Republicans Shouldn't Be Shocked at Trump's Creepy Dinner With Ye and Nick Fuentes
The GOP will get what it deserves if, as predicted, Trump burns down the party if he doesn’t get the 2024 nomination.

A Black anti-Semite, a Latino white supremacist, and an ex-president walk into a bar or, well, a restaurant at a Florida country club…
That sounds like the beginning of a bad joke, but is instead a straightforward account of a recent dinner that has turned into a national news story after Donald Trump had a sit-down with rapper Ye (formerly known as Kanye West) and alt-right celebrity Nick Fuentes.
The funniest part—the tortured way the ex-president and his defenders have handled the blowback—is reminiscent of a comedy skit I recall in which TV commentators talk about a group of terrorists with Middle Eastern names and couldn't figure out the reason for the fictional attack. They just couldn't bring themselves to state the obvious.
To his credit, in 2016 Trump didn't hesitate using the term "radical Islamic terrorists"—as President Barack Obama contorted himself to avoid using religious terminology when referring to organizations like al-Qaeda. Likewise, Trump and his minions can't seem to denounce the kind of "very fine people" who staged the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and refuse to climb back under their rock.
Before we look at the reactions, let's look at the dinner guests. Ye recently lost as much as $1 billion in merchandising deals with Adidas, GAP, Balenciaga, and others after tweeting that he would go "death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE." He probably meant Defcon 3—a military term for preparing for nuclear war, but whatever. It's pretty creepy stuff.
In a damage-control tweet, Trump referred to Ye as a "seriously troubled man" and said he didn't know anything about Fuentes. Provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos—largely banished from the conservative movement after interviews of him surfaced dismissing age-of-consent laws—said the dinner was designed to embarrass Trump for ignoring "the people who love him the most."
Trump has yet to denounce Fuentes' views just as he couldn't quite issue an unequivocal rebuke after Charlottesville. I believe it's the result of Trump's narcissism. As the center of the universe, he praises or condemns others based on their fealty to him. It wasn't hard for him to give an unequivocal condemnation of Islamic terrorism because there aren't many jihadists who adore him. The same can't be said for the far right.
I grant Trump's point that something isn't right with Ye, but Fuentes seems to know what he's doing. Here's his take on the Holocaust: "If I take one hour to cook a batch of cookies and Cookie Monster has 15 ovens working 24 hours a day, every day for five years, how long does it take Cookie Monster to make 6 million batches of cookies? I don't know. That's a good question.…That doesn't really sound correct (to) me…Maybe 200,000 to 300,000 cookies."
Here is his view on Jim Crow laws: "(Blacks) had to drink out of a different water fountain, big f**king deal. Oh no, they had to go to different schools. Their water fountain in that famous picture was worse. Who cares? Grow up, drink out of the f**king water fountain. It's water, it's the same.… Even it was bad, who cares… We all agree, it's better for them, it's better for us. It's better in general."
Recently, he argued that our country is so evil that, "we need a dictatorship. We need to take control of the government and force the people to believe what we believe." There's plenty more, but you get the gist. Maybe our very online ex-president didn't know anything about Fuentes. He almost certainly was sandbagged at the dinner.
OK, fine, so how hard is it to just condemn these kinds of foul views after the fact? Instead, Trump has largely been silent. Prominent Republican officials had mostly been silent, although a few have issued tepid responses as the scandal continues to cause discomfort. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo denounced anti-Semitism but didn't mention Trump by name. Ditto for Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.
"To my friend Donald Trump, you are better than this," said Trump's U.S. ambassador to Israel David Friedman. Based on many of Trump's comments over the years, I'm not sure Trump is better than this—and Republicans have long known the kind of man they've supported. Coercing apologies from the unapologetic is pointless, but it's still important to keep the pressure on.
Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro slammed Trump for the Ye/Fuentes dinner in far harsher terms than most of his colleagues on the Right, but his best take came in 2016: "Trumpism breeds conspiracism; conspiracism breeds anti-Semitism. Trump is happy to channel the support of anti-Semites to his own ends."
Now this bar joke is on the Republican Party, which has coddled conspiratorialists within its ranks. The GOP will get what it deserves if, as predicted, Trump burns down the party if he doesn't get the 2024 nomination.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Should we be surprised with democrats dining and taking pictures with Farrakhan, Sharpton, Sarsour, the squad, etc? Don’t know since we never talk about that.
Some of them are very fine people.
I am making $92 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website. http://www.LiveJob247.com
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM
What he should have said is that it's nobody's damn business who he dines with but his own.
Funny, your cohorts in the Dark Ages didn't think it was nobody's business if Witches partook of medicinal herbs.
And your cohorts in Twentieth Century Europe didn't think it was nobody's business if Jews and non-Jews ate together.
Fuck Off, Witch-Burning Nazi!
???
And this; "your cohorts in the Dark Ages didn’t think it was nobody’s business if Witches partook of medicinal herbs", didn't happen in the "dark" ages. Most witch burning happened in the early modern period (1600s-1700s) long after the Renaissance.
Also, the idea that witches were persecuted herbalists and medicine women was an Edwardian invention by amateur folklorist Margaret Murray.
Even in Pagan Rome, Germania and the amongst the Celts, witches were cannibalistic, murderous ogres and hags. Actual medicine men and women were called "cunning folk" and were highly respected in their communities throughout the Medieval and Early Modern periods.
The witchburnings never targeted them.
You may think yourself a very cunning linguist, but that's not what this Wiki page says:
European Witchcraft--Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_witchcraft
Though Witch persecution reached it's zenith in the time period you mentioned, Witches were outlawed and persecuted in Europe since classical antiquity, as far back as 500 B.C.E. Neither Pagan nor Christian regimes could condone the idea of someone evoking supposed supernatural powers independent of State or Religious authority.
Eventually, the Catholic Church also could not support the idea of cunning folk either. While most ancient medicine, East or West, was folk medicine, both Witchery and Cunning were early attempts witbin limited knowkedge and without scientific method to solve human ailment and injury. But evidently, the Church couldn't have humans trying to tear down "the veil of tears," so cunning was banned too.
As for cannibalism by Witches, you'll have have better forensics than The Brothers Grimm to prove that.
Oh FFS, I never said witches were cannibals. Real witches never existed. I said both pagans and Christians believed they were cannibalistic monsters.
The people you're calling witches were never regarded as such by anyone. Identifying Cunning Folk as "witches" is an Edwardian invention.
People burned as witches were never Cunning Folk, but usually the insane or local pariahs.
