’re racist!

            1. I Hate….oh who am I kidding, I like kitties.

              1. Like ’em sliced thin and deep-fried?

            2. There’s a sliver, a sliver of white America that hates white supremacy and that hates
              capitalism. These are the folks that you need to organize with.

              Apparently no one got the memo given black people basically cost Bernie the nomination.

              1. Apparently no one got the memo given black people basically cost Bernie the nomination

                Does no one remember the 90s?

                Hillary isn’t a pragmatist. She’s not an opportunist. She’s the actually socialist side of the Clinton equation. This was widely noted in the 90s–that it was Bill who tacked towards the center–and Hillary made it plain that this was something she did not like.

                Black people voted for the socialist because there was no other choice. The Democrat in the race is Trump.

              1. I’m not a sweets guy but bakery around the corner makes these red velvet cupcakes with cream cheese frosting that are out of this world.

          2. There’s a sliver, a sliver of white America that hates white supremacy and that hates
            capitalism. These are the folks that you need to organize with.

            Who support more government, requiring and empowering more cops, who bust more heads and end more black lives.

            Um, y’all …

    2. Now I am in the very awkward position of defending BLM.

      There was recent police shooting of a black woman here in LA. About a year ago but it got through the procedures a few weeks ago. BLM protesters demanded the resignation of police chief over it.

      The short of it is a woman who met the description robbery suspect was chased by police after a 911 call. Two cops saw her and chased her on foot. She turned on them and wielded a kitchen knife above her head. One cop tazed her, the other cop shot her dead, at the same time.

      A local radio reporter interviewed a BLM spokeswoman (I think she was one of the 3 movement founders). She did not have a problem with the cops chasing her, subduing her, and arresting her. She thought, though, that one of the cops used excessive force.

      You might not have heard of that story if you don’t live in LA. It’s not the right setup for national political theater.

      1. Link to a story?

        1. I think this is the original new report from the LA Times:

          http://www.latimes.com/local/l…..story.html

          Here’s a follow up:

          http://www.latimes.com/local/l…..story.html

          1. There’s a bullshit training statistic used police academies in CA. They teach that anyone can be lethal with a knife inside a radius of 27 feet.

            No research, no science. They just teach that number.

            Old lady with a wheel chair creeps up on you with a knife on her lap? Shoot her at 27 feet. You feared for your life. She could have ginsu’d you up into a thousand pieces before you even broke leather.

            1. Well, it’s a kind of cargo-cult rule.

              The point was illustrated by (I think) Massad Ayoob (one of the good arabs I guess) just how fast an agile felon with a blade can close on a victim. Basically, if he’s close enough to be inside arms reach before you draw, he’s a plausible threat.

              That rule of thumb turned into 21-27 feet being the kind of range for “reasonable personal defense” with firearms, but that view is under review nowadays because of the increasing use of long guns at places like San Bernadino etc.

      2. She did not have a problem with the cops chasing her, subduing her, and arresting her.

        Nobody runs in L.A.

        1. Where are you gonna run to in LA? Even the ghetto in LA is composed of one-story bungalows with lawns. It’s not like NYC or Philly with row-houses, alleys, and fire escapes. LA is not a good place to run from the police, if that’s your game.

          1. Sorry, it was an 80s reference.

          2. LAPD and LASD have 12 and 14 helicopters, respectively, so there’s that too.

          3. And our wide streets and expansive freeway system make for the best police chases.

            *turns on KCAL 9*

    3. You’ve got to organize with class-conscious workers?.You’ve got to organize with the
      undocumented
      . You’ve got to organize with the radical trans people?.You’ve got to
      build a poor people’s movement, a colonized people’s movement.

      lol critical theory

  33. Give the guy a break. He had to act like a totally conventional politician yesterday. And didn’t he do such a nice job? He’s just blowing off steam.

    1. OK, this comment makes up for a lot of… not so good comments

  34. “If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks,” Trump said in North Carolina today, “although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know.”

    Anyone who sees that as a threat of violence is either lying or retarded or both. There is no sugar coating it.

    1. Could mean the NRA, GOA, individual 2A supporters who wield quite a bit of political influence. That’s what popped into my head when I heard the full comment.

      1. That is exactly what it means. And it is of course true. Overturning Heller would just allow them to ban guns. I wouldn’t enact a ban.

        1. Can I also buy bulletproof vests in the Republic of John?

      2. My initial reaction as well. Complete and utter overreaction with a disturbing number of liberals demanding Trump be jailed over it.

        That being said, can we not kid ourselves that the media would be having a much harder time of propping up Hillary is the Republicans weren’t running a guy who can’t speak coherent English?

        1. True on both counts, Mr. Man.

        2. Clinton supporters should be on their presidential knee-pads, thanking Trump for helping the unwinnable easily win.

          1. It’d be the same story with someone else. It’d be an inoffensive guy who wouldn’t say outrageous things but who would be afraid to attack for fear of the press turning on him which, being a Rep, is a futile strategy. He’d lose with grace and dignity after putting up a halfass fight.

