Trump Targeted Again Amid Rising Tide of Political Violence
Politicians and partisan fanatics spur each other to extremes in what they see as a struggle against evil.

If politicians loudly and publicly insist their opponents are existential threats to democracy who seek to impose a dictatorship, they run the risk that people will take them seriously. Particularly unhinged or hate-filled followers may choose to lash out at what they've been warned are dangerous political enemies—even to the point of attempting to assassinate opposition leaders like Donald Trump. Twice.
Trump is guilty of his own overheated rhetoric, of course. But so far, he's been the one on the receiving end of those who take such language seriously. Well, Trump and regular people caught up in political tensions and a rising tide of violence have been on the receiving end. The very real risk is that people who perceive a need for bloody action against candidates and movements who might win the upcoming election will feel more desperately motivated to action once the ballots have been counted.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Familiar Apocalyptic Rhetoric
"@POTUS Your campaign should be called something like KADAF. Keep America democratic and free. Trumps should be MASA …make Americans slaves again master. DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose," Ryan Routh, the more recent of the two would-be assassins who targeted Trump, posted on X earlier this year.
Democracy is on the ballot? That sounds familiar.
"We must be stronger, more determined, and more committed to saving American democracy than MAGA Republicans are to — to destroying American democracy," President Joe Biden insisted in a September 2022 speech ostensibly intended to challenge Trump's demagoguery, but which ended up just offering a different brand of authoritarianism.
That came after he accused Trump supporters of "semi-fascism."
"Donald Trump is a threat to our democracy and fundamental freedoms," Vice President Kamala Harris, now the Democratic presidential candidate, charged in March. She's since repeated such language.
Democrats will respond that Trump started it, and they have a point. Trump is famously nasty. Among his statements are a claim in March that if he doesn't win the election, "we're not going to have a country anymore."
When Harris took over from Biden as their party's standard-bearer, Trump warned that "she will destroy our country in a year," which he followed during his debate with his opponent by warning, "they're the threat to democracy."
But it was Trump who was wounded by one assassin's bullet and targeted by another.
Politics as a Struggle of Good vs. Evil
None of this vicious verbiage is an overt call to violence. But talk of saving democracy or preserving our country presents the normal business of electoral politics as struggles between good and evil. If we take this language seriously, we're not debating taxes and healthcare, we're engaged in Manichean struggle.
"Seekers have mistaken Leviathan for God, the will to power for the state of grace—and, by exalting political action almost literally to heaven, they have succumbed to what might be called the transcendental temptation," former CIA analyst Martin Gurri, author of The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium, recently wrote. "Only politics, they believe, can save the earth."
While everybody is susceptible to the unhealthy desire to search for deeper meaning in political activism, Gurri thinks the "progressive political class" has been especially effective at turning it into "a potent weapon of control." That means particular success in wielding apocalyptic language as a spur to fanatics who imagine themselves as holy warriors against evil. Ryan Routh, who appears to have been unbalanced from the beginning, would have been a likely convert to such a mission.
Political Violence Hurts Regular People
But prominent politicians aren't the only victims. Schools in Springfield, Ohio have been inundated with bomb threats amidst the controversy over the city's sizeable population of Haitian immigrants. In July, an 80-year old man putting up a Trump campaign sign was run over by a politically motivated attacker who later killed himself. Arsonists have targeted Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), the offices of conservative organizations in Minnesota, and an Ohio church that hosted a drag event, among others.
"Threats against public officials have steadily risen during the last decade," according to a May data review from the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. "Indeed, in the last six years, the number of individuals who have been arrested at the federal level for making threats has nearly doubled from the previous four years."
We have until November before ballots are finally counted in this election. But that's unlikely to settle matters. Americans live in a state of permanent political campaigning now, forever staring-down the "immoral" and "dishonest" people (as they describe them) across the political divide whom they increasingly despise and would, in many cases, resort to extreme measures to keep out of power.
"One in 5 U.S. adults believe Americans may have to resort to violence to get their own country back on track," PBS reported in April of the results of a PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll.
More Violence To Come
That's not nearly a majority. But it only takes a few nuts with grudges to set things on fire. And that's exactly what a lot of Americans expect to happen. A January CBS News poll found that "half the country expects there to be violence from the side that loses in future elections." That share rose to three-quarters regarding this year's vote in an August Deseret News/Harris X poll.
Elections should never be so important that people anticipate literally warring with their neighbors over the outcomes. If those who are drawn to political power are so dangerous that they threaten "our democracy and fundamental freedoms" or "will destroy our country in a year" and are poised to win on waves of popular support, then far too much power has been concentrated in government. In a free society, you can't guarantee that only angels will run for election. So, government and all of its offices should be stripped of the ability to do so much damage in the hands of the unfit.
Until that happens, mutually loathing factions, prompted by their leaders, will fear and plot against each other's rise to power. That threatens more political violence in the weeks, months, and years to come.
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
So this “rising tide” of political violence is just something happening and maybe kinda randomly, Trump has been unfortunately possibly the target of this a few times. Serendipitously. But he really does need to tone down his rhetoric because he keeps wearing a dress like that whole walking through a blue neighborhood, him getting raped will be squarely his fault.
The Meeting of the Right Rightist Minds will now come to Odor!
Years ago by now, Our Dear Leader announced to us, that He may commit murder in broad daylight, and we shall still support Him! So He Has Commanded, and So Must Shit be Done!
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/24/donald-trump-says-he-could-shoot-somebody-and-still-not-lose-voters
And now, oh ye Faithful of the Republican Church, Shit Has Become Known Unto us, that Shit is also in His Power and Privilege Ass Well, to murder the USA Constitution in broad daylight. Thus He Has Spoken, and Thus Must Shit Be Done! Thou shalt Render Unto Trump, and simply REND the USA Constitution, and wipe thine wise asses with shit! Do NOT render unto some moldering old scrap of bathroom tissue! Lest we be called fools, or worse!
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/03/politics/trump-constitution-truth-social/index.html
Proud Boys, STAND with TRUMP, and stand by! And if ye don’t agree 110%, then we don’t need you polluting our world, because all who disagree with us in ANY way are LEFTISTS!!!
There, I think that’s a wrap! I’ve covered shit ALL! You can take the rest of the day off now.
(You’re welcome!)
I am kind of new here...can you briefly explain why you always talk like a Democrat gone Full Retard?
Because he is a Democrat who has gone full retard. He has been as long as I have been reading the blog.
Hi Bisexual Semi-Humanoid,
YOUR TALENTS ARE GOING TO WASTE!!!
Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!
So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…
Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:
Hi Fantastically Talented Author:
Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.
At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.
Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to ReasonNeedsBrilliantlyPersuasiveWriters@Reason.com .
Thank You! -Reason Staff
I always worry you're going to be the next one to shoot or try and run over a MAGA.
It should have been put down a long time ago. I would cage it and tie it to the vet for euthanization if I knew where to find it. Or at least alert animal co trol to do the same.
Was SQRLSY a Bernie Bro? That seems to be the most common thread.
I said briefly.
OK briefly then...
Most Bisexual Semi-Humanoids are STUPID (ass well ass EVIL) to the Nth degree!
Do yourself a favor and mute it.
Correct. Grey squirrels are best kept in grey boxes.
Grey squirrels are best euthanized.
The guy seem fairly intelligent; unfortunately whatever smarts he has is overwhelmed by his being unhinged. I recommend using the mute button [there are several others, but I am sure you will make those calls as you see fit.
No, he doesnt
^+1. Room-temp IQ at best.
He's one of those crazy old guys who married a sweet but very stupid woman who thinks his 100 IQ is super-smart and idolizes him and feeds his ego, to the point where he thinks he's prescient and witty.
Your accusations are very revealing.
How so, drunky?
I'm not a Democrat who is actively doing whatever I'm accusing other's are doing.
So maybe you want to pull out that internet-test-guaranteed 140 IQ you're always talking about, and explain how #1 that was "aCcuSatIoNS" rather than observations, and #2, how it's revealing.
Twat, all the TRULY intelligent people support “Hang Mike Pence”?
There is a few of those here.
SBP, sarc, Jeff, Brandy, SRG, DuckSalad.
Their purpose is to try to distract with nonsense. They are here to give credence to the capture of the LPe by the left.
Nonsense such ass "Hang Mike Pence" came from some EVIL place, and NOT from true lovers of liberty!
“Hang Mike Pence” came from one FBI provocateur who the crowd told to fuck off, and a whole bunch of corporate media liars.
Hey, if we can't trust the FBI, who can we trust?
Then WHY in the Sacred Name of Government Almighty did Dear Leader AGREE with the (supposed) "suggestion" of the FBI, to "Hang Mike Pence"? Did the FBI mind-cuntrol Your PervFected God, The Donald, or is The Donald UDDERLY incapable of cuntrolling Himself? Or somehow both?
Inquiring minds want to KNOW, Marxist Moose-Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer!
He didn't, you retarded fuck. That's why.