Cunning folk weren't always liked by church authorities but at a local level they were usually as integrated into the church and as devout as any other villager.
Also, nothing in the witchcraft excerpt you posted contradicted anything I said. I puzzled why you think it was a refutation.
My high-quality friend’s mother makes $sixty seven an hour at the computer. dc80 He has been unemployed for eight months however final month his test was $19928 only for running some hours at the computer. Try this page.
Just open the link————————————–>>OPEN>> USA JOBS ONLINE
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot (psr-04) of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
OPEN>> https://jobsseller5.blogspot.com/
Shorter JesseAz: WHATABOUT?!?!
WHATABOUT is a wonderful technique for revealing rank hypocrites who see standards as nothing more than a tool to advance the interests of their team. When you point out the inconsistency, they scream "WHATABOUT?!?!"
Yeap. And his screams of whatabout are one way as he does it and applauds Mike or Jeff doing it.
My lost is regarding bias. It is pointing out the writers biases. But people like sarc believe themselves to not be biased so don't dare point out their biases.
I'm not excusing trump here. He was an idiot. What I'm calling out is reasons one way bias. Of they care about anti sometimes, it is very prevelant on the left, but ignored. So they really don't care about it. It is a tool used to go after the right. That's what they care about. Sarc is very similar.
I’m not excusing trump here.
he says as he deflects for Trump
Cite? I mean I just explained my post.
Are you this dumb jeff?
Cite?
https://reason.com/2022/12/09/republicans-shouldnt-be-shocked-at-trumps-creepy-dinner-with-ye-and-nick-fuentes/?comments=true#comment-9828991
So no cite. What was the very next sentence after your snip?
The thing is I don't care about a person's words. I care about their actions. Trump was one of the most pro Israel presidents ever. He denounced neo nazis. He denounced trump and Fuentes the next day.
Meanwhile the left is heavily invested on anti Israel policies mean to harm the Jewish state.
You seemingly think those actions are the same and seemingly only so you can protect the lefts actions.
He knows he's deflecting. But he's a liar so he will lie about it. What I don't get is why others defend him.
Tribalism. It is a mentality of "no enemies on the Right".
Says the biggest tribalist here. Lol.
Another example of sarc and Jeff allowed to claim everyone else a tribe but don't call them leftists.
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)>>> GOOGLE WORK
Tribalism!!!
You're like the incarnation of hypocrisy, chemleft. A walking, squawking fifty-center for the DNC probably shouldn't go around shrieking "Tribalism!"
Funny, but no. What you call "pointing out inconsistency" is what those of us familiar with fallacies call "tu quoque" which is a subset of JesseAz's favorite fallacy, the "ad hominem."
Both WHATABOUT and tu quoque can be legitimately applied to question the central premise of an accusation. I'll put it in the form of a simple syllogism so you can understand.
X is bad.
You do X.
You're bad.
That works, if X is really bad. But, what if it isn't? If I say drinking water is bad, the fact that I and everybody else drinks water every day kind of mitigates against that assumption. The same applies here. Meeting with extremists is either bad or its not. If someone justifies meeting with extremists (Farrakhan, Sharpton, Sarsour, the squad, Wright, etc.) on an ongoing basis, it's unreasonable for them to expect that we should all of a sudden assume it's beyond the pale for this one case (after which it reverts to perfectly okay in the future).
That’s not what JesseAz is saying.
X is bad.
My team is accused of X.
WHATABOUT WHEN THE OTHER TEAM DID X?!?!?!?!?!
That’s tu quoque.
Except it is not if when the other team did X it was considered good.
Logically it doesn’t matter.
Edit: Logic doesn't give a shit about morality. The argument is a fallacy because it attacks the person, not what the person said. Logically it's the equivalent of "But Mommy! He did it first!"
It brings into dispute whether X is right or wrong. Your logic fails when one of your presumed constants is in reality a variable.
Logic don't give a shit if X is right or wrong.
Unless by "right or wrong" you meant "true or false." Logic doesn't give a whit about the former, only the latter.
Your premise is that X=bad. If X can be good, then your logic fails. Saying that logic does not care about morality is an odd thing to say when the logic tree is explicitly about making a moral judgment about a person's actions.
Yes negating a premise causes the logic to fail. But that is irrelevant in the context of tu quoque and ad hominem fallacies.
The fallacies attack the person making the argument, not the argument itself.
For fuck's sake sarcasmic. Learn what tu quoque and ad hominem mean.
Pointing out that the logic is faulty means that it cannot be a tu quoque. If the logic is faulty, then that means the conclusion is wrong, at least for the reasons given. That is, it is an attack on the argument.
Except that's not what JesseAz does. He always attacks the person. Logic isn't Perry Mason where you can disregard what someone says by impeaching their character. Calling someone a poopyhead doesn't make them wrong.
Look. Sarc doesn't understand boolean logic. Youre wasting your time.
*snort*
I forgot more about logic than you ever knew.
Edit: Oh, and thank you so much JesseAz for yet again proving my point. Instead of pointing out a flaw in my logic you attack me personally. You're as predictable as my bowel movements, though they smell a lot better.
Look at Sarc saying Jesse always attacks the person, when all he ever does is attack Jesse. While making some of the dumbest arguments available
It’s beyond parody at this point
Look at Sarc saying Jesse always attacks the person, when all he ever does is attack Jesse.
So when I point out, with examples, how JesseAz is a liar who attacks people personally while dodging issues, you react by saying I'm attacking him personally. Sure, buddy.
You're a gigantic fucking hypocrite, Sarcasmic, and if you weren't so stupid you'd realize that the shit you posted earlier today doesn't just disappear when you decide to change narratives.
But this is not what's going on.
This is--
Y does X
C does X
Y says C is bad for doing X
C points out that Y does X and does not get called bad for doing X
Y says 'whataboutism' or 'tu quoque' and calls C bad for doing X again.
That's what's happening.
Oh, and after all that, Y keeps doing X.
C points out that Y does X and does not get called bad for doing X in order to make the argument about Y, not X, which makes it a tu quoque.
fixed that for you
Also, I’m not Y or C. I’m L.
You're definitely a gigantic "L".
And the latter group actually puts their beliefs into actions and policy.
Sarc nor jeff can find a single instance of Trump actually putting an anti Semitic take into action. Not one. But they believe it is equal but how dare you call put the dems.
"Tu quoque is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack."
-Wikipedia
When you read what's being called 'tu quoque' it becomes very clear that something has slipped in the definition of the term.
Person A cheats at elections.