            1. now you’re talking Gary

    2. I’m not convinced it wasn’t a reference to possible violence, but it’s not any kind of threat.

      1. ^exactly.

    3. OR,they could more reasonably see it as Trump REMINDING people that it could happen. (“so vote for me…”)

      Some people are too retarded to discern what constitutes a threat,especially a CREDIBLE threat.

  35. See, THIS is how you do it =

    POLITICS
    Donald Trump Suggests Shooting Hillary Clinton, Her Supreme Court Picks, Or Both

    S.V. Date Senior Political Correspondent, The Huffington Post

    Donald Trump on Tuesday warned his supporters that if Hillary Clinton is elected president and appoints judges to the Supreme Court, there is nothing anyone can do about it. But then he added that, given the Second Amendment, maybe there is.

    “If she gets to pick her judges ? nothing you can do, folks,” Trump said with a shrug at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina. “Although, the Second Amendment people. Maybe there is. I don’t know.”

    What Trump was actually suggesting is not clear. However, ….

    When anyone complains, the writer can get really huffy and go, DID YOU NOT READ MY ARTICLE? I SAID “NOT CLEAR. JESUS YOU PEOPLE ARE NUTS”

    1. What he was suggesting was not clear but let me slander him by assuming it was anyway. God these people are scum.

      1. as noted above = same cookie-cutter, different sprinkles.

        If the crucial substance of difference is how one couches the “MAYBE SO, MAYBE NOT”-bits, the sophistication of your caveats? its effectively the same cookie.

        1. Can’t we all just get along and pull the lever for Hillary?

          1. Why do you hate America? that is what a vote for Criminal Hillary is.

          2. Don’t get me wrong, i love cookies, and i welcome Reason’s efforts to help elect Hillary. She is the shadow of doom which will unite the various races to look past their petty squabbles. I’m ready 4 Her.

            1. The very thin gruel of hope that I have left is that the economy is going to implode, soon. Maybe Hillary will get the blame, but probably not. But maybe the younger generations will look around and say, (you have to read this like a Talking Heads song) this is not my grandfather’s country, what has happened?
              And maybe we can have a libertarian moment in 2020…0000.

              1. Burn. It. Down.

  36. Hoo boy. Maybe you Trump faggots need less book learnin.

    1. I mean, don’t get me wrong. If you can’t joke about murdering Hillary, what is there to say about her. But hoo boy.

      1. joke about murdering Hillary,

        Reported Spam

      2. “murder” is the WRONGFUL killing of another. Thus,killing Criminal Hillary would not be murder.
        One -could- consider it “Justifiable homicide”.

        1. or even a patriotic act of defense of America and it’s Constitution.

    2. ‘…Trump faggots…’

      Milo?

      1. Eh, Lewandowski always seemed to be compensating for something.

        1. In high school, back in the ’70, when the music you liked was very important for some reason that escapes now, I was a big David Bowie fan and got called FAGGOT! by classmates on a regular basis.

          Space faces, not safe spaces!

          1. For some reason? It’s a well known fact that David Bowie music kills boners and chases hot women away. And getting chicks is a pretty damn important topic to kids in high school, unless of course, they were Bowie fans. Dig?

  37. Trump is going down. The reason is that he’s a modern day Hitler and we caught on. However the commentariat will try to spin it either as a plot by Hillary or he just got cold feet on becoming president. The simple truth is – he wanted to be dictator and we realized it before it was too late. We’ve learned from history – congrats, people!

    1. Your trolling is third rate, but the name is perfect.

    2. Hitler was heavy on tax cuts and deregulation, light on empire building too?

  38. I’m ready for football, fall beers, crispness in the air, the smell of burning leaves, sunset before 9.

    1. I am so with you, JB.

      Although in Tucson, we don’t get crispness in the air or the smell of burning leaves (unless there’s a wildfire, that is). But yeah.

      http://tucson.com/news/local/w…..f8e.html#2

      1. Wow those are some incredible pics. I bet that’s insane to watch in person.

        1. The dramatic night-time pics make it look awesomer than it was, because long exposures.

          But its still pretty cool.

          My place is tucked up along the national park east of town. I’d lived there less than a month when I looked out my kitchen window at the Catalinas one morning, and saw fire coming over the top and heading down. Directly toward my house. It was still miles away, and fizzled out, but still . . . .

          1. Damn that’s scary. Is the threat to you over or is there still potential risk?

            1. For season in the South West is pretty much over… except for a few fires breaking in west Texas.

            1. That fire was inconvenient. VERY inconvenient.

            2. Sure that wasn’t just a giant rave?

              1. I’m sure. Unless I fried my brain on rave drugs, in which case I can’t be sure of anything.

          2. The dramatic night-time pics make it look awesomer than it was, because long exposures.

            I have some pictures of a good sized wildfire that was over 30 miles away from where I was standing that look like the goddamn apocalypse because they were long exposures taken at night.