Yeah, sure, and humans never landed on the moon! And vaccines (and other forms of preventing death and suffering, which Marxist Moose-Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer just LOVES!) are EVIL!
Yes, we all KNOW this SHIT already, Servant and Serpent of the Evil One! Ye have PervFectly told us a billion times already!
The democrat media and democrat politicians are to blame for all the violent rhetoric. We should put them all in prison.
Apparently we haven't captured the LPNH yet.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/libertarian-party-of-new-hampshire-unapologetic-after-post-about-kamala-harris-murder/ar-AA1qHFXh?ocid=BingNewsSerp
I'm sure you were just as upset at the red wedding comments or the many other LPe based posts.
"why you always talk like a Democrat gone Full Retard?"
More like a Paleolib in the midst of a psychotic break. I suggest the mute button.
It also eats shit. Its own or anyone else’s.
Trump must have touched him in a bad place.
He's full retard, I don't think there is anything more to explain
Just put him on mute and enjoy the quiet grey boxes.
What I want to know, where is Ted Cruz's dad in all of this?
I didn't know squat about this... For the curious, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Cruz#:~:text=Rafael%20Bienvenido%20Cruz%20y%20D%C3%ADaz,Texas%20U.S.%20Senator%20Ted%20Cruz. ... Also https://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/05/trump-ted-cruz-father-222730 = = Trump accuses Cruz's father of helping JFK's assassin
By NOLAN D. MCCASKILL 05/03/2016 07:36 AM EDT
Donald Trump on Tuesday alleged that Ted Cruz’s father was with John F. Kennedy’s assassin shortly before he murdered the president, parroting a National Enquirer story claiming that Rafael Cruz was pictured with Lee Harvey Oswald handing out pro-Fidel Castro pamphlets in New Orleans in 1963.
Also https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/national-international/national-enquirer-made-up-story-about-ted-cruz-father-and-lee-harvey-oswald-former-publisher-says/3496187/
National Enquirer made up the story about Ted Cruz's father and Lee Harvey Oswald, former publisher says
Wow, Dear Leader is a True Bleever who will fall for ANY pile of horse-shit, so long ass Dear Leader thinks shit will help Him!!!
The heckler’s pedo showed up after your post.
Chumpy Chump wants to... Hang Mike Pence! In obedience to Dear Leader! And then blame the Demon-Craps for political violence!
Fuck off, Troll
HANG MIKE PENCE!!!
So hath Dear Leader (AKA the Supreme Cummander) cummanded, and so must shit be done!
Actually on 2nd thought...
Let’s Please NOT Hang Mike Pence!, I say, and then the Marxist Moose-Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer the PervFect Fuhrer protests and squawks like a chicken!
Hey Marxist Moose-Mammary-Farter the PervFect Fuhrer, Let’s PLEASE NOT torture and kill the newborn baby Christians, and then drink their blood in Satanic shituals!!! Will You now PervFectly protest and squawk like a chicken at that also? She of the Guilty Mind, perhaps?
Dear Leader's Blessings upon "Hang Mike Pence" should be hung like a dead albatross, around His Dear Neck, all of the way to this year's erections!
You're no longer a dupe. Now you're just a liar.
I gave you the video showing the Ray Epps clone yelling it and everyone else telling him to fuck off. You know that what you're saying is a lie.
What would M. Scott Peck say about you?
You did NOT, PervFect LIAR! All that You presented is some Trumpist lawyer yabbering about watching endless videos, and Trumpist lawyer's cuntclusion... Which is... Wait for shit now!!! That TRUMP IS ALWAYS RIGHT AND TRUE AND GOOD! Twat a surprise!
(Kinda like Sidney Powell).
I have five or six times now, which is proof that you don’t actually bother to look at the evidence we give you, and I suspect you barely read our replies.
What a dishonest clown you are.
Also, it turned out Sidney Powell was right. Dominion machines were fiddled with.
That combined with sarc posting sqrsly copypasta is why he is accused of being the same person.
Ask the shit eater about his church of squirrel website.
It is embedded in my posting-name, Super Genius!
Enlightened One, AKA Light-Bearer Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer says (in contravention of THOUSANDS of years of traditional practice) says that LYING IN COURT (AKA perjury) should be CELEBRATED instead of punished!
https://reason.com/2023/10/20/how-sidney-powells-plea-deal-could-hurt-trump-in-the-georgia-racketeering-case/
https://reason.com/2022/02/11/sidney-powell-disowns-her-kraken-saying-she-is-not-responsible-for-her-phony-story-of-a-stolen-election/ (Yet another Powell article)
https://reason.com/2021/03/23/sidney-powell-says-shes-not-guilty-of-defamation-because-no-reasonable-person-would-have-believed-her-outlandish-election-conspiracy-theory/
Sidney Powell Says She’s Not Guilty of Defamation Because ‘No Reasonable Person’ Would Have Believed Her ‘Outlandish’ Election Conspiracy Theory
Which particular lies are you wanting to hear and believe today, hyper-partisan Wonder Child?
WHY do you evil people love it SOOOOO much when lawyers LIE in court? Is it the lawyers that You love, the lies, or both?
When did that happen?
"Hang Mike Pence" has never been a rally cry anywhere in the right, even at deep MAGA site like Gateway Pundit. "Trump is Hitler and an existential threat" has been the motto to live by at the MSM for nearly a decade now.
Hacks like you hang onto J6 with dear life because it's the one incident of significant right wing political violence you can muster. We're supposed to forget that Marxists yelled ACAB and "From from the River to the Sea" as they burned down cities and assaulted Jews. Who chased Sinema to the women's bathroom, accosted Mcconnell's wife in a restaurant, and burns down campus after Ben Shapiro arrives? Republicans? Your side own political violence in this country.
You idiots live and die by your selective morality and expect others to abide by it. You have no problem believing that Asian hate spiked because Trump said "Kung Flu", but when some nutjob converts to radical islam and plots to kill people, you hem and haw about not generalizing.
You accuse others of "violent rhetoric" to discredit them, not because you're actually worried about violence it might incite. If you did, you would yell at your own kind for dehumanizing people constantly. You can accuse some random Daily Wire writer of using hate rhetoric, and attribute that to whatever isolated incident that seems to fit your narrative. Banana republic stuff.
Who really created the heated environment in this country? Trump? Or those who hate him with a burning passion and make him an issue 24/7? You sound like an unhinged lunatic here, not any Trump fans.
Mr. Tuccille, disappointing that you did not cite Corey Comperatore in your 'Political Violence Hurts Regular People' section of your article. Does Corey Comperatore somehow not count in your tally of victims of political violence? He was shot to death by Thomas Crooks (who we know absolutely nothing about, but the FBI is on the case!...hmmmm) for the 'crime' of attending a peaceful, outdoor political stump speech by the leading opposition candidate for President.
Would it be wrong to infer you have bias from this glaring omission? That is not an inference I want to make. Maybe you can update your article.
You're suppose to say "The omission was deliberate because [insert strawman here]." Then smugly call him a leftist and declare victory.
Poor sarc. Completely out of ideas.
Poor sarc. Completely butthurt and now just flinging shit.
Still doesn't understand selection bias. Maybe he does but wants to hide his citations from Jen Psaki and Google under a guise of simple ignorance. Who knows.
Still doesn’t understand that his imaginary explanations for perceived selection bias that he creates and then argues against are the dictionary definition of strawmen.
Now watch him try to gaslight by claiming I don't know what strawman means.
Yes sarc. Consistent examples of selection bias don't prove selection bias. We get it.
You depend on corporate narratives and any deviation from said narratives makes people Trump cultists.
You've been clear.
I’m not saying that selection bias isn’t a thing. I’m saying that the imaginary explanations you make up and then argue against to explain perceived selection bias are the dictionary definition of strawmen. Doesn’t matter that you’re detached from reality and believe the things you imagine are real, they’re still made of straw.
Hey, retard. You do realize you're creating a strawman argument against Jesse in that post, right?
That would require him to know the definition of straw man.
Tuccille is a TDS-addled steaming pile of shit; understanding that will explain a lot.
We don’t have a ‘political’ violence problem. We have a democrat violence problem.
Exactly. One side does most of the political violence.
Both Harris and Biden have recently repeated the lie that Trump called for a bloodbath if not elected. He was speaking of the effect on US auto industry from Chinese EVs, as can be easily checked online.
It is the Democrats who misquote Trump and then use these misquotes to justify calling Trump the next Hitler and an existential threat to democracy. If an unhinged person looking to become a hero listens to this it becomes a call to action.
The real bloodbath has been the rape and murder of a number of young women by illegal aliens most of whom are obviously criminals released from a Venezuelan prison.
How many more young women and girls have to be raped and murdered by one of Nancy’s “sparks of divinity”?
Biden's
Broken
Border
Bloodbath
Here’s a question that puzzles me: Why do conservatives want to kill Trump?