Person B tries to stop person A's cheating
Person A declares that person B's actions are cheating and that cheating is bad and should be stopped.
Person B points out person A's cheating and exposes the actual hypocrisy.
Person A posts a Wikipedia defintion of 'tu quoque'' in an attempt to suggest that noting hypocrisy is a logical fallacy.
Except that’s not at all what I said.
Your above analogy was closer.
Logic doesn’t care about teams or morality.
X does A.
Y does A.
When confronted about A, X says “But what about Y? You didn’t say anything about Y? That means you’re a hypocrite! What you say doesn’t matter because you didn’t mention Y! You’re on team Y! You’re a bad person! What X did doesn’t matter because you’re a hypocrite! Hypocrite! Hypocrite! I just won the argument because you’re a hypocrite!”
Someone says “Yo X, you’re engaging in a logical fallacy called tu quoque.”
X says “You’re on team Y! You’re a hypocrite too! What X did doesn’t matter because you’re on the other team!”
And then X’s team jumps in to back him up.
That would be much more accurate.
Lol when you can’t support your point bring up a ever so slightly related topic and try to distract. That’s all the MAGAs got these days lol
….. and Sarc is in early, causing problems again. Good old Drinky McDumbass.
AND, unlike Trump, the left will AGREE and PROMISE to institute and enshrine their beliefs into the 'law of the land'.
OMG! Those right-wing conspirators trying uphold the US Constitution in this Nazi-Addled taken-over of a nation??? OMG! Heaven-forbid.... /s
Publishing an article about who Trump had lunch with says more about the author than it does about Trump. What policy did Trump address? What does this article say about Trump at all except who he had lunch with?
I can't be bothered to read the article. Does he get into why Trump agreed to the dinner and what they were set to discuss? Does he address that Trump claims to not have known who Fuentes is? Supposedly Trump got pissed off and started yelling at them. Is this discussed? Is it mentioned that Trump has no reason to be in line with their antisemitism considering his Jewish grandkids and the prominent position given to Kushner?
I know the whole thing is a bad look considering recent comments from these guys, but it seems to me that Trump took a dinner with a celebrity and former vocal supporter with political aspirations.
No, the fact that Trump essentially denounced them both immediately doesn't matter.
Those are good points.
My take on the whole thing is that it is another example of Trump being too incompetent to be our nation’s chief executive. (a) He should have had enough sense to have someone screen his dinner guests; (b) he should be aware enough of the political landscape to have known who Fuentes is.
Also, I suspect he is a big fat liar when he says he didn’t know who Fuentes is, but I’m taking him at his word.
Sure, Trump is the incompetent one…..
Really? Given events this week, I wouldn’t be so quick to pull on that thread.
Trump got pissed off because Yedolph asked him to be his VP lol. Nice try though
This article comes right after the democrat anti Semitic meeting democrats have. There is a reason this article happened the same time it became part of the democratic narrative.
MSNBC having Sharpton on to discuss Ye was the height of hilarity given his anti jew Himey Town hate.
I guess this Fuentes guy is now elevated to a prominent position of universal recognition.
Ye seems like a decent guy but he clearly has mental health issues. Is it right or moral to pillory a sick man?
"Ye seems like a decent guy"
With his level of narcissistic assholery, he only appears relatively like a decent guy if he's at a table with Trump.
It's hilarious how you lemmings throw around words like "narcissistic" because the TV tells you to, with no self awareness and little understanding of human psychology.
Thank you, Dr. Tell me though, how did you acquire your expertise in human psychology to diagnose leftists and lemmings from minimal online posts?
And what's this about self awareness?
Pathetic faggots who spout pablum like "With his level of narcissistic assholery, he only appears relatively like a decent guy if he’s at a table with Trump" is a pretty big tell.
Maybe try getting your lines from somewhere else besides The View.
Hmmm. I'm beginning to think you are a preteen/teenager? It wouldn't be right to argue with a kid....at least that's what they say on the View.
Fuck off punk. You’re not a very talented troll.
...he whined with profanity, insults and irony.
Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro slammed Trump for the Ye/Fuentes dinner in far harsher terms than most of his colleagues on the Right, but his best take came in 2016: "Trumpism breeds conspiracism; conspiracism breeds anti-Semitism. Trump is happy to channel the support of anti-Semites to his own ends."
Trump turned Ben Shapiro into a leftist!
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I’ve been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier… They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill… It’s been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply…
Visit following page for more information………….>>> onlinecareer1
Likewise, Trump and his minions can't seem to denounce the kind of "very fine people" who staged the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and refuse to climb back under their rock.
Here's what Trump said about Charlottesville:
As I said on remember this, Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America. And then I went on from there. Now here is the thing. Excuse me, excuse me. Take it nice and easy. Here is the thing, when I make a statement, I like to be correct. I want the facts. This event just happened. A lot of the event didn’t happen yet as we were speaking. This event just happened.
TRUMP: Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.
REPORTER: George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same.
TRUMP: Oh no, George Washington was a slave owner. Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down – excuse me. Are we going to take down, are we going to take down statues to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him? Okay, good. Are we going to take down his statue? He was a major slave owner. Are we going to take down his statue? You know what? It’s fine, you’re changing history, you’re changing culture, and you had people – and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats – you had a lot of bad people in the other group too.
Man, Trump just can't bring himself to condemn those neo-nazis. He sure can't seem to do that. If only he had done that back then.
But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.
OMG Trump said BOAF SIDEZ!!11!one!!!!1!eleven!!!!
Never-mind it had nothing to do with Party Platforms.
Look who you’re talking to. Sarc is a pathetic drunk who is obsessed with Trump. And the booze has ruined his brain. So this is all he’s got.
Even the left media had to admit Trump denounced the neo nazis multiple times.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/10/02/trump-and-white-supremacy-he-did-condemn-and-has-repeatedly-column/5883336002/
But those who love the dem narrative like above don't care about the truth. They have their biases and narratives and fuck your facts.
And I thought it important to include Trump's remarks about Washington and Jefferson because he was spot on with those. He's pointing out a slippery slope of people who want to rewrite history.
Rewriting history is a favorite past time of aithoritarians.
Started watching Ancient Apocalypse on Netflix. Interesting documentary about the share cultural flood stories. The most interesting thing about it though is the outright hate for it the mainstream archeologists have against it. Because it challenges accepted narratives. They want no information that might counter their agreed to biases. Same thing in politics.
I mean it's not a mystery that many civilizations shared a flood story-most early civilizations arose on the banks of major rivers that flooded irregularly and calamitously. Two of the deadliest natural disasters involve massive flooding in China.