            1. The Sand Canyon fire looked like the apocolypse during the day. Similar convection patterns to a volcano.

              It was dark at lunchtime, and I’m a good hour away from it.

                1. Seriously, fuck instagram and their tiny low res images.

        2. Almight JB,

          Being that I am from Columbus like you, I cannot get excited about fall.

          Sure buckeye football starting up is always sweet and this year should be fun, but fall here sucks.

          It’s dreary, rainy, and gray. Sure September rocks and if you get Indian summer October is great too, but that’s a big if. November and December both blow and most years fall is really a 2-3 week span in between summer and what is really just a rainy season.

          If we actually got substantial amount of fall as you describe it that would be sweet but reality is just not so, almost ever.

    2. Maybe that’s what’s happening. The polyester in Trump’s wig is not allowing for proper heat radiation and in the current hot part of the summer, it’s slowly cooking his brain.

      1. Brain? That’s never been established. Stop spouting nonsense.

    3. I too cannot wait for Football God Jim Harbaugh to rule Saturdays.

      1. Which Harbaugh coaches the team I hate and which one coaches the other team I hate? I always get them confused.

        1. I was referring to the one that takes his shirt off at practice.

              1. Soccer players take their shirts off after a golazo. Same idea?

      2. I can’t wait for the Buckeyes to destroy him in November either.

        1. Aha! This narrows it down.

        2. Aren’t the Buckeyes that team that pretends to have college students playing football?

          1. One of many. Actually we’ve had some pretty good players that were pretty smart as well. Maybe not Northwestern smart but…:)

              1. I was thinking more along the lines of Craig Krenzel.

                1. Every player with the exception of Craig Krenzel or Dane Sanzenbacher?

            1. Northwestern had a really good team…. Shit, I think I was still in high school.

              Everything really came together. No standout players, just some great teamwork.

              1. I do remember

                1. We modeled our program after it. Instead of spending hours in the weight room, their O-line would push cars around the parking lot. “Working class ripped”, I believe it’s called.

  39. “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” ?Hillary Clinton, 2004.

    Have you heard the one about Hillary Clinton promising to turn the USA into a Marxist state? It’s Hillary Clinton?maybe she did, maybe she didn’t, but the soundbite is going to get a lot of play.

    1. If she weren’t running against the Stupid Party, it might.

  40. Trump should find the Second Amendment guy hiding in the duck blind of his hair who routinely shoots him in the foot.

  41. My first impression of the Trump comments were that they reinforced the idea that Trump seems like a liberal caricature of a conservative.

    Indeed, but a poor one at that. Every time he attempts to mimic conservative culture and values it comes off hilariously forced and awkward. From Two Corinthians to this. “Second Amendment people”?

    His policies aside, nominating him was suicidal for the GOP simply because he’s possibly the least articulate person to ever run for president on a modern major party’s platform.

    1. he’s possibly the least articulate person to ever run for president on a modern major party’s platform.

      brevity, yo

      1. I actually think he’s worse than Obama, who is quite inarticulate off-script.

        1. Obama, who is quite inarticulate off-script.

          Do you remember when praising Obama for being “articulate” was closet-racism? Sigh. Those were happier times.

    2. His policies aside, nominating him was suicidal for the GOP simply because he’s possibly the least articulate person to ever run for president on a modern major party’s platform.

      I don’t think any of them are articulate. Off-script Obama is 80% ‘…duhhhh…ummm’ and on a per-capita-paragraph of off-script ramblings Hillary is undisputed champion of stilted stupidity.

      Unlike Trump, they recognize limits of their abilities and stick to scripts much as possible.

  42. I will vote for Obama for another term. It says he can’t run – doesn’t say he can’t get elected.

    1. AM, you never fail to miss. Ladies and gentlemen, your 22nd Amendment

      No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,. . . .

      1. The constitution is silent regarding issue of perpetual Chicago juntas. Therefore legal.

        -AmSoc

  43. https://reason.com/blog/2016/08…..osition-le

    In this thread, hypocritical mulatto demosntrates he’s, too stupid to realize he’s throwing a temper tantrum responding to a post he thinks is about him but isn’t.

    I think the best is him declaring “intellectual checkmate” while ignorant of the fact that his butthurt rant was a result of his shitty reading skills.

    Good times.

    1. OH MY GOD! YASSS!!!!

      You’re still at it? 4 and a half hours?

      GOD, I LOVE THE MENTALLY ILL!

      1. It wasn’t even about you!

        Ahahahahahahahahhahaahhaha

        Youre so fucking stupid you can’t read!

        Go ahead, take the last word, you cant help yourself.

    2. You seemed sober a few hours ago. What happened?

      1. Wait, let’s predict his response, Playa….

        You’re an alcoholic, Playa!”

        I retract my earlier criticisms of neo-Watsonian behaviorism.