I don’t think I’m alone in thinking, when the first assassination attempt happened, that it would end up being some liberal version of the paleocons that did it. Then it turned out to be a conservative, albeit a (possibly) mentally ill conservative (*pause for joke about redundancy from the liberals*).
Then when the second happened, I thought, “Alright, THIS one is a whackjob leftist”. Again, I don’t think I’m alone in that thought. Then it turned out that he, also, was a (possibly) mentally ill conservative.
So what is going on? Are former Trump voters just that angry and prone to violence? What gives?
Maybe they want a war? Because that's exactly what's going to happen if someone kills Trump.
You think killing trump will start a war, after you have observed that almost killing him twice has started… nothing?
Can you explain your reasoning?
Well, he's a weasel so no he can't.
"You think killing trump will start a war, after you have observed that almost killing him twice has started… nothing?"
Non-sequitur much?
The fuckstain is best on mute.
Post the list!
The non-sequitur is - killing trump will start a war.
Hey Sarckles, I know you're probably already in the bag, but did you actually just fall for some of the dumbest gaslighting ever?
"Then it turned out to be a conservative, albeit a (possibly) mentally ill conservative"
I mean wow. Not even Salon is pushing that one (yet, anyway).
I believe that many people on both sides, but mostly on the right, deep down want to see Trump assassinated so they can go murder their neighbors.
So basically your saying it's your angry asshurt feels that are telling you. You don't want to acknowledge that so far the only people who've been getting killed for their political beliefs are MAGA.
If you weren't so blindly tribal you'd notice that Jeff or Shrike or whoever is running the “Nelson” sock is obviously overtly lying.
You also believe immigration has zero cost, Hitler is Trumps spirit dictator, Jen psaki is a good source, you don't have TDS, censorship at behest of government is libertarian, you're a libertarian, you're intelligent...
"Jen psaki is a good source"
Wow! Did he really?
Well, Mother, that assertion is supported by information, much of it publicly available. Are you joining the other feeling-based posters here who can't provide anything beyond a few bucks going to ActBlue as proof neither was a conservative?
Your gut feeling doesn't count as proof.
Hold the fucking phone. You’re saying that there’s no evidence that they weren’t conservative except for some evidence that they weren't conservative? Extreme right-wingers always donate to ActBlue and the Democrats and sport Biden/Harris stickers on their car doors, don’t you know?
Fucking clown. You murderous fucks have killed twelve MAGA and wounded a bunch more already and twice shot at Trump all hyped up on your DNC rage porn.
And now you want to blame the victims?
Fuck you.
Did you provide any yet?
Plenty. You handwaving away evidence and pretending a few bucks and a bumper sticker are more compelling evidence than a social media history of support for conservatives doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means you will ignore what you don't want to hear, no matter how damning, and amplify what you do, no matter how tiny.
I can't quite figure out yet if you actually believe the two shooters were conservatives, or you are just trying to stir shit up by making this false claim to see who bites at it. I'm leaning toward the latter.
I just read some more of your comments. I think it's clear you are just some ActBlue shit poster, or something similar.
Here’s a question that doesn’t puzzle me: why do Act Blue types gaslight?
You'll have to explain the ActBlue and the gaslighting parts. Because it seems like a substance-free shitpost, but I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Thanks for the projection.
Well that was a substantive rejoinder. Shitpost it is, then.
"Substance-free shit-post" describes your original comment quite well.
Really? Because there is a lot of substance behind that observation. Like the history of both shooters.
Pointing out something you don't like to hear isn't the same as shitposting. Quite the opposite.
Except you're not "pointing out something," you're lying.
^ This
Some people have a hard time with that distinction.
He's not having a hard time, the appeal to pedantry is part of the lie.
Yes, the history of conservatism displayed by both shooters should be ignored because ... why is that?
Except there isn't a "history of conservatism," and in fact, the one source you did cite didn't even confirm that the social media account was actually his.
Weak bullshit.
So I have shown supportong documentation for the idea that they were both conservatives and your counterevidence is ... what, exactly? That you don't like it and it isn't good enough for your rigorous *checks notes* "my gut says they weren't" documentation?
The vast majority of evidence shows that they were conservatives in their beliefs and their political support. The only counterevidence is each gave a small amount of money to ActBlue, but never espoused any support for any liberal position on any issue.
When one position has dupport and the other only has feelings, one is more credible than the other. Come back when you have something more than donating a few cups of coffee to ActBlue as your proof that either wasn't a conservative.
The evidence that they were dedicated conservatives is pretty much the same (at best) that they were equally dedicated liberals. And you are still bullshitting.
It is? Where’s the evidence that they were liberals? Did they support liberal positions? Were they described as “left of center” by their peers? Did they vote for liberal candidates? Espouse liberal beliefs? Because if you replace “liberal” with “conservative” and “left” with “right”, that exactly describes both shooters.
There is evidence that supports their conservative beliefs. There is none, outside of a few bucks to ActBlue and a bumper sticker. And I haven’t seen anything about the bumper sticker, that they weren’t. And I’m just assuming the sticker isn't a lie.
Several outlets including the AP reported the Biden-Harris bumper sticker on a white truck parked at his house in Hawaii. It was easy to fine that information.
Also from the reports,
“DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose,” he wrote on X in April in support of Biden.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/what-we-know-about-reported-suspect-behind-apparent-trump-assassination-attempt-2024-09-16/
I’d be happy to pull the parts that scream “not a conservative” if you like.
“Except you’re not “pointing out something,” you’re lying.”,/i>
And lying rather poorly at that.
Nothing say “conservatives” like a Biden/Harris sticker on your driver’s door.
Donating to Act Blue multiple times would make the shooter even more conservative.
Who did they make donations to?
I get it is easy to trick a retard like sarc, but your narrative seems to be a lie.
Yes, a single $20 donation has the exact weight as a lifetime's support of conservative positions. And, in the second shooter's case, a vote for Trump.
There's a saying about mountains and molehills.
Cite the lifetime of support. Another one of your lies.
You didn't even know his fucking age lol.
^ This
Well, the first shooter was a vocal Trump supporter according to his classmates and died wearing an anti-gun-control t-shirt. The second voted for Trump and supported a Nikki/Vivek ticket after he soured on Trump. But sure, go with "lies".
For clarity, admitting you made a mistake is the opposite of lying. You should try it sometime.
"Well, the first shooter was a vocal Trump supporter according to his classmates"
No he wasn't. This isn't Huffpo where you can just make shit up unchallenged, Shrike.
Still not seeing your citations.
"Yes, a single $20 donation "
https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?contributor_name=ryan+routh
Sorry, the $20 was by the first shooter. The second gave $140.
Yeah. You already fucked up and lost your case on the first shooter, but now you use different “facts” about one shooter to try to support a case for the other, and denying known facts about one shooter to support assertions about the other; to the point where it’s impossible to follow you.
You’re running a nice pretzel factory today.
I didn't fuck up anything. On one point I conflated support for Trump with voting for Trump. And, when it was pointed out to me, I said, "You're right, I made a mistake, I was wrong.".
Other than that, everything I've posted is supported. Yiu just want to take a mistake that was acknowledged and use it to obscure the fact that my central point, that both shooters were conservative, is supported by available evidence.
Dishonesty doesn't bother you at all, does it?
" the fact that my central point, that both shooters were conservative, is supported by available evidence."
Which you have yet to actually post.
We have evidence of about 19 donations.
We have zero evidence of a vote for Trump.
Just sayin'.
Except for a statement by the man who did it, posted contemporaneously. Other than that, you mean?
From CNN:
"In June 2020, Routh appeared to say that he had voted for Trump in 2016, but that he had since withdrawn his support of the former president.
“I and the world hoped that president Trump would be different and better than the candidate, but we all were greatly disappointment and it seems you are getting worse and devolving,” he wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “I will be glad when you gone."”
So, uh, where exactly did he say he VOTED for Trump?
It says it right there in Nelson’s posts. Multiple posts = multiple sources.
Irrefuted (sic)
Well, we still don't know much about the first shooter, and the second was a Democratic supporter converted from conservatism, and no one hates their former beliefs like the converted.
We actually know a good deal about the first shooter. He, like the second, was a known conservative in his community.
I don't dispute the fervor of the converted, but it remains that conservatives seem to be dominating the political violence game.
Bernie Sanders supporter anti Hillary vote is a stretch to call a person a conservative. If that's the standard we are going on then McCain and Liz Cheney are liberals...
Both were 2016 Trump voters and neither said their votes were "anti-Hillary". Nice try, though. The "ascribing-unsupported-motives-to-someone-you-don't-know" thing is usually a red flag. Yiu should try to hide your dishonesty better.
"Both were 2016 Trump voters"
How did someone who was 20 in 2024 vote for trump in 2016?
Fair point. Apparently he was just a vocal Trump supporter. My mistake.
You are a dumbass and an ignoramus, denouncing everyone here for "ignoring all the reporting" about the shooters, yet you don't know basic facts.
Because I admit when I make a mistake?