The doc series goes into even areas not prone to floods having the same stories. Agree it is the current acceptance of the story. That they all lived in flood plains. But there are temples and cultures with similar studies not in flood areas. It also describes how similar the stories are, not just the flood aspect.
But the really interesting parts is the new back dating on earliest temple building happening at the time the narrative is only hunter gatherer societies. It is an interesting series.
In the documentary he claims the flood stories coincide with the end of the last ice age which came with a relatively fast rise in sea level.
None of this, however, would prove that a worldwide Great Flood mentioned in The Holy Bible occured or that the story of Noah was true.
Lol.
But those who love the dem narrative like above don’t care about the truth. They have their biases and narratives and fuck your facts.
Just like how you call people liars when what they say deviates from your narrative about them. You've got the same dearth of morality as the people you hate.
But you would characterize Greenhut's statement, that Trump can't seem to denounce bigotry and hatred, as an outright lie, correct?
I never said that.
So what would you say? Is it true or false?
I don't follow Trump's every speech, so can't say.
Politicians don't like to denounce anything, because that alienates voters. If what Greenhut says is true, it would just make Trump a typical politician.
If what Greenhut says is true, it would just make Trump a typical politician.
Why put this in there? It's a simple question-is Greenhut's statement true? Did Trump never condemn bigotry and hatred? I mean, I quoted a statement for you up above, perhaps that's useful as a citation. If you believe I made it up, here's the link:
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/15/full-text-trump-comments-white-supremacists-alt-left-transcript-241662
Is Greenhut telling the truth or is he spreading a lie? It's not a hard question.
Article i posted has multiple times he denounced it. He also did during the debates. Sarc doesn't care. He cares about his shared narratives.
Sarc cares about his hatred of Trump, his obsession with you, and getting blackout drunk.
Logically you could both be correct. Your claim that Trump has denounced those things at some point doesn’t negate Greenhut’s claim that in this instance by having dinner with those people it could seem that he can’t denounce those things.
Or you're a dishonest hack. I asked about Greenhut's statements about the Unite the Right rally, that I actually quoted at the top of this reply chain. Greenhut specifically mentioned them, and I quoted a rebuttal to them with actual facts. You want to shift the goalpost and claim I'm talking about something else.
I simply did this to demonstrate that you lack the capacity to denounce a lie when it conforms to your own narrative. You've danced and wriggled and avoided but there's a clear misstatement of fact that you won't simply acknowledge when put to you as simply and plainly as possible. You can call out JesseAz all you want for clinging to his own narrative of truth but you're absolutely no different when it comes to facts you simply can't accept. You refuse to put yourself in a position where you might say something about Trump that could possibly come off as positive, especially in a manner that betrays the bigger media narrative.
You say you want to have discussions? You need to actually try to answer the fucking question when it's put to you, when it's simple and straightforward and easy to answer. You don't want to do that, you want to troll and debate and shift.
And it's telling that after all of that, of me presenting you with factual information and seeing if you'd acknowledge it, your only response is to tell ME to educate myself. Because that's consistently what I see from a lot of people on the left-when they're proven wrong, they just tell other people they need to educate themselves and say "I'm not going to educate you, it's not my job." The truth is that they can't. They get proven wrong and can't actually show that the other person is wrong, so they just say they're wrong and it's not their job to prove it.
Logic isn't personal.
You want to shift the goalpost and claim I’m talking about something else.
Wrong. You moved the goalposts when you claimed Greenhut was saying Trump never denounced those things, when the context of the article was clearly about a dinner date.
You need to actually try to answer the fucking question when it’s put to you, when it’s simple and straightforward and easy to answer.
Do you still beat your wife? Answer the question! It's simple and straightforward and easy to answer. What? It's a loaded question based upon a false premise? Fuck you you dishonest hack! Answer the question! Don't change the subject by attacking the premise of the question! Answer it!
See what I did there?
Greenhut isn't claiming 'in this instance'
Here is the statement in question--
Likewise, Trump and his minions can't seem to denounce the kind of "very fine people" who staged the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and refuse to climb back under their rock.
"Can't seem to denounce'. No 'instance'.
There is the statement made by Greenhut. Is that statement correct? Yes or no?
Unlike JesseAz I think you actually mean well. Unfortunately your grasp on logic sucks. You should educate yourself before making such statements.
His grasp of logic is just fine. You're just pissy because he showed you to be the dishonest idiot you are.
Instead of calling names why don't you explain the statement found in his link, or address his argument?
He doesn’t have a problem, dumbass. You do. You’re not very bright and you aren’t capable of an honest reasoned discussion. This is why it’s necessary to slap you down so often.
It's not a lie. Trump SAYS things that sounds like he denounces bigotry and white supremacy, but then he also tells the Proud Boys to "stand by", has dinner with Nick Fuentes while claiming he doesn't know who he is, etc. I'm going to put Trump's "denunciation" of white supremacy and bigotry on the pile of the many thousands of lies he's told over the past several years.
If Trump is so opposed to bigotry and white supremacy, why does he keep doing things like that? Why did he pick a fight with a Mexican-American judge who ruled against him because he thought she couldn't be fair because "she's Mexican"? Why did he tell "the squad" to "go back to their country" when they are CITIZENS?
He wants to have it both ways. He wants to be able to CLAIM he's not a bigot while continually playing footsie with bigots so as to garner their support.
You CAN say that Trump is a liar. But you can't say that he's never denounced bigotry when that's blatantly false. That's where there's a lie. People want to claim Trump is a bigot and hater, so they suggest he's never condemned neo-Nazis and white supremacists, even though he's actually done it.
It gets hard to prove his bigotry when he has all these statements condemning it, so people pretend they don't exist. But they do, and if you say they don't exist, you're a liar.
Don't tell lies about what someone has said-it makes you more credible when you want to accuse them of lying when confronted with their actual words.
Yes, Trump has denounced bigotry. Trump has also said that he "knows more than the generals" when it comes to prosecuting wars. Both statements are lies and don't deserve to be taken seriously.
You have yet to show how they are lies aside from your bald assertions. What actions did trump take that were bigoted? An example might help you.
If you say Trump was "lying" every time he condemned racism and bigotry, you must have some examples of Trump racism to demonstrate his true nature.
What racist things has Trump done or said to demonstrate that he's the liar rather than you, Jeff?
Furthermore, the people around here who insist on "being honest" with regards to Trump's statements on bigotry, are themselves *lying by omission* when they fail to point out all of the times when Trump's actions AND words have been bigoted in nature.