        1. SWING AND A MISS! YOU PREDICT LIKE YOU READ!

          take the last word, you cant stop anyway

        2. Quite some time ago I had a stalker following me around the threads here for a few days. Good times. Some people have no life.

          1. I’d wager it was the same psycho, JB.

            1. could be

              1. Was it a combination of just shouting back whatever you said to it while attempting to re-write history by shouting the loudest?

                Which leads to the question if it’s actually psychotic or just a precocious 12-year-old boy posting on HnR?

                1. It was putting words into my mouth based on one comment, and then extrapolating an opinion that I did not have based on those words that I did not say, and then following me around arguing with that opinion that I didn’t have. Very strange.

      2. Booze guy, come on.

    3. Hitting the bottle early? You weren’t making this many errors a few hours ago.

      1. I just said yes.

        1. What’s your poison? You seem like a gin guy to me.

          1. Rum generally

          2. I was gonna say margaritas.

      2. It’s always happy hour somewhere.

        1. Happy hour or 4:20?

          And by “4:20,” I mean “heroin.”

          1. Yesterday when we were driving somewhere, my 15 year old started giggling. “Hey Dad, it’s 4:20. I bet you don’t know what that means.”

            1. That’s what you get for being an absentee father.

              He needs to learn it by watching you
              !

              And don’t deny that is exactly how you looked circa 1987.

              1. I paraphrased that bit last night explaining to my wife why our two-year old is up watching the Olympics so very late at night for a two-year old.

                1. Did you tell her because it’s fucking summer and your 2 year old doesn’t have anywhere to be tomorrow?

                  1. No, I told her the toddler learned it from watching her. And that parents who watch midnight co-ed volleyball for the competition alone reap what they deserve.

              2. In 1987, I was a 33 year old who looked like Phineas Freak.

                1. It was a different time.

            2. my 15 year old started giggling. “Hey Dad, it’s 4:20. I bet you don’t know what that means.”

              My 12-year old niece pulled me aside during christmas and said very seriously,

              “Uhm, i don’t think you know this, but The Indians? uhm, we took – stole – their land a long time ago? and like, that’s really a problem. A lot of people don’t know that. ”

              I did a very good, “OMG REALLY??” and strung her on for another 10 mins. Also! did you know that, like, you shouldn’t call things “Asian”?

              I then began to express my admiration for the wonders of modern education, and explained to her that my own schooling was almost exclusively limited to Animal Husbandry and How To Spot Witches. I bet kids don’t even use chalk and tablets anymore!

              1. Also! did you know that, like, you shouldn’t call things “Asian”?

                *renames 40 GB worth of data on his hard drive*

                1. *renames 40 GB worth of data on his hard drive*

                  Pics of the 12 year old niece is what he meant.

                  1. The server is in Tokyo.

                    Completely legit.

                2. LMFAO

              2. I larfed

              3. Also! did you know that, like, you shouldn’t call things “Asian”?

                Oriental is preferred.

          2. That should have been the “Ass to Ass” clip, but it wasn’t.

  44. It’s amazing a guy can make so many genuinely dumb and dangerous comments, and yet still be unfairly targeted by the media. No, this was not a threat. No, Trump did not seriously advocate for Russia to hack us. Trump saying the election could be rigged, that’s worthy of criticism. But it’s getting buried by these horrifically stupid non-stories where a journalist feels it’s his or her moral imperative to stop Trump, and so they twist his incoherent ramblings into the newest Trump controversy.
    .
    I’m eagerly awaiting whatever generic Republican or Democrat defeats Hillary/Trump in 2020. Get me back to that baseline awfulness

  45. Was his comment not a jab at how the left will often characterize the NRA (and other “Second Amendment people”) as some sort of all-powerful lobby that has the majority of congress in its pay? Because that’s how I read it.

    1. that’s how I read it.

      its whatever you want it to be. Amazing!

      Talking in non-sentences and grunts and hand gestures allows for an amazing spectrum of interpretation.

      1. It allows the media to get baited into looking like fuckwits and giving Trump free attention. And has the bonus of making people think about what to do if Hillary does get elected. And by that, I definitely don’t mean whacking her the way she both deliberately and carelessly has killed so many other people. Because that’s not how we do things in America, since we have healthy electoral and legal systems for dealing with bad actors without having to resort to political violence.

        1. It allows the media to get baited into looking like fuckwits

          Look man, i thought you said you felt bad about all the shit Ed was getting. there’s no need to kick a guy when he’s down.

  46. God I love reading the comment section when Trump says something MONUMENTALLY STUPID (and even if there’s a disagreement about what it meant, the way he phrased it was monumentally stupid) and seeing everyone go TEAM RED TEAM RED TEAM RED TEAM RED.

    1. I read the comments as “Hillary is so bad, we’ll line up to suck Trumps dick.”

      Count me in.