You only will admit to a mistake that is so obvious, it is impossible to deny. Your characterization of these shooters as "mentally ill conservatives" is equally asinine.
No, I read your post and realized that I had overstated his support for Trump as a vote for Trump. And then, because I was wrong, I said so.
Now you try it. Both were conservatives and you know it.
C'mon, you can do it. I believe in you.
You over stated for both while ignoring their actual donation history.
In 2016 and 2020 democrats actually advocated for Democrats to register as republican to mess with the primaries dumdum.
Find one pro Trump statement from either shooter.
You mean like the first shooter's consrvative positions on multiple issues (as reported by his peers) and fervent anti-gun-control stance (very Democratic, that)?
Or maybe like the second shooter being an admitted Trump voter?
So stuff like that, Jesse?
You mean like the first shooter’s consrvative positions on multiple issues (as reported by his peers)
Which ones?
Find one pro Trump statement dumdum.
Act Blue types double down on their gaslighting.
"Which ones?"
Support for abortion bans and opposition to immigration. In addition to dying in an anti-gun-control t-shirt. Does that count?
"Find one pro Trump statement dumdum."
He voted for Trump, dumdum. And he supported Haley and Vivek as an anti-Trump ticket in 2024. And I didn't say he was a Trumpkin. I said he was a conservative. There is a vast difference between the two.
I said he was a conservative.
Of which you've still offered no actual proof.
"In a Senate committee hearing on July 30, FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate said the agency discovered a social media account believed to be linked to the shooter from 2019 to 2020. Some of the over 700 comments in that account “appear to reflect antisemitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature,” according to Abbate."
https://time.com/6998557/thomas-matthew-crooks-trump-rally-shooter-fbi-motive/
Support for abortion bans and opposition to immigration. In addition to dying in an anti-gun-control t-shirt. Does that count?
That wasn't an anti-gun control t-shirt. It's a t-shirt of a YouTuber that does gun reviews.
Which "support for abortion bans and opposition to immigration"? They guy had hardly any social media presence at all.
Conflicting Accounts of Trump Shooter Thomas Crooks' Social Media Emerge
Published Jul 30, 2024 at 3:28 PM EDT
Updated Jul 31, 2024 at 10:43 AM EDT
Conflicting accounts relating to social media belonging to former President Donald Trump's shooter, Thomas Crooks, have emerged this week.
On Tuesday, acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to answer questions about the attempt against Trump's life at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13. Deputy FBI Director Paul Abbate also appeared before the Committee on Tuesday.
On July 13, Crooks, 20, was identified as the individual who shot at the former president at a campaign rally while he was on stage, injuring his ear in an assassination attempt. Crooks was later killed by the Secret Service while one rally attendee also died and two others were in critical condition.
During the hearing, Abbate explained to Senators that the FBI discovered two different social media accounts that they believe may belong to Crooks. According to Abbate, one account shared "antisemitic" topics and thoughts, but a second account on the platform Gab, shared "differing points of view."
"While the investigative team is still working to verify this account to determine if it did in fact belong to the shooter, we believe it important to share and note it today, particularly given the general absence of other information to date from social media and other sources of information that reflect on the shooter's potential motive and mindset," Abbate said during the hearing, while speaking about the social media accounts.
However, in a post to X, formerly Twitter on Tuesday, Gab CEO Andrew Torba said, "The FBI is now claiming that the Trump shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks had an unspecified 'social media account' in 2019/2020 (when he was 14/15 years old) that posted 'anti-immigrant and anti-semitic' content."
"This is not consistent with Gab's understanding of the shooter's motives based on an Emergency Disclosure Request ("EDR") we received from the FBI last week for the Gab account 'EpicMicrowave' which, based on the content of that EDR, the FBI appeared to think belonged to Thomas Crooks," Torba said. "The story is this: the account for which data was requested was, UNEQUIVOCALLY, pro-Biden and in particular pro-Biden's immigration policy."
"To the best of Gab's knowledge, as of 2021, Crooks was a pro-lockdown, pro-immigration, left-wing Joe Biden supporter," Torba added in his post.
Rowe recently took over as acting Secret Service Director after Kimberly Cheatle resigned from the role. Cheatle faced widespread calls to step down following the shooting, with many criticizing her for the shooting.
Any confirmation that it was his yet?
So I have shown supportong documentation for the idea that they were both conservatives and your counterevidence is ... what, exactly? That you don't like it and it isn't good enough for your rigorous *checks notes* "my gut says they weren't" documentation?
The vast majority of evidence shows that they were conservatives in their beliefs and their political support. The only counterevidence is each gave a small amount of money to ActBlue, but never espoused any support for any liberal position on any issue.
When one position has dupport and the other only has feelings, one is more credible than the other. Come back when you have something more than donating a few cups of coffee to ActBlue as your proof that either wasn't a conservative.
You haven't provided any supporting documentation. You provided a cherry-picked quote from over a month ago that hasn't actually been confirmed.
The vast majority of evidence
Another lie. You still haven't shown this "years of conservative beliefs," so the rest of your argument can be summarily dismissed.
Amazing how Nelson ignored the entire second half of the post given while also ignoring the unverified description of the posts claimed by the FBI.
Amazing.
Hilarious.
And yet, that doesn't change the basic facts that both were conservatives. Which, of course, your focus on my overstatement of the first shooter's voting record is trying to obscure.
Both were conservatives. Neither was "the opposition" or "Democrats". Focusing on me and my mistake won't change that.
"overstatement of the first shooter’s voting record"
This is like saying "2+2=5" is an "overstatement" of mathematics.
Nope; it's just bullshit from a bullshitter. Nelson is a bullshitter.
And yet you won't admit your mistake, denying that the two shooters were conservatives. So if someone who makes a mistake and admits it is a bullshitter, what are you?
Dude, BG is a piece of shit troll best left on mute. Nothing he says is of interest. So just mute the fucker and be done with it.
Again. You are lying based on false narratives.
Who did they donate money to dumdum?
Again, it is easy to trick the leftist retard sarc, the rest of us are not easily fooled and actually have facts.
A $20 donation to a liberal organization wipes out a history of conservative beliefs? That's a ... bizarre belief.
A $20 donation to a liberal organization wipes out a history of conservative beliefs?
Where's this "history of conservative beliefs"?
I have given you actual proof of his record able actions. You continue to offer bald assertions.
"...And yet, that doesn’t change the basic facts that both were conservatives. .."
And yet:
You.
Are.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
"In a Senate committee hearing on July 30, FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate said the agency discovered a social media account believed to be linked to the shooter from 2019 to 2020. Some of the over 700 comments in that account “appear to reflect antisemitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature,” according to Abbate."
https://time.com/6998557/thomas-matthew-crooks-trump-rally-shooter-fbi-motive/
Which the FBI hasn’t actually confirmed was his account. Thanks for playing.
^This is Nelson's idea of "supporting documentation".
Another lie. He donated to Biden-Harris.
No, he didn't. I believe he donated to a pro-Democratic PAC.
Distinction without a difference.
I believe..
More “converted” information.
OK, if you need more specific language, I know he donated to ActBlue. Better?
You're trying (and failing) way too hard. Dude gave money to the Dems. He's a liberal extremist. They exist in the same universe as conservative extremists. At this point, it doesn't matter. It's assholes all the way down.
The 2nd shooter was a Bernie supporter who explicitly stated he voted for Trump due to the DNC screwing Bernie over.
Try again retard.
No, he expressed support for Tulsi Gabbard and a Nikki Haley/Vivek ticket to beat Trump in the primary. He was also a well-documented supporter-turned-opposer of Trump.
Like the $20 from the first shooter, the second shooter's $140 in donations to pro-Democratic PACs doesn't alter a history of conservative activity.
They were both conservatives. It's not going to kill you to admit that.
Find one pro Trump statement from other.
You've now admitted to who they chose to fund.
Work it out buddy.
"In a Senate committee hearing on July 30, FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate said the agency discovered a social media account believed to be linked to the shooter from 2019 to 2020. Some of the over 700 comments in that account “appear to reflect antisemitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature,” according to Abbate."
https://time.com/6998557/thomas-matthew-crooks-trump-rally-shooter-fbi-motive/
Which the FBI hasn’t actually confirmed was his account. Thanks for playing.
Aren't anti-semitic posts a MAJOR problem with Democrats for several years now?
The pro-Hamas wing in the USA is not voting Republican.
Crooks wasn’t old enough to vote you fvcking tool
And, as with the other places in this thread where it was pointed out, I mischaracterized his support for Trump as a vote for Trump. That was a mistake and not true.
Yet you are to be believed of his long history of conservatives support? Lol.
No, you should believe the information available through reputable sites.
Why, what's your proof that he wasn't a conservative? Any counterfactuals besides paying for ActBlue's coffee run?
LOL, you haven't even provided any proof that he was, other than supposition about a social media account by the FBI that's gone nowhere.
"reputable sites."
Did your reputable sites not fill you in on Crooks' age, which has been known from the start? That assassination attempt happened 2 months ago, ass-hat.