Sure, Trump has said he condemns bigotry. I don't believe it and I don't think any serious person should give these condemnations any more weight than when he said he "knew more than the generals".
To be fair Trump has said that he knows more about anything than anyone, not just generals.
chemjeff radical individualist
September.17.2019 at 8:40 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/04/17-issues-that-donald-trump-knows-better-than-anyone-else-according-to-donald-trump/
Trump:
“I know more about renewables than any human being on Earth.”
“I understand social media. I understand the power of Twitter. I understand the power of Facebook maybe better than almost anybody, based on my results, right?”
“Nobody knows more about debt. I’m like the king. I love debt.”
“I understand money better than anybody.”
“I think nobody knows the system better than I do.”
“I know more about contributions than anybody.”
“Nobody knows more about trade than me.”
“Nobody knows jobs like I do! ”
“Nobody in the history of this country has ever known so much about infrastructure as Donald Trump.”
“There’s nobody bigger or better at the military than I am.”
“I know more about ISIS [the Islamic State militant group] than the generals do. Believe me.”
“There is nobody who understands the horror of nuclear more than me.”
“Because nobody knows the system better than me. I know the H1B. I know the H2B. Nobody knows it better than me.”
... And now, if Trump were to say that He is the VERY LEAST RACIST of ANYONE on the planet? Guess what? Trump cultists would fall all over themselves to agree with Trump! (With the possible exception that Trump is in 2nd place, behind MEEEEE, Trump cultist, being the BEST, at times, although other Trump cultists will call you an arrogant unbeliever for saying such heretical things, putting yourself before The Supreme Donald.)
You use hyperbole constantly here, Sqrlsy. It part of your schtick.
Why are you allowed but not Trump?
Marxist Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer, do You (Oh Perfect One) actually DENY that Perfect Donald made the above raging-untamed-ego-based statements? Is EVERYONE lying to Perfect You about EVERYTHING? ... Paranoia will destroy-ya, ya know!!!
So now you call out trumps actions. Which ones?
See The Atlantic article https://feedreader.com/observe/theatlantic.com/politics%252Farchive%252F2016%252F10%252Fdonald-trump-scandals%252F474726%252F%253Futm_source%253Dfeed/+view
“The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet” or this one…
https://reason.com/2019/09/02/republicans-choose-trumpism-over-property-rights-and-the-rule-of-law/
JesseBahnFuhrer will keep RIGHT ON worshitting The Trumptatorshit, no matter HOW much evidence is puked up here! But... OTHERS might read and heed! There's always hope!
Do you have any articles from this decade that weren't Democratic Party narratives and thoroughly refuted by later events?
You call people "tribalist" but then you post this shit.
EVERYTHING that refutes The Sacred Perfect Narrative of Marxist Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer is "shit", to be sure!!! Also Sprach Marxist Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer The Perfect One; thus MUST it be TRUE!!!!
Yeah, phoning in your invective isn't cutting it Sqrls.
chemjeff gets it! Trump talks out of both sides of his mouth! Say 10,000 racist things, and 5 statements condemning racism... WHAT are we gonna BELIEVE about the state of Trump's mind?
(But then of course, if we really believe that Trump is racist, whenever a racist view seemingly helps Trump out, at the very least... Then we MUST be LEFTISTS!!!)
"It’s not a lie. Trump SAYS things that sounds like he denounces bigotry and white supremacy, but then he also tells the Proud Boys to “stand by”..."
Are the Proud Boys a white supremracist organization? If not, it kind of punches a hole in your thesis.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-extremists-explainer/explainer-president-trump-asked-the-proud-boys-to-stand-by-who-are-they-idUSKBN26L3Q1
That does not prove or disprove that the Proud Boys are white supremacists. Just that Biden says they are and he is a known fool and a liar.
It also laughably claims that antifa is anti fascist. Which they are as much as N. Korea is a Democratic People's Republic.
Speaking of fascist...
Hey Damiksec, damiskec, and damikesc, and ALL of your other socks…
How is your totalitarian scheme to FORCE people to buy Reason magazines coming along?
Free speech (freedom from “Cancel Culture”) comes from Facebook, Twitter, Tik-Tok, and Google, right? THAT is why we need to pass laws to prohibit these DANGEROUS companies (which, ugh!, the BASTARDS, put profits above people!)!!! We must pass new laws to retract “Section 230” and FORCE the evil corporations to provide us all (EXCEPT for my political enemies, of course!) with a “UBIFS”, a Universal Basic Income of Free Speech!
So leftist “false flag” commenters will inundate Reason-dot-com with shitloads of PROTECTED racist comments, and then pissed-off readers and advertisers and buyers (of Reason magazine) will all BOYCOTT Reason! And right-wing idiots like Damikesc will then FORCE people to support Reason, so as to nullify the attempts at boycotts! THAT is your ultimate authoritarian “fix” here!!!
“Now, to “protect” Reason from this meddling here, are we going to REQUIRE readers and advertisers to support Reason, to protect Reason from boycotts?”
Yup. Basically. Sounds rough. (Quote damikesc)
(Etc.)
See https://reason.com/2020/06/24/the-new-censors/
(And Asshole Extraordinaire will NEVER take back its' totalitarian bullshit!!!! 'Cause Asshole Extraordinaire is already PERFECT in every way!!!)
This (above damikesc quote) is a gem of the damnedest dumbness of damikesc! Like MANY “perfect in their own minds” asshole authoritarians around here, he will NEVER take back ANY of the stupidest and most evil things that he has written! I have more of those on file… I deploy them to warn other readers to NOT bother to try and reason with the most utterly unreasonable of the nit-wit twits here!
So he denounced it but just not to the level you wanted him to?
The "Proud Boys" organization is a million light years away from being "white supremacists". Wallace knew it and you know it.
So your reasoning trump is lying requires one to accept your assertion of facts not actually in evidence while you ignore actual words that can be explicitly stated. Got it.
Aren’t the Proud Boys lead by a multi racial immigrant from Jamaica? Or are you doing that thing you wokie democrats do and label everyone who disagrees with you as a racist?
Please enlighten us, Fatfuck.
And here is the thing about Trump’s response to Charlottesville.
Any normal person would have simply said “Hey, Nazis are bad, I totally condemn them, full stop”.
But Trump couldn’t do that. He HAD to keep going and say “Sure, Nazis are bad, but WHATABOUT those other guys…..? Huh?” In so doing he created the appearance of moral equivalence with his attempt to do a whataboutism involving literal Nazis.