    2. GayJay, Weld and that new LDSCFRCIAGS guy are TEAM RED this cycle. Try to keep up.

    3. GO GO GO. RAH RAH RAH. YAAAAY TEAM!

  47. Interesting that they leave it up in the air as to whether the dude shot himself or the cops shot him.

    http://nbc4i.com/2016/08/09/ma…..l-veteran/

    1. I think i read this elsewhere (PM Links?) and they were less ambiguous that the police shot the guy the second he showed up at the door of his own home with a rifle.

      Even though he had called the police himself. This story says that a “help line” called the police. the previous one suggested he’d called the cops himself.

      Ever notice how EVERY vet always ends up with PTSD after they’re dead?

      Smith, 45, had spent four years in the Army, deployed in Saudi Arabia. The Desert Storm veteran also spent a year in the Air Force Reserves.vet2

      His sister, Dianna Gossett, said Smith was a great father to his 13-year-old daughter and 10-year-old son. She also described him as a hard worker but said he struggled with post-traumatic stress disorder and physical pain. She said he had recently been hospitalized for back pain and headaches.

      Desert Storm.

      Notable for a lot of sick-veterans (*one of my friends was a JTAC/forward air controller, and he died of gulf-related* leukemia from anti-nerve-agent pills they were forced to take)….. but i think you sorta had to go out of your way to find PTSD in all the months of ‘waiting for something to happen’. Not saying it didn’t happen, but…. you know, 20+ years, alcohol. Maybe it was his ex-wife.

  48. Who wants to be the Trumpkin Marc Feldman?

  49. What do you think the 2nd Amendment is for, Kray Kray?

    1. The 2nd Amendment is so that you can practice biathalon, trying your bestest to compete on equal footing with Western Europeans.

      1. Gotta milk the comparative advantages where we can.

  50. Mr Krayyewski misunderstands;
    Trump wasn’t suggesting that Second Amendment supporters could do something about Criminal Hillary’s SCOTUS picks,he was implying that they could do something about Crooked Hillary herself. to “Oswald” her. Then she won’t be making ANY SCOTUS picks.
    You folks need to re-read the Declaration of Independence to understand why there’s a Second Amendment. Then you need to read Unintended Consequences by John Ross. it’s a must-read.
    if you can’t find a copy to buy,try your local library,or used book stores.

    the whole book in PDF;
    https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/ Uploads/129/Media/Unintended_Consequences.pdf

    Revolution is not the only way to “reset” out government,once the voting process is corrupted.

      1. Exactly, I couldn’t press that spam button *enough.*

        1. do you just object to the mention of a book? or to my statement before that?

          because the latter is NOT “spam”,it’s a comment PERTINENT to this article,unlike many of the comments made here.
          I suspect you’re just engaging in censorship,you don’t like the message,so you whine about “spam”,because that’s the only way you’ll get notice by the moderators.

      2. it’s not spam,there’s stuff in that book people NEED to learn. some folks (like you) are just too short-sighted and ill-informed.
        at the very least,the book is a great way to lean about American “gun culture”.

      3. I looked for the thing expecting a snuff book and found only looter “reviews” panning it. The precedent in Texas was ABATE, American Bikers Against Totalitarian Enactments who weren’t all that smart and didn’t smell very good, but smarmy politicians figured it was easier to repel the law than have those guys hanging around lecturing them on freedom. Still it boiled down to votes, and there is nothing better than a freedom party siphoning off spoiler votes to get those slimy vultures to repeal stuff in a big hurry.

        1. maybe you should try READING the book,instead of some reviews posted online. (as if people who don’t like pro-gun books wouldn’t post negative reviews…) Or at least look up the book elsewhere,like Wiki.

          Heck,the download is free,….and you might learn something.

  51. OK, OK….enough with the “Let’s parse the shit of these phrases”!

    We have other things to worry about.

      1. Was that Ted Cruz?

    1. *blinks*

      Nice ass, but I don’t think that pattern really works here. Someone ask Gilmore.

      Lingerie belongs crumpled in a heap near the bed anyway. There’s no improving on “naked”.

    2. That’s so pointless. There is plenty of lingerie that will fit men of almost any shape and size.

      1. Well, CJ, I guess some men just like to feel catered to.

        Nevertheless, you are right

  52. Well… I recall when the ku-klux wing of the GO Pee shot down one of Ronnie Reagan’s Supreme Court nominees because he’d puffed some pot. A hysterical lynch mob forced Bork’s resignation from the Circuit Court and Republican Ronnie Ray-gun accepted it with gutless “deep sadness,” because, after all, Mommie had told him to “Just Say No.”

    1. That’s why I hang my hat in Tennessee.

      1. I can’t figure out whether you two are having the same conversation, but now I’ve got an earworm. *inflicts*

        1. Hank is like Agile Cyborg, only with a very narrow theme.

          1. Hank is the bad trip guy.

    1. It’s Trump talking. As a general rule, I tune out.

    2. I tossed my medals over the White House fence during a Vietnam protest.

      1. When did you start tossing salads?

        1. I meant that I threw medals over the White House fence, just not my medals.

      2. Abstract? Check.

        Euphemism? Check.