Lol. Why would any conservative donate even a penny to act blue?
What the fuck is wrong with you?
The first shooter was a libertarian-Democrat and the second is a Greensboro communist felon.
The first shooter was a 2A activist and 2016 Trump voter. The second was also a 2016 Trump voter. Neither could remotely be characterized as a Democrat or a communist.
Unless we're using the paleocon's "eating cats" definition of truth?
“The first shooter was a 2A activist and 2016 Trump voter.”
The first shooter was 20 years old, so in 2016 he was about 13. What evidence do you have that he voted for anyone?
Why is it that the left leaning posters here all seem to have their heads perpetually up their asses? Sarc, jeff, plug, et al make idiotic statements like this all the time, without hesitation.
Sometimes the left forgets that the underage, illegals and dead people only vote for Democrats.
Like I said above, you are correct. I took reports of his vocal support for Trump and converted it, mistakenly, into a vote for Trump. It was my mistake.
"Then you have intentionally ignored everything that has been reported"
^this is how you have characterized other posters here; yet it is you who are ignorant of the most basic facts.
One fact. That doesn't alter the history of the two shooters one iota. They are still conservatives. Distract and deny doesn't change that.
It is evidence that Nelson won't hesitate to use obviously made-up bullshit to support a nonsensical talking point.
More false bald assertions. It is all you have.
Yes, making a mistake and admitting it is proof that I'm trying to make stuff up and get away with it, not that I made a mistake. Are you really that dishonest?
Your turn. Both shooters were conservatives. Are you able to admit that yet, or are you still in the denial phase of your grief?
You've admitted to their monetary support of Democrats. Still no evidence of ant pro Trump or gop statement. Weird.
Your turn. Both shooters were conservatives. Are you able to admit that yet, or are you still in the denial phase of your grief?
No, both shooters were not conservative. You haven't even cited what their conservative beliefs are. Do conservatives donate to Democrat PACs?
"In a Senate committee hearing on July 30, FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate said the agency discovered a social media account believed to be linked to the shooter from 2019 to 2020. Some of the over 700 comments in that account “appear to reflect antisemitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature,” according to Abbate."
https://time.com/6998557/thomas-matthew-crooks-trump-rally-shooter-fbi-motive/
Which the FBI hasn't actually confirmed was his account. Thanks for playing.
"Still no evidence of ant pro Trump or gop statement"
Sure, if you don't include voting for him.
"Sure, if you don’t include voting for him."
Since you've admitted now that this only applies to Routh, have you now officially moved your goalposts to just Routh, and not Crooks as "conservative"?
Weird how you keep staying this despite the known calls by democrats to vote in GOP primaries or Rouths anger at the DNC for screwing Bernie over.
Please cite your reports. You won't however. Because you're lying. Who did he donate to?
ActBlue. Both of them did. The first gave $20, the second gave $140.
Fuck mam. Show evidence of your claims they support conservatives. One statement.
So far we have both agreed they supported democrats monetarily.
"In a Senate committee hearing on July 30, FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate said the agency discovered a social media account believed to be linked to the shooter from 2019 to 2020. Some of the over 700 comments in that account “appear to reflect antisemitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature,” according to Abbate."
https://time.com/6998557/thomas-matthew-crooks-trump-rally-shooter-fbi-motive/
Which the FBI hasn't actually confirmed was his account. Thanks for playing.
“”Some of the over 700 comments in that account””
Does that include the one where he calls Trump a Buffoon?
Anti-semitic themes would tend to reflect left-wing views, no? See of Columbia Univ, et al.
Re “anti-immigration themes” – Bernie Sanders holds anti-immigration views. Is he conservative?
Nothing says "conservative" like donating to actblue. Thank Christ we have geniuses like Nelson to point these things out to us.
I took reports of his vocal support for Trump
Which never happened.
Sure. Everyone who talked about it was lying, but you, who didn't know him at all, have the real facts. Please.
Sure. Everyone who talked about it was lying, but you, who didn’t know him at all, have the real facts. Please.
Bitch, you haven't written a single fact yet.
Post this everyone citation.
moved
I can’t believe this is still going on.
Nothing says I support you like them shooting at you.
Amazing how feelings of betrayal can turn love into hate. Although why he was surprised when Trump failed to be a better person in office baffles me. Trump is constitutionally incapable.of being better.
The inflation, the abysmal exit from Afghanistan that Trump stumped for while senator then supported for 8 years as VP, the bac mandates, the open borders, the proxy war in Eastern Europe. Yup. The past four years have been bad under Trump’s leadership.
He like the second donated to Biden-Harris.
Try again dumdum.
No, dumdum. Both gave to ActBlue, not Biden or Harris.
Distinction without a difference.
Next he will try to claim Act Blue is conservative.
""Both gave to ActBlue,""
Something a Trump supporter would not do.
^ This
And yet one of them is has been documented as both a Trump voter and gave $140 to ActBlue.
So a Trump voter not only could theoretically give to ActBlue, this specific Trump voter is proven to have done so.
So what you say would never happen very clearly and provably did happen. If you say, "My mistake", that's fair. If you don't, what's that called?
Didn't he renounce his '16 trump vote? Also, in 2016 quite a number of would-be Sanders voters switched to trump over hillary. So you're evidence for these guys as "conservative" is weak at best, and this is meeting you way more than half way.
Isn't Actblue how people would normally donate to Harris?
Hey Nelson. Perform this experiment please.
1. Pretend you want to donate to harris.
2. Type in kamalaharris.com
3. Click on an amount to donate
4. Read your browser's address bar and see what site you are now using. Is it Act Blue?
Report back here with your findings please.
"We actually know a good deal about the first shooter. He, like the second, was a known conservative in his community."]
Nothing I've seen indicated he was, in any way, a conservative. Feel free to present your evidence you have of such. And the second does not seem to have a history of conservatism at all. He was a fucking Bernie supporter in 2016.
Weird how when you hear a President got shot, you know it was a Democrat shooter who did it.
You know, eh? Your gut tells you?
“Did he support or oppose Trump?
Routh said in 2020 that he had backed candidate Trump in the past but expressed his disappointment with the Trump presidency.
He tweeted at Trump on June 10 of that year: “While you were my choice in 2106, I and the world hoped that president Trump would be different and better than the candidate, but we all were greatly disappointment and it seems you are getting worse and devolving … I will be glad when you gone.””
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ryan-routh-trump-assassination-attempt-alleged-what-know-rcna171269
Are you claiming that he planned to try to kill Trump in 2020 so he posted a false claim of voting for him to … I’m not sure what it would accomplish. You’re the conspiracy-accpting partisan. Can you explain?
He was a conservative who soured on Trump and Republicans. Is that so hard to believe? Because there’s no substantive evidence that he was a liberal outside of some anti-Trump donations.
"He tweeted at Trump on June 10 of that year: “While you were my choice in 2106, I and the world hoped that president Trump would be different and better than the candidate, but we all were greatly disappointment and it seems you are getting worse and devolving … I will be glad when you gone.””"
Where, EXACTLY, did he say he voted for him?
Gary Johnson was my pick in 2012. Only because Romney was the drizzling shits and Obama was Obama.
Guess who did not VOTE for Gary? Because Gary was also a fucking idiot. Just less so than the others.
Except the second shooter was never a conservative but a Bernie bro that hated Hillary more.
"Why do conservatives want to kill Trump?"
Because Trump wants to kill them! Trump supported HANGING the number-two-ranking conservative, His VEEP, Mike Pence!
I have heard shit said that Pence is behind ALL of this shit!!! PENCE WANTS REVENGE!!! (So does General Milley, Ted Cruz and Ted Cruz's father, and who knows HOW many of Trump's other victims!)
Twat cums around goes around, shit has been said...
What the fuck are you even talking about? Both shooters have verified proof of being Democrat partisans. I've seen no conservative rhetoric anywhere from either.
You lie.
Then you have intentionally ignored everything that has been reported, especially about the first shooter.
Didn't Routh encourage other countries to assassinate trump? Sounds like a typical conservative (at the bulwark) to me.
Was he a disillusioned Trump voter? Absolutely. But that doesn't make him anything other than a conservative. It's not like feeling betrayed by the candidate you voted for immediately changes your entire worldview.
"Was he a disillusioned Trump voter? Absolutely. But that doesn’t make him anything other than a conservative."
This does not follow. It's fairly obvious you're trying to salvage the idiotic talking point that you came here with; by following it up with more idiocy.
What part is wrong? The second shooter was absolutely a Trump voter. Although I don't know if he was actually there to try to assassinate Trump, it seems like the most likely explanation.
So if you have someone with a history of conservatism who supported Trump in 2016, but wanted to kill him on 2024 ... yeah, disillusioned Trump voter seems pretty spot-on.
Unless you think he spent decades pretending to be conservative so that he could assassinate Donald Trump?
Unless you think he spent decades pretending to be conservative so that he could assassinate Donald Trump?