Furthermore, let’s look at the “fine people” on the Nazi side that he claims to have been supporting. He claims that he wasn’t defending the Nazis. Okay fine. So who was he defending? People who didn’t mind hanging out with Nazis, who wanted to keep a statue of the leader of a treasonous pro-slavery rebellion on public land. That’s who EVEN HE was claiming to have been defending. So those are the “fine people”?
Riots in which billions of dollars in property is destroyed or looted, people are assaulted and murdered should be unequivocally denounced as bad, but for the peaceful protestors.
Is this where you deflect on behalf of Trump?
No, this where I ask that why making generalizations about the nature of the people at Charlottesville is good but making generalizations about the people involved in the BLM riots is bad.
In other words, you are deflecting on behalf of Trump by bringing up an irrelevant topic. By trying to hijack the conversation away from Charlottesville because discussing that makes him look bad. Jesse does the same stuff all the time.
Note that you never addressed the substance of my argument. Even by Trump’s own standards, the “fine people” he was referring to were people who were defending the statute of the leader of a treasonous pro-slavery rebellion. Do you think that these are “fine people”?
Notice jeff can't answer the question proposed because he knows it makes him a hypocrite.
Jeff. Can you even admit there were two different protests in Charlottesville? One against pulling down statues? Or are you going to lie about that?
One can be a 'fine person" and defend the continued existence such statues, yes.
So, you do advocate making generalizations about the moral status of all the protestors based on a small subset?
"In other words... lie, twist, lie"
This is Chemjeff's absolutely favoritist trick. He can't actually argue against Mickey Rat and Jesse without tipping his hand. So he rewords and twists their statements into something they didn't say, and proceeds to attack that.
Everyone doesn't call him "Lying Jeffy" for nothing.
Who the fuck said BLM was good? Another logical fallacy by a Trump goon in the Readon arguments err...comments
All of their donors? All the supporting democrats? Schools? Media? News agencies?
Not in this particular back and forth. Rat inserted it.
Jeff has run cover and made excuses for BLM many times here in the past. You know this Shrike, don't pretend otherwise.
Just because he doesn't say it in the last several comments, doesn't mean it's not applicable.
No defenses were made for the peaceful protestors?
Hey Fatfuck, is this where you descend into Wokie platitudes and revisionism?
Who was he defending?
The people, that turned out in an honest attempt to stop having the statue removed, and the ones in support of the removal.
The Neo-Nazis glommed on to that and antifa decided that no one should be allowed to protest, despite them having obtained a court-approved permit to do so.
The real bad actors, at Charlottesville, were the antifa goons, who were trying to prevent others from exercising their First Amendment rights.
Reason repeats the Charlottesville lie at least once a month. It's a cornerstone of the new liberaltarian dogma.
And they all know it's a lie, but they repeat it regardless.
Greencunt, also fails to mention that Milo has admitted that he and Kanye set Trump up, by him bringing Fuentes to the dinner.
I grant Trump's point that something isn't right with Ye, but Fuentes seems to know what he's doing. Here's his take on the Holocaust: "If I take one hour to cook a batch of cookies and Cookie Monster has 15 ovens working 24 hours a day, every day for five years, how long does it take Cookie Monster to make 6 million batches of cookies? I don't know. That's a good question.…That doesn't really sound correct (to) me…Maybe 200,000 to 300,000 cookies."
Holy shit, this man made an edgy joke! He can't be allowed to exist in public spaces. He needs to be fed into a woodchipper feet first, clearly.
He does NOT seem to know what he’s doing. Those cookies are going to be burnt to charcoal.
I don't now anything about Nick Fuentes, but when I see him described as a "Latino white supremacist" who hangs around with a black guy, I just assume that the "white supremacist" part really just means "not a Democrat." Why wouldn't Trump assume the same? He's certainly well aware of the way the Cathedral lies about him--Greenhut is doing it right here with the "very fine people" hoax.
I really don't know anything about Fuentes, but every time Reason writes about him or quotes him, I see "this guy must clearly be a satirist." Everything they share of him seems to be an edgy joke.
Maybe the edgy jokes are just him expressing his real feelings in humorous ways. He's some kind of boogeyman for Reason authors but they do a poor job of expressing exactly why I should care about him.
Yeah the last time Reason's Lancaster told us he was a white supremacist, his citation turned out to be a video of Fuentes going "Hurr durr, I'm a white supremacist" in a retard voice as obvious mockery. It was straight up gaslighting by Lancaster.
It is amazing how this mid twenty something idiot whose name is vaguely dropped as if everyone is familiar with him has become such a bogeyman to the press.
"Likewise, Trump and his minions can't seem to denounce the kind of "very fine people" who staged the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and refuse to climb back under their rock."
There are plenty of things Trump has said which bare questionable, but this is a lie.
Trump unequivocally denounced the few Neo-Nazi types who showed up at that rally. What he did not do was generalize that everyone who went there were in league with the Neo-Nazis. Much like the Reason staff insisting that one could not lump the "peaceful protesters" in with the murderers, arsonists, vandals and looters during the BLM riots.
When violence comes from the Left, we must see the shades of gray. When violence comes the right, we must see everything morally in stark black and white.
And it's just blatantly rewriting history. He condemned strongly all bigotry and hatred and he did so multiple times. But every time it comes up, people ask, "Why can't Trump ever seem to denounce bigotry?" They insist on continuing to spread this misinformation.
This is why propaganda works. Repeat the lie often enough and people just accept it.
I really think this is one of the reasons Trump has staying power. If someone like Greenhut would stick to criticizing Trump for the actual egregious things he says, that might get some traction. However, the press insist on framing him for things they wished he had said, and it is such an obvious lie that it discredits the rest of their argument.
Seriously, Greenhut: Stop making me have to defend Trump because you insist on libeling him!
And it's not hard to dispute these claims. There's very few people in the entire world who have cameras on them as frequently as Trump. If people say he said or did something, there's a good chance there's a complete video of it for people to view. It's the sheer blatancy of the lies that make him stick around.
I don't like him at all but I really wish people would stop spreading lies.
He condemned strongly all bigotry and hatred and he did so multiple times.
And then he has dinner with Nick Fuentes.
And then he “condemns bigotry”.
And then he tells the squad to “go back to their country”.
And then he “condemns bigotry”.
And then he picks a fight with a Mexican-American judge over her heritage.
And then he “condemns bigotry”.
And then he wants “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States”.
And here you are, saying "look he condemned bigotry multiple times, why are people continuing to spread the lie that he's a bigot?"
One might be forgiven for believing that his verbal condemnations of bigotry are less than sincere.