  53. I’m a real thing! Not some retard’s fever dream!

    1. The fuck you talkin’ ’bout?

      1. Someone took a sockpuppet for a lark and got checked, hard. Now they have hurt feelings, and a need for validation.

        Goddammit.

        1. Hey look at that the cunt who cried about sarcasmic

          1. You guys, now I’m even more confused. So thanks for that.

          2. He and I are such close pals. We plot glory and world domination when y’all aren’t looking. You don’t even know.

            You’re burning through socks at a fantastic rate, so the ol’ shame muscle isn’t totally atrophied. Bonus.It’d help if you didn’t keep making it obvious that you’re that other handle you dropped when things got too hot.

            And by you don’t even know, I mean Sarc is looking in your window right now. I have the feed open on my computer. Nice lingerie.

            1. “He and I are such close pals”

              The reason you cried like a bitch and whined like a child are yours to come to terms with.

              INTELLECTUAL CHECKMATE!

              I WIN!

              1. Cytotoxic?

                No way, his mother’s not in bed this early.

                Shift left, by the way. And lean a little more back.

            2. the ol’ shame muscle

              HoD, I didn’t know you are Catholic! 😉

              Also, band name(?)

              1. HoD, I didn’t know you are Catholic! 😉

                Raised devout Baptist. My home church (my grandfather is the deacon) had a division back in the 90’s over the old hymnals versus Maranatha.

                So I told everyone the church split on the Rock of Ages. My grandfather wasn’t too happy about that, as I recall.

                Anyway.

                1. Six hours now, Hamster.

                  How many hours did this fucking lunatic stalk you for?

                  1. I didn’t even know it was the same troll until he popped up, all small and angry and hissing. It was a couple of nights ago, I flagged him for Unnecessary Douchebaggery.

                    1. What is it about us that we attract the ire of such psychos?

                2. Raised devout Baptist

                  Dangit…that would’ve worked beautifully, too.

                  /or, whatever a joke about the shame muscle can be called.

        2. Almost 5 and a half hours now, Ham.

          Meth is a hell of a drug.

          1. You couldn’t help yourself, you had to respond.

            I win!

            INTELLECTUAL CHECKMATE!

            1. I WAS SPEAKING TO HAMSTER!

              IT WASN’T DIRECTED TO YOU!

              LEARN TO READ!

              HA! HA! HA! HA!

              PATHETIC!

              YOU LOSE TIMES INFINITY!

              I WIN!

              1. Who said respond to me? I said “respond”

                So your shitty reading skills betray you again.

                Another intellectual checkmate.

                Of course, you then DID respond to me. So another?

                INTELLECTUAL CHECKAMATE!

                I WIN TWICE AND YOUR READING SKILLS STILL SUCK!!!

                    1. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Dicks Out for Harambes are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creators with certain unalienable memes, that among these are lulz, gorillas, and the Pursuit of kek.

          2. Is this a Mary infestation? This is some seriously crazy shit.

            1. I dunno, man. jesse.in.mb kicked over a hornet’s nest, it seems.

              A swarm of bitter, angry, none-too-bright hornets.

            2. Its a drunk trolling an idiot.

              Not everything is one of your paranoid persecution fantasies, loser.

              1. Its Mary. Take some meds Mary, you sad angry pathetic person.

                1. Nah, I think it’s a regular commenter who uses socks to go after people he (or she) has beef with, but doesn’t want its main user handle to look like a dick…or apparently completely unhinged.

                  I certainly could be wrong about that though.

                  1. Maybe so jesse. But that is even more pathetic.

                    1. That’s what sent this whole clusterfuck off, John. Around 3PM EST, jesse called it out for being a cowardly sock and it flew off the fucking handle.

                      Pun intended.

  54. Ewwwwwwwwww…

    http://nbc4i.com/2016/08/09/mo…..-in-court/

  55. “it’s time to feed the hogs.”
    from Unintended Consequences by John Ross,a must-read.

    if you can’t find a copy to buy,try your local library,or used book stores.

    the whole book in PDF;
    https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/ Uploads/129/Media/Unintended_Consequences.pdf

  56. I hope Trump meant it like I took it. If your local elected official puts a regulation in place that makes it a crime to load 15 bullets instead of 10 in your gun you have the right to shoot that local official in the head with that gun. That’s certainly how some of his supporters in the crowd took it. Good for them.

    1. Translation from the Original Retard: “Chinks are too stupid to be literate in the white man’s language.”

      1. I’m thinking about voting for Trump for reason’s of anarchistic glee. How moronic do you have to be to be an actual person who will cast a vote for him unironically. Everyone knows what right-wing kooks mean when they refer to the second amendment in the context that Trump did. i thought this website was dedicated to limited government not sucking Donald Trump off. Am I in the right place?

        1. Am I in the right place?

          Not by a long shot. But, when has that ever stopped you?

          Your shit never ceases to bore.