What is this record of "decades" you have on file?
What is this record of “decades” you have on file?"
Checking my calculator… 2024 minus 2016 = 8… That fits the definition of “decades” right???
I suppose this is just Nelson “overstating” again.
“Although I don’t know if he was actually there to try to assassinate Trump, it seems like the most likely explanation.”
Jesus fucking Christ. Why are liberals so fucking cowardly. Was he in the bushes re-enacting Caddy Shack?
Stop being a bitch and take the L.
Uh, I said that's what I believed. I was trying to stay within the present information, since I don't think it's actually been declared an assassination attempt. That's just what I believe.
So you need “a reputable source” to confirm that a virulent TDS democrat was on Trumps course with a gun was there as an assassin?
Do you look out of your window each morning and disbelieve if it’s raining or not until the weather channel can verify?
And here you are Simple Jack calling other people dum dum.
Hey Nelson, tell us how that Disney lawsuit is going, LOL.
Which one? I don't need to pay attention since my Disney stock is doing quite well. I don't care about the nonsense lawfare of conservatives. It's baked into their budget, so it doesn't impact my returns.
I don’t need to pay attention since my Disney stock is doing quite well.
You mean how it's tanked lately, Mr. "Just wait until discovery happens"?
"What is this record of “decades” you have on file?"
What is your counterfactual record that a Trump supporter wasn't a conservative? $140 in donations to ActBlue, as opposed to posts supporting conservatives (including a Haley/Vivek ticket)?
Yes, True and Honest Conservatives donate money to Democrats. LOL.
Again, what is this record of "decades" you have on file? You made the assertion, quote the issues he's conservative on.
How can he counter facts when you've offered zero?
The Act Blue types have mostly given up and now just post bullshit. Their veracity is trending with Biden’s cognitive skills.
Consider, if one of them would have denoted to $140 to Trump's campaign or a conservative organization, you WOULD be using that as proof they support Trump.
Why? Donating small amounts of money one time isn't really indicative of anything except perhaps a momentary flash of anger. Giving the max or giving multiple times might be different, but $20 isn't moving anyone's needle.
Hell, I gave to Chase Oliver even though I will vote against Trump in the general election. He's better than the last few Libertarian Party candidates.
Donating small amounts of money one time isn’t really indicative of anything except perhaps a momentary flash of anger.
LOL, the hair-splitting here is nuclear-level.
“Hell, I gave to Chase Oliver even though I will vote against Trump in the general election. He’s better than the last few Libertarian Party candidates.”
This makes you a "conservative".
What is your counterfactual record that a Trump supporter wasn’t a conservative?
That he renounced his 2016 vote, called for other countries to assassinate the republican candidate (including Iran - nothing says conservative like asking Iran to murder your enemy, right??), donated to left wing candidates, had the bumper sticker for the current dem candidate.
So yeah, is all this completely conclusive? Perhaps not, but it goes a lot further than your assertions.
I've seen no evidence he was a Trump supporter and you've yet to provide any.
Supporting anybody but Trump is not evidence. CNN interviewed Haley voters in NH who admitted they'd vote Biden regardless. Were THOSE people conservative?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ryan-routh-trump-assassination-attempt-alleged-what-know-rcna171269
"CNN interviewed Haley voters in NH who admitted they’d vote Biden regardless. Were THOSE people conservative?"
Uh, you know that you can be a conservative and oppose Trump at the same time, right? There are entire political ads with scores of conservatives saying they'll vote for Harris. Dick Cheney, a lifelong conservative, has endorsed Harris.
Believing that supporting Trump and being a conservative are the exact same thing is nuts.
"Uh, you know that you can be a conservative and oppose Trump at the same time, right?"
So, yes, Biden voters who voted for Haley are conservatives to you. Got it.
" There are entire political ads with scores of conservatives saying they’ll vote for Harris. Dick Cheney, a lifelong conservative, has endorsed Harris.
Believing that supporting Trump and being a conservative are the exact same thing is nuts."
If you're supporting Harris, any claim to being conservative is already dead and buried.
The option to "not vote" exists for a reason.
"If you’re supporting Harris, any claim to being conservative is already dead and buried."
So opposing Trump makes you not a conservative, according to you? Someone who thinks Harris is better than the alternative, but doesn't support her policies, doesn't give up their conservative beliefs. They just know that Trump was bad the first time and he's only older, angrier, and less tethered to reality now. That makes them patriots, not liberals.
“So opposing Trump makes you not a conservative, according to you? Someone who thinks Harris is better than the alternative, but doesn’t support her policies, doesn’t give up their conservative beliefs. They just know that Trump was bad the first time and he’s only older, angrier, and less tethered to reality now. That makes them patriots, not liberals.”
Yes, they do.
Because the option to not vote or vote for Oliver exists, and a vote for the LP candidate is a vote for a more conservative candidate/platform (compared to Harris/Democrats).
Sorry, there is no world where voting for Democrats proves your conservatism. It doesn’t make them patriots or heroes. They aren’t putting country above party because their party isn’t the GOP, it’s the State and Harris will continue to grow its power and influence and authority.
Edit: And in the grand scheme of Presidents, he doesn’t even break the top 10 for bad.
Wow you are really stinking up the place. Off to your grey box little fella.
He's bored because of the Volokh portion of the site only does open threads on Mondays and Thursdays.
Seriously.
He is a 'Never Hillary' Bernie Bro who claimed to have voted for Trump in 2016 because he didn't like Clinton.
According to a guy who claims the information has been scrubbed from the internet. That guy is totally credible.
According to the asshole's own self-published book.
(Which is apparently no longer available)
Now do all the Obama voters who supported Trump in 2016.
Correct. They were still liberals, even though they didn't vote for Biden.
See how that works?
Then you have intentionally ignored everything that has been reported, especially about the first shooter.
Nothing's been ignored. You're lying.
In what way? The history of both in supporting conservative causes? The anti-gun-control t-shirt the first shooter was wearing (and we all know how much Ds hate gun control)? The second shooter's Trump vote? Or maybe his support for a Haley/Vivek ticket (because all Ds respond so positively to both, especially Vivek)?
Stuff like that.
In what way? The history of both in supporting conservative causes?
Which conservative causes in their history? Is there a reason you keep resorting to this sweeping generalization?
Oh, yeah, it's because you're lying.
Also seems to think that people can't change. If you were a trump fan in 2016 you MUST be a Trump fan in 2024,
No, he obviously isn’t a Trump fan any more. But that doesn’t mean he stopped being a conservative.
The wide and deep swath of conservatives who have come out in support of Harris is ample evidence of that. There is no sane way to claim Dick Cheney isn’t a conservative.
No, he obviously isn’t a Trump fan any more. But that doesn’t mean he stopped being a conservative.
Since he wasn't a conservative, this is immaterial.
I don't know why I'm bothering, as you are clearly a Dem shill but...
According to you, having voted for Trump in the past (2016), means he's currently a conservative.
So Dick Cheney supporting Kamala, and intending to vote for her, means Cheney is a progressive.
Let's connect the dots here. Dick Cheney is a progressive, according to your logic. Your logic is terrible, but let's apply it evenly.
Yes, the fact that he was a conservative for years doesn't just cease to be true because he soured on Trump.
As I keep pointing out, being a conservative and opposing Trump aren't mutually exclusive groups. A lot of conservatives oppose Trump, mostly because he isn't really a conservative and they fear (rightly) that if it comes down to conservative principles or Trump's ego, conservative principles will lose every day and twice on Sunday.
"So Dick Cheney supporting Kamala, and intending to vote for her, means Cheney is a progressive."
Nonsense.
"Dick Cheney is a progressive, according to your logic."
Again, nonsense. Every vote Cheney has ever made has been conservative. Every policy he supports is conservative. His entire political life has been about supporting conservatives. He's literally supporting Harris because Trump is so bad he fears it will wreck conservatism for years if he wins. Much like the second shooter, although he was responding to a betrayal of himself and guilt over helping Trump win than the larger context that Cheney uses.
The vast majority of information indicates the shooter was a conservative. A bitter, angry, disillusioned conservative who felt betrayed by Trump, but still a conservative.
Except he wasn't a conservative for years, which you have yet to prove.
TBF, Cheney has always been a progressive. So has Bush.
That is the very essence of “compassionate conservatism”.
What support? Money? No.
Cite their history.
What, voting for Trump isn't good enough for you? Conservative positions aren't enough for you?
So what do you have, outside of tiny donations to ActBlue? Any actual beliefs they espoused that aren't conservative? Anything?
He had no conservative positions. And donating to Democrat organizations indicates Democrat loyalties.
Nelson seems to have fully moved his goalposts to now just talking about Routh only, since he repeatedly stresses his 2016 vote, which can't possibly apply to crooks.
How about traveling to Europe to fight for Ukraine? It wasn't conservatives posting Ukrainian flags in all of their social media accounts. Most conservatives, from what I can tell, wanted the US not involved in that war, not funding that war, and certainly weren't such true believers that they would uproot to put their lives on the line in a war of choice (war of choice on the part of the US, that is) in Eastern Europe.