Maybe bringing up Trump's criticisms of the Jew-haters on the squad is counterproductive to your argument?
One can be a bigot without being a total anti-Semite.
There are no antisemites who are defended by the mainstream Right. The same cannot be said for the mainstream Left.
https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-560w,f_auto,q_auto:best/rockcms/2022-12/221201-gop-kanye-tweet-mn-1415-5d8d24.jpg
Do you have a link for that, because it looks faker than fuck.
I’m reluctant to click on anything Fatfuck links. It could be to his NAMBLA webpage, or even child porn, like Shrike posts.
The lie works. You see regulars here constantly repeat those lies. That's why they have no problem doing it.
You would know about repeating lies. It's literally all you do.
No, Drinky, that’s you. Jesse tells the truth. You don’t.
In Charlottesville, violence came from the left
Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema QUITS Democratic Party and registers as an independent - just days after her party won 51st Senate seat - in massive blow for Biden
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11520647/Arizona-Senator-Kyrsten-Sinema-QUITS-Democratic-Party-registers-independent.html
would
I'm sorry, but this is just retarded. Is there any sane person out there who really believes that Donald Trump, a guy whose daughter is Jewish and moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, is an anti-Semite? And, as I seem to recall, Reason pooh-poohed Republican commentary about Barack Obama's relationship with Jeremiah Wright, certainly a closer relationship than having had dinner with the guy one time. And before the usual clown car shows up accusing me of being mad because Reason is attacking Republicans, no, I'm just disgusted by the lack of consistent standards.
It's always worth pointing out when an individual, or a small group, is being a hypocrite. What-aboutism is when you deflect by changing the subject. When you have two equal acts and you see only one act is drawing criticism, it's worth asking why the other act isn't being criticized.
Let's ask Benjamin Netanyahu about his feelings regarding Trump's approach to jews, then maybe ask him to compare it to Obama
Bigotry comes in many different forms.
You can have bigots who really do think that, say, Blacks are inferior, but then they are good friends with a Black person. When you ask the bigot to reconcile their beliefs, they will tend to say something like "well, sure, Blacks are inferior, but my friend is an exception."
This is one reason why the old excuse of "I'm not a bigot, I have many friends who are Black!" just doesn't fly.
So I think it's definitely possible for a person to be a bigot while still being friends with members of the group against whom one is bigoted.
Bigotry comes in many different forms.
Bigotry is bigotry, Jeff. Not all bigotry is violent or malicious, but it is what it is. You hate Christians for example. You may not want to slice their throats like al-Qaeda did to the Copts and Syriac Orthodox, but you still hate them just the same.
Bigotry comes in different forms, Fatfuck. Especially radical democrats, like the ones you worship.
It is truly remarkable how the Cult of Trump cannot let go of the guy who sabotaged his party causing it to lose countless Senate seats and is now clearly spiraling out of control into quackery and delusion.
"Cult of Trump" ---- LEFTARD PROJECTION 101......
Republicans don't generally "[WE] gang-affiliation RULES" build because they believe in Individual Liberty (Individualism) and Justice instead of bird-brained chicken-pecking lile leftards do predictably, consistently and compulsively..... While leftard mentality continues to stain humanity with a history of unfathomable evils.
You see; Your 'gang rules' mentality doesn't allow you to comprehend anything but Red-Team members cursing statements made by Trump because you have NO-PRINCIPLES. All you see is Gang-Building (chicken-pecking) of a member of the Gang.
Yet you deflect YOUR mentality on the whole situation as a "Cult of Trump" when really it's PRINCIPLES of Individual Liberty and Justice for all. You're PROJECTING your own evil mentality 100%.
This is why leftard democratic-tyranny is evil. It's not founded on any principles AT-ALL... [WE] gang RULES! is the bottom line.
The USA is NOT a democracy.
It's a *CONSTITUTIONAL* (*principles* of Liberty & Justice) Union of Republican States.
LOL. Individual liberty, huh? Yeah, that’s totally what the GOP has been going for. Fucking delusional
The GOP could do a much better job at it; I'll grant you that.
The DNC on the other hand doesn't do it all. It's all about [WE] gang RULES the masses! As-if their never-ending Gov-Gun agenda's wasn't a dead give-away.
It seems to me that both parties are mostly interested in limiting the rights of the opposition while bestowing greater protection of rights on their own constituency. But we agree that the Dems are truly fucking awful
I’m certainly interested in driving you Marxists out of my country. You have no business here. So leave.
They refuse to see it. I bet if you talk to a rural MAGA hat wearing church lady in the deep midwest about her views on Trump calling for the disbanding of the Constitution, she would have no idea what you are talking about. She's in a bubble and only positive reports of Trump can reach her.
David French saw the same thing when he talked to members in his own congregation about Trump "pussy grabbing" talk. They had no idea what he was on about, never heard of it. My own mother still considered Trump to be the most righteous president ever, after Reagan.
The conspiracism starts when one cannot control the deafening cognitive dissonance in the brain, but revels and wallows in the contradiction.
And I wonder, too, what the average Democrat voter in, say, Wilmington, DE hears about the Biden family shenanigans?
Yet here you are talking 100% emotional and 0% policy.
Your right rural MAGA people don't give a sh*t about your chicken-pecking mentality games.. USA patriots care about Gov-Gun usage against the people by UN-Constitutional Nazi-Policy. And Trump's first 3-years and DE-Regulation committee is what the MAGA people are all about.
Leftards continue to paint a narrative that their bird-brained gangster chicken-pecking game is somehow more important than policy... For its the only thing left for them to hang onto after the Trump Administration cause they can't just come out of the closet at admit they're big-fans of National Sozialism(syn; Nazism).
Brandyshit really wants a warm, loving daddy figure who never says anything to disturb him.
If Brandyshit is older than 15, he'll never grow up.
"...on Trump calling for the disbanding of the Constitution,..."
We got a live one on the line here, folks; bring all the snake oil you got.
Fuck off and die, Brandyshit.
turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a TDS-addled asshole, a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1601187043442184193?t=jFwOJQm291u-72t-1ST2XQ&s=19
BREAKING: A felony arrest warrant has been issued for Biden energy official Sam Brinton for allegedly stealing luggage from the Las Vegas airport.
This is on top of criminal charges he faces for a similar incident at the Minneapolis airport.
https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601007575633305600?t=lW8EoFMmIPrgfEfin4V-yA&s=19
THREAD: THE TWITTER FILES PART TWO.
TWITTER’S SECRET BLACKLISTS.