    2. You are a pathetic shit AS.

  57. “It’s Tuesday, and Donald Trump is looking to dominate the news cycle yet again with another off-hand remark that provides many in the media the cover they need to avoid covering the election more substantively.”

    Yeah, Ed, you sure are smart and better than all the rest of the stoopid media. A candidate for President uses a term for what everyone knows is a euphemism for armed insurrection and it’s the media that’s picking on Donald Trump. Poor Donald Trump and poor you Ed. You’re such victims. Poor, poor you.

    1. A candidate for President uses a term for what everyone knows is a euphemism for armed insurrection

      I know, right? What is this, 1917?

      1. Or March 23rd, 1775?

  58. 370+ comments? I think I’ll skip this shit-show.

      1. OK, I got a few comments in, made a witty comment of my own, then proceeded to what is indeed a shit-show between our host and some others, and… bailed.

        Wait… Grieco?

          1. I made it through the eighties… barely.

      1. But the good part is he always cries for me.

      2. Baby Jesus requires really small nails.

        1. You can say that again in a slightly different way.

          1. Squirrels need even smaller nails.

            1. LMFAO

      3. Baby Jesus requires very small nails.

  59. So, having thoroughly fucked HM til he was raw, I retire from the field undefeated.

    Improve those reading skills half-moor, or you’ll continue to make a fool of yourself like you did here today. God forbid your family gets wind of it and becomes even more ashamed of you than they are.

    Really, for your own good, learn to read, you’re bad at it .

    I won, good night halfsie.

    1. If you resort to that bullshit, did you really win?

      Nope. Not even a little bit.

      1. It’s Baghdad Bob.

      2. What he really wants is our love.

        We should give him our love.

        Choose who will love him best.

      3. It waited a full six hours to pull out the racism card, Playa. SIX HOURS! That’s like 1/4th of a day!

        1. “It waited a full six hours to pull out the racism card”

          And ulyou waited even longer to gin up the false accusation!

          AHMIGERD I CAN POINT OUT MY ETHNICITY BUT IM SO FUCKING STUPID THAT I ACTUALLY PRETEND OTHERS DOING IT IS R..RR. RRRRRACISM!

          Jesus christ I’m crushing you!

          1. Yes, because context and tone aren’t things.

            See, this is why you were called a mendacious cunt.

            And, now, you’re being called a racist mendacious cunt.

              1. Who knew you were an “everything is racist” SJW type?

                I had you pegged as smarter than that.

                1. Calling someone a “half-moor” IS racist.

    2. Oh god another shit-show I missed.

      1. Fuck you bitch, no one buys your stupid above it all act.

        1. No one buys your ten different handles in one day.

    3. You must have drunk a lot to be so delusional. I wonder if you could spare us one more post to tell us what it’s like being a barely functional alcoholic. I mean, did your job get outsourced to China? Is that why you’re so bitter? Or did a “half-moor” cuckold you, so you’re going to take it out on some random stranger on the Internet? Is that what this is all about?

      I mean, you’re obviously a loser living on benefits in a group home, so it’s not like you have work tomorrow morning. Why not stay up a few more hours and continue to entertain us with your incoherent babble?

      If and when you’re sober, I can point out exactly where you were intellectually checkmated. Not that you possess the sophistication to understand what happened to you.

      If not, I’ll still be here another day.

      1. ” I wonder if you could spare us one more post to tell us what it’s like being a barely functional alcoholic”

        Ask sarcasmic or his soon to be exwife.

        Holy shit you’re getting destroyed!

        Like your bloody ass.

        Now clean yourself up.

        1. Why would sarcasmic getting divorced “destroy” me?

          You’ve imbibed yourself into incoherence.

          And Cytotoxic does your shtick much, much better.

          Jus’ sayin’.

  60. Yeesh.
    Rough day, everyone?
    *cracks beer*

    1. I know. You work all day. Come home to relax in front of the computer and then there are all these dicks defending Donald Trump. What a letdown.

      1. HEY SOMEONE PAY ATTENTION TO ME

      2. Jesus you are a simpleton. Please go away. Once upon a time you were entertaining, but now just tiring.

      3. Hey, at least he works and pays his mortgage.

  61. The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

    — Thomas Jefferson

    1. He’s not fit to be President!!! He’d be a tyrant and plunge us into war!! Everyone knows thosethat blood won’t be coming from Red Cross donations!

  62. Don’t bother with the comments Ed, it looks like Putin has stepped up and hired even more Trump bots to troll us.

    1. You’re telling Ed in the comments not to read the comments. And you’re accusing a presidential candidate of hiring commenters, and it’s… Trump????

      Holy fuck I need your newsletter.

      1. I think Ed would have caught a lot less shit if he just provided a link, said “presented without comment”. and then told us he was giving a free thread to bitch at each other about it. It would be a shame, because he worked in some great political cynicism about the inherent violence of government, but eh.