"How about traveling to Europe to fight for Ukraine?"
A LOT of conservatives support Ukraine. Opposition to supporting Ukraine is a MAGA thing, not a conservative thing. The belief among Republicans that we send too much aid to Ukraine has grown since March of '22 from 9% to 47%. So even with the MAGA bullhorn, a majority of Republicans still don't think we are sending too much. Obviously the second shooter was in that majority. He was VERY passionate about his support for Ukraine.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/07/29/war-in-ukraine-wide-partisan-differences-on-u-s-responsibility-and-support/
The poll does not include conservatives. It does include Republicans-lean Republican. That party includes neocons such as Cheney and Graham.
The secret is to see a bit of information, then “convert it” into something else.
Yeah, the paleocons do it all the time here. But, unlike me, they don't acknowledge their mistake, they just double down. Just read the threads about the illegal Hatians eating pets for a prime example.
They view acknowledging mistakes to be weakness. So they never do it. What they will do is accuse you of being a liar whenever you’re wrong. And if you correct your wrong they’ll call you a liar, claim you meant whatever you originally said, and argue against that. That’s how the bad faith trolls roll.
What they will do is accuse you of being a liar whenever you’re wrong.
Except he is actually lying about the shooters being conservative.
Lying or misinformed? There is a difference.
Yeah, there is a difference, but it's the former. It's why he popped in out of the blue this morning to make the assertion despite several days and weeks worth of commentary on the topic already on record.
Is this your excuse and why you choose willful ignorance?
"Lying or misinformed?"
Dude, Crooks' age was reported from the beginning. This is not new information that Nelson "just missed, oopsie!"
"Except he is actually lying about the shooters being conservative."
If you ignore all the pro-conservative actions and statements of both shooters, sure. But ignoring relevant facts isn't an honest way to behave, is it, Red? Why do you do that?
If you ignore all the pro-conservative actions and statements of both shooters, sure.
More sweeping generalizations. Which "pro-conservative actions and statements?"
But ignoring relevant facts isn’t an honest way to behave, is it, Red? Why do you do that?
You have yet to provide any relevant facts, including claiming that donating to ActBlue isn't donating to Democrats.
What pro-conservative actions? His support of Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primary? His pro-Palestine stances? His various donations to ActBlue? The Biden-Harris bumper sticker on his truck?
https://notthebee.com/article/i-compiled-a-profile-on-the-second-trump-shooter-with-as-much-info-as-i-could-grab-before-it-was-scrubbed-off-the-internet
Ah, yes. A completely credible source, that. He even included a conspiracy-laced "scrubbed off the internet" tag. Because, as we all know, the internet isn't forever. LOL!
So, no answer.
Since the Bernie thing only seems to show up on right-wing sites, but his past support for Trump and Haley/Vivek are publicly available, I'm going to go with the publicly available stuff.
And yes, anyone who claims that anyone can "scrub the internet" is to be distrusted. The internet is forever. "Scrubbing" anything would take a massive effort by many people and still fail.
Since the Bernie thing only seems to show up on right-wing sites, but his past support for Trump and Haley/Vivek are publicly available, I’m going to go with the publicly available stuff.
The only thing these guys believe is the right-wing sites. The more luny the more credible. What you call "publicly available" they call "Democrat leftist corporate narrative."
That's some crazy Blue-Anon stuff your team is getting into.
"Forty-nine percent (49%) of Democrats think it's at least somewhat likely that Trump himself or the Trump campaign was involved with the assassination attempt, with 21% saying it was very likely."
https://napolitaninstitute.org/2024/09/18/17-say-america-would-be-better-off-if-trump-had-been-killed/
That is crazy. But it's no more crazy than still believing the 2020 election was stolen. Partisans are nuts.
Partisans are nuts.
Yup. They got to where they are through emotion, which means no amount of facts, logic or reason can ever change what they feel.
Look at sarc resort to our ad hominem to defend his leftist buddy while never providing his own evidence or questioning Nelson's evidence. Lol.
No, we accuse you of being a drunk homeless liberal weasel with no convictions about anything. You are an easy mark and a pox on this nation.
Shit weasel*
Ever notice how sarc always jumps in to defend the dem posters here despite not being a democrat?
GFY you poorly gaslighting imbecile
You first.
He hasn't lied about the shooters being conservative, you vermin.
Neither did I. But there seems to be a resounding silence from the "they weren't conservatives" when told to put up or shut up, just pedantic nitpicking about adjectives and levels of confirmation of the available information.
They were both conservatives. They have been documented as conservatives. Even if you go all-in on the first shooter being called "slightly right of center", that is ... wait for it ... conservative!
Your counterevidence? A grand total of $155 donated to ActBlue, an amount that wouldn't even cover a coffee run? Please. Do you have anything substantive? A voting record or support for a non-conservative issue or anything with any veracity that says either was a liberal?
You absolutely did. You took an unsubstatianted speculation by a glowie and presented it as unvarnished fact. You're claiming that donating to Democrat organizations doesn't make a person a Democrat.
They were both conservatives. They have been documented as conservatives.
They were not conservatives and have not been documented as conservatives. I realize the rest the lefty retard commenters that post over on Volokh's side of the site have been convincing themselves of this, but that doesn't make it fact.
Even if you go all-in on the first shooter being called “slightly right of center”, that is … wait for it … conservative!
You haven't proven this, either.
Every single assertion of yours has been a lie.
But there seems to be a resounding silence from the “they weren’t conservatives”
You are directly lying. Again.
You have the burden of proof after making the claim that both shooters were conservative. A burden you have not come close to meeting.
Getting a head pat from a sniveling sycophant like Sarc doesn't count as meeting your burden of proof.
Really? Because the majority of evidence points to both being conservative. You just don't like that it looks like one of your former allies went off the Trump reservation.
I get it. You don't like it. But it is not reasonable to think that a Trump/Haley/Vivek supporter (and voter) was somehow.confused about the beliefs of those he suppoerted. It's not like he suddenly said, "Oh, wait! Haley and Vivek are conservatives? Damnit, it happened again! I accidentally supported conservatives!".
Because the majority of evidence points to both being conservative.
I realize leftists think repeating a lie means they can speak their wishes into existence, but that still doesn't make it a fact.
100% safe and effective
You seem to be confused about who is shooting or pointing a rifle at Trump. Neither were Trump supporters.
Funny, one voted for Trump. A disillusioned Trump voter is still a conservative. There are political ads with scores of them.
So?
Trump was a democrat that donated to them in the 80s.
Is a disillusioned democrat still a democrat? Or can they become something else?
Trump certainly didn’t turn into a conservative. Though he did manage to change the definition from someone who opposes the progressive administrative state to someone who weaponizes it.
And it’s ok because Democrats did it first.
All this doing stuff Democrats do and excusing it because they did it first looks suspiciously like being an actual Democrat.
"Is a disillusioned democrat still a democrat? Or can they become something else?"
I didn't say Republican, I said conservative. Not all conservatives are Republicans, just like not all liberals are Democrats. You're on a libertarian web site, for God's sake. You can't understand the difference between ideology and party affiliation?
But to you, anyone who voted for trump, ever, is a conservative, forever and always.
It's a damned good indication. And absent any proof that there was a radical change in his beliefs, assuming he remained a conservative, but an anti-Trump conservative, is the logical conclusion. Assuming, with no evidence, that he changed his entire worldview because Trump betrayed his conservative beliefs is not rational.
What evidence do you have of Routh voting for Trump? Did he provide a reason why he did so if he did so?
Yes, he posted in 2020 about his 2016 vote for Trump and his feelings of betrayal when President Trump failed to be a better man than Candidate Trump and his guilt over supporting him. It was his anger at Trump that made him anti-Trump, not some newly-discovered liberal beliefs.
Taking a four-year-old post as an actual expression of his feelings makes sense. Pretending he was on an 8-year-long secret liberal mission to assassinate Trump doesn't.
I believe the direct quote from his tweet was “While you were my choice in 2106, I and the world hoped that president Trump would be different and better than the candidate, but we all were greatly disappointment and it seems you are getting worse and devolving … I will be glad when you gone.”
Just because he was the guys “choice” doesn’t mean he actually voted for him. I know plenty of Bernie Bros who couldn’t hold their nose and vote for. Republican candidate, but he was still their choice because they hated Hillary that much.
I mean, you would think if these guys were actual conservatives, there’d be transactions showing they donated to whatever the Republican version of ActBlue is, but funny that, they did the opposite.
Both assassins are leftists. The first one registered Republican to interfere in his state’s republican primary. As so many of you tried to do in swing states.
Political violence in the US is 99.9% democrat sourced. You’re a party of murderers, rapists, thieves and terrorists.
"The first one registered Republican to interfere in his state’s republican primary."
Really? Based on your gut and your feelings? Because there's nothing to support that statement.