[Thread]
https://twitter.com/Malcolm_fleX48/status/1601069090486906882?t=u-dIZ_eLSTgXj4s8q0kSaw&s=19
If Twitter could see your DMs as detailed in the #TwitterFiles / #TwitterFiles2 drop, doesn't this mean they had countless exchanges of Child Pornographic Materials through DMs on their radar and just sat on it despite having tools to stop, report, and suppress it?
Conspiracists have always been in the GOP. Occasionally someone like William F Buckley will call them out and some will shun them, but for the most part they are tolerated.
Libertarians are worse. The conspiratards have learned they are actively welcomed at libertarian events, and show up in numbers. Your average LP meetup will have more Bilderbergers than Misesians.
And don't forget the Democrats. Their conspiracists go in a different direction, but don't forget that 911 Troof movement started within the 2008 Democrat primary season, within the Hillary Clinton campaign. But more typical are the anti-GMO, anti-nuke, anti-modernity groups, and it spinoffs include the original anti-vaxxers. Anti-semitism is every bit as strong in alt-left circles as it is in the alt-right.
The ongoing task of the rational person, regardless of ideology or party, is to keep calling these wackadoos out and expel them from the movement.
Didn't the "Obama is a secret Muslim foreigner" also start from the Clinton campaign?
And the current in vogue progressive conspiracy theory - Critical Race Theory.
Huh? CRT isn’t a conspiracy theory.
(And, no, that wasn’t a defense of CRT.)
It isn’t. It’s very real, and very obvious.
The slow bleed continues. Sooner or later Republicans are going to have to dump Trump. They should have done it in 2020 when they had 4 years to rebuild. Now they have 2. At least in 2024, they will again have 4 years to work with.
Gotta have a RINO infested GOP!! /s
Proclaims the Nazi(National Sozialist)-fanboys....
Yep; We all know too well why your kind keep insisting as much....
Always funny how it's our opponents telling us to dump him. Yeah I'm really going to believe that I should drop the one guy who stands a chance of winning in a sea of mediocrity.
You should drop him because just a few days ago he called for the termination of the articles of the Constitution.
There are a lot of good Republicans getting dragged down by Trump and those are the people need the Trump anchor removed.
BTW - going from mediocrity to incompetence is not a step up.
Yeah! We need a real,Republican! Like Kasich!
Seriously, you should just shut up.
For some reason, this article brought to Tom Lehrer's song "National Brotherhood Week," in which, among other things, "The Protestants hate the Catholics, and Catholics hate the Protestants, and the Hindus hate the Muslims, and everybody hates the Jews"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEGRsE1Fubw
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I’ve been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier… They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill… It’s been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply…
Visit following page for more information………….>>> onlinecareer1
Stuff your TDS up your ass, Greenhut. Your head is begging for company.
Mr. Greenhut, perhaps you could explain how having dinner with these guys is more comment-worthy than the fact that Kristen Clarke (a person who has espoused kooky racialist theories) is Deputy AG for Civil Rights.
Easy:
TRUMP!!!!!!!!
Why would that be the bar for Greenhut to comment on a public figure’s actions or not?
This conspiratorial mindset is not new to GOP. I noticed it a lot among Ron Paul supporters in 2008. At first I thought that it was just because Alex Jones was the only media that would talk to RP. Until I realized later that RP has been yapping w JBS for decades.
Just never-mind the USA was founded by conspiratorial mindsets against the British Empire. No need to address the cause; just name-calling certain people will do for the leftard-gang....
And no one else should care.
Let’s be honest about Fuentes. Nobody knows who he or any post-Charlottseville alt-right personalities are. There was in-fighting for years between the anti-semitic wing and the rest of the movement. Once the anti-semitic side became the face of the alt-right, everyone else dropped the label.
You basically will not be exposed to Fuentes in any capacity unless you’re the sort of person who browses places where people might link to him, TDS, etc., you watch online debates (IBS) or you watch IDW-type e-celebs (Tim Pool, JBP, Shaprio, etc.)
Nobody in the real world has heard of these people, so why would they know someone even more degrees removed? Everyone knows Kanye though. Trump told the truth when he said he didn’t know Fuentes was coming. You really think any boomer on the planet knows who Fuentes is? You could tell when the MSM started covering the story that they never heard of him before. They tried to pretend they’re experts, but actual experts always see through fakers.
All this story really did is lead to a bunch of people asking me “is it pronounced Foo-en-tes or Funchez?”
Also: Kanye is clearly having some serious mental health issues. If he's willing to speak with you, just as one human being to another, show him some compassion and try to get him back on track. Think about his kids, not what he's saying.
It does not speak well to Trump’s competence that he didn’t have someone vetting who he was having dinner with. It’s not the type of thing someone who is running for the chief executive of the United States should screw up on.
You actually said something that made some kind of sense. Good for you.
After all of that went down, I saw a video of bunch of black guys outside a basketball game in NYC chanting. I guess there’s an entire documentary and movement that promotes a takeover of Israel and that Africans are the real Jews or something like that. Wild
Really Bad judgement to invite West to dinner after his Jewish people comment. Horrific judgement for the DNC to place Donna Hylton on the convention stage and have real fucking communists throughout the Democrat political party. Maybe a third party comes out of all of this
“ The GOP will get what it deserves if, as predicted, Trump burns down the party if he doesn’t get the 2024 nomination.” and only the GOP because no ill that results could possibly hurt the rest of us or be bad for the nation as a whole.
How much you want to bet their dinner included Fish Stick
Reason, are you still, at this late date, pretending that the West/Trump dinner was collusion between white supremacists?
Because we've already got the scoop. And the receipts to back it up. You're wrong. And its embarrasing how you keep screaming about Trump.
Came here with popcorn in hand to read the apologists and enjoy the mental gymnastics by MAGAs to justify this. Truly Olympic level gymnast lmfao
lol... Right. Sure.. Trump (currently just a regular citizen) had an uncomfortable lunch with questionable characters.. It's such a unprecedented action we had to apologize and justify it.
"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!", screamed chicken-little-sh*t.
Coba berbagai jenis game dari provider terlengkap di slot demo 777 https://joannabriggs.org/pragmaticplay/
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> http://www.worksclick.com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> http://www.worksclick.com
If you are running for president and you don’t vet your dinner guests for their views and public statements, you deserve the resulting bad publicity and accusations. It’s just Dumb.
The only people "shocked" by this are the bleating sheep in the media. GFY.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently (ibf-10) making a lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link-------------------------------------->>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
COPY AND OPEN THIS SITE________ http://Www.Salaryapp1.com