      2. I came back one last time. I’m glad I did. LOL what a “bloodbath.” Or is that, ‘bloodbath’

  63. God damn, I’m even more tired after bloodying HM’s ass again.

    So now, because there is, too much left to drink, I’ll leave him alone and let it heal.

    1. No, you won’t.

      You know you’ve made an ass out of yourself and are hoping to escape further censure.

    2. You seem awfully obsessed with bloody asses.

  64. I don’t much care for the Python programming language. I have many reasons for this but using a white-space indentation as a syntax token tops the list. OTOH, it is very clever in handling datasets. I have no idea to whom I am replying other than the squirrels. Thread loss.

    1. I actually like that feature. The baffling library – is it a function? is it a method? – not so much. I slightly prefer Ruby.

      1. You’re Japanese?

        1. No. Nor Dutch.

      2. I like a rigorous lexical analysis pass. How ’bout you?

    2. PyTivo.

      That’s enough for me.

  65. Please rise and Rebel Yell for the yokeltarian national anthem:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_1H2njznEU

    YEEEEEE-HAAAWWWW!!!

    [fires six-shooters into the air like Yosemite Sam]

    1. I didn’t realize they had such strong pro-Drug War views.

    2. I feel cheated out of a Billy Idol video.

  66. Trump made an off-the-cuff wink to his base.
    Team Clinton, as will be their strategy each and every day until election day, thereby freaked out as loudly as possible on this Trump remark-of-the-day in order to deflect and drown out any corresponding coverage of their own candidate’s “foibles”.
    Lather, rinse, repeat 91 more times until Nov 8.
    I am tempted to give kudos to Ed for jumping into the cesspool of the comment section, but troll feeding should not be encouraged. Especially paid Correct the Record trolls. Kudos to them for getting paid to troll, but they are still another sad example of the system being gamed. Not saying that Ed was engaging them in this thread. Just sayin’

  67. Fuck this troll. I made some asses bloody tonight. I don’t see any responses to my DESTRUCTIVE comments.

    I’m going to bed and there’s nothing you can do about it!

    1. I haven’t seen this many bloody asses since the last Papa John’s sponsored company picnic.

      1. YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH. PAPA JOHN’S GARLIC BUTTER MARGARINE IS LIKE NOTHING ELSE

  68. Fuckin LOL at the butthurt in the Promoted Comments section.

    The best part of the uproar over this is that many gun owners have pointed out, time after time and often in the comments on this very site going back years, that the 2nd Amendment allows us the means to resist tyranny. He says that gun owners could exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to resist a person who’s an admitted gun-grabber, and all of a sudden it’s a problem?

    1. A presidential candidate advocating for the assassination of his opponent is a problem. Yes.

      1. You should come back here and let us know when that actually happens.

      2. I’m sure you were broken up about it when Clinton did that with Obama.

  69. Who. Gives. A. Fuck? .

  70. Ed had something in his head, he thought was so great he had to run out and type it in his wood shed. That is until the commentariat exploded his head. He was amazed how far his legs could spread, even as he choked on Crusty, and garbled T H A A TSs wW what T ttRump immmplied..yu yusing LeAd.

    After such a reaming he crawled in to bed, holding his teddy bear so tightly with a whimper he said, I wish this story was over and dead!

  71. Is it possible Trump is the stupidest fkn man in America?

    1. Not while you are breathing.

  72. I sincerely, honestly believe he had no ill intention.

    However, he really likes speaking in mafia-isms and I’m not at all surprised at that eventually one of the things that fell out of his mouth sounded like a call to assassination.

  73. Ella . you think Victoria `s storry is astonishing… on saturday I bought themselves a Car after bringing in $7899 this – 5 weeks past and-more than, 10-k last munth . it’s by-far the best-job I have ever had . I began this 8-months ago and almost straight away started to earn minimum $77
    ?????????? http://www.factoryofincome.com

  74. Wow, let me just slow clap for the fucking Trump cocksucking happening all over this site. Jesus Christ people.

    1. Feelings aren’t an argument Tony. I got $5 for you if you can provide definitive proof that he called for the assassination of Clinton or any SCOTUS judge today.

      Tony, as it turns out, if you’re hearing dog whistles, you’re most likely the dog.

    2. Poor Tony, too bad he can’t get culturally enriched by a bunch of barrio homeboys.

  75. Y’know, I can’t help but notice after reading this–

    Conservatives, meanwhile, are upset Trump’s comments eclipsed the story of the Orlando shooter Omar Mateen’s father attending a Hillary Clinton rally in Florida

    that reason neglected to have an article about the murderers dad who got choice placement at a Hillary event.

    1. Maybe I’ll get one up on Mark Foley today 😉

      1. 567 comments, I am impressed Ed. Although only 1/4 of the way through the comments-so far. DTF time now that the beer is gone, the drinkin and fightin is over and all the crazy women have wandered off to louder places.

  76. “Trump seems like a liberal caricature of a conservative.”
    That’s because he’s a Clinton shill… he’s in cahoots.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.