"Political violence in the US is 99.9% democrat sourced."
Really? There are repair crews at the Capitol that would beg to differ.
Ever since that whack-a-doodle shot Steve Scalise, conservatives have dominated the violence game. I mean, c'mon. Two of them tried to kill the President.
Conservatives dominate the violence game. Tell that to the Jews being beat up. What about Asians that were attacked. Should we talk about the violence at CHOP? What about Anifa?
All conservatives right?
Funny, you don't have any facts to support that the shooters are conservatives because they weren't.
"you don’t have any facts to support that the shooters are conservatives"
Except, of course, all the reports about their beliefs say they were. And voting records. And social media posts.
"Other than everything, there's no evidence they were conservatives."
Except, of course, all the reports about their beliefs say they were. And voting records. And social media posts.
None of which proves they were conservative, especially repeating the lie about the social media posts.
Well, you're ill informed. Conservatives do not donate to progressive "get out the vote" causes. They do register as Republicans to vote in the other side's primaries. There was a big push for it in my district to get rid of Lauren Boebert and Liz Cheney actively encourages the Wyoming Democrats to do the same. The second one has a Biden Harris bumper sticker.
At this point, I assume you are just fraud. You know you're lying.
"Conservatives do not donate to progressive “get out the vote” causes"
Except, of course, the second shooter voted for Trump and gave to ActBlue. So except for the demonstrable fact that it happened, it didn't happen? Sounds like paleocon logic.
"They do register as Republicans to vote in the other side’s primaries."
Really? Is that what your gut tells you? Because there's no other reason to doubt a conservative who supported conservative issues was a Republican.
"The second one has a Biden Harris bumper sticker."
You mean the one who voted for Trump? And supported Haley and Vivek? And felt betrayed by Trump? That guy?
A bumper sticker and a small donation to ActBlue indicates opposition to Trump. It doesn't mean he wasn't a conservative. Trumpkins seem to be confused when it's pointed out that being a conservative and supporting Trump are two separate things.
It's possible to oppose Trump and still be a conservative.
The vast majority of evidence shows that both shooters were ideological conservatives. That has yet to be disputed except for pointing to small donations to ActBlue.
"Ignore their beliefs, just pay attention to their tiny donations" is a silly thing to say.
You got caught bullshitting, and are engaging in pretzel-logic to save face. Give it up.
Regardless of the motivations or political leanings of either of them (and I don't claim to have any good knowledge either way), the premise of your comment is very flawed. Even if they were some kind of conservatives, it doesn't show that conservatives want to kill Trump. All it shows is that these two weirdos wanted to kill Trump. There is no basis to make any generalization about conservatives. It's just lazy, weak rhetoric.
Wait, I thought that anecdotal stories were proof of the behavior of the disfavored group, even in the face of evidence otherwise. I know that it's the running theme in anti-immjgration rhetoric. And anti-abortion rhetoric. And anti-trans rhetoric.
And I didn't say that all conservatives wanted to kill Trump. I pointed out that the two people who did try were both conservatives, which was a surprise to me.
There are plenty of far-left wingnuts, it's just they didn't get to the "assassinate the ex-President" stage like these two anti-Trump conservatives did.
So you are just engaging in obnoxious sophistry. Noted.
No, I made points with support throughout this thread. Paleocons have been trying to "yeah, but" or "it wasn't confirmed well enough" or "supporting Trump and Haley and Vivek doesn't mean he was conservative" all day. You deciding to join the party late doesn't make you any more credible.
Pointing out that the two people who tried to assassinate Trump were conservatives isn't sophistry, unless you meant to use another word. There is documented support of each shooter actively embracing conservative ideals, as well as candidates like Trump and Haley and Vivek. Your handwaving doesn't change that.
There is that Trump-Vance bumper sticker on the truck at his house in Hawaii. There was his April 2024 X post supporting Trump-Vance. He did donate to ActRed. And he did just track down Biden at a golf course and brought an SKS with him.
Haha. Mild mannered Zeb comes in and destroys Nelsons retarded argument very effectively.
I suppose there’s a lesson in there somewhere, but that’s no fun.
You’re an idiot Nelson.
The 2nd one is a Bernie Bro. He has a Harris/Biden bumper sticker. He has never been a conservative. Ukraine turned him away for being screwy.
The Bernie Bro thing seems to only be promoted by the right. I haven't seen anything that indicates that the guy who voted for Trump supported Bernie's policies. Voting for Trump, supporting Haley and Vivek, and a social media history that skews conservative is a lot more telling, wouldn't you say? Unless, of course, you didn't like that inconvenient conclusion.
So except for his beliefs, he wasn't a conservative?
All of that is consistent with being rabidly anti-Trump, no conservatism required.
And yet he voted for Trump and then threw his support to other conservatives.
Plus, of course, there's nothing that shows he changed his mind about the things that made him vote for Trump in the first place. He only changed his mind about Trump as the vessel, which killing him would have solved. The Republicans would have a different candidate that he could support.
Except he didn't actually do any of that.
“When Harris took over from Biden as their party’s standard-bearer, Trump warned that “she will destroy our country in a year,” which he followed during his debate with his opponent by warning, “they’re the threat to democracy.”
But it was Trump who was wounded by one assassin’s bullet and targeted by another.”
Trump ramped it up to match the dems, who have beating the “If you don’t vote for me, then you will literally die because of Trump” drum for 8+ years. They had way more time to whip their crazies into a frothy, fear fueled rage.
Super Dooper Pooper Scooper, do NOT despair! Peaceful transfers of power are now BACK!!! Dear Leader is FINALLY conceeding that He lost His 2020 erections!!!
STOP THE PRESSES!!! INSERT HOTTEST NEWS FLASH!!! BREAKING NEWS!!!
Trump finally (Sort of) concedes the erections!!!!
My most-senior inside contact at the Shadow White House has surreptitiously slipped me an advance copy of the ex-lame-duck POTUS’s concession speech. Without further ado, here it is:
Friends, non-foreigner-type True Americans, and all who Make America Great Again, lend me your ears! I come to bury Biden, not to praise him. Biden and his minions stole the erections, and we must dishonor that! To Make America Great Again, we must invent the most fantastic, fabulous, YUUUGEST BIGNESS EVAH SEEN, in the ways of truly factually fictitious, but Spiritually and Metaphorically True, NEW Republican ballots! Because I have directed My Generals and My Scientists to research the current and past performance, efficacy, and patriotism of one-party states, versus multi-party states. As I have directed them to, My impartial, unbiased, data-driven council of My Generals and My Scientists have determined that yea verily, one-party states work better! Therefore, we must all strive for the Glorious Day, when America becomes a one-party state, under the One True Party, the Republican Party!
But for now, the courts have sided with Biden and his camel-toe, and Antifa, BLM, and all the Marxist terrorists. We must let the courts have it their way, with mayo on the side. I mean, with Mao Tse Tung on the side, but without the Proud Boys standing back and standing by. Thank you, Proud Boys, for having stood by me. Also, thank you, Steve Bannon, Vladimir Putin, Kim Ill Dung, and Pepe the Stolen-Intellectual-Property Frog. Pepe, watch out for Miss Piggy, she and her “pre-nuptial contracts” will clean your clock, just like Melania is set to clean mine soon! But I digest.
So we can’t disrepute what the nasty courts have said, or there might be civil war. Sad! The courts aren’t very American these days! And if you don’t like what I just said? Well, I’m sorry that you feel that way!
So congratulations to Biden for having stolen the erections! This is America, so we must properly honor the decisions of the courts, in a dishonorable way! Biden can come and live with us in the White House, per the wishes of the courts. He can pour our covfefe for us, for Steve Bannon, Pepe the Frog, and I, and Jill can make sandwiches for us. We promise to call him POTUS, and her, First Lady! POTUS of covfefe, and First Lady of sandwiches, that is! Hey Biden! Get yer butt over here! Pepe needs some covfefe!
That setup will get us by for a little while! Meanwhile, we can schedule the NEW run-off erections, this time without any fraudulent so-called “Democratic” votes being allowed, and we can do this RIGHT the next time!
Meanwhile, congratulations to Joe Stalin-Biden, on being erected POTUS of pouring covfefe for Pepe!
I didn't ask.
And you didn't think, either! You emoted, emptily! For sore-in-the-cunt cuntsorevaturds, shit's ALL about the FEELZ!!!!
"Now would be a good time to throw a big cocktail party in New York or Washington, and invite every single conservative writer you know."#RedWedding2
-Matt Welch, March 4, 2019 on X
https://x.com/MattWelch/status/1102654202545913857
For those of you who were never fans of the HBO show "Game of Thrines", the "Red Wedding" was a surprise massacre.
Like most lefties, Reason staff writers certainly aren't above advocating for the mass murder of people they don't like, at least when they think nobody I really paying attention. Note that he's so proud of this post that he never deleted it even after it got brought to people's attention here.
“Now would be a good time to throw a big cocktail party in New York or Washington, and invite every single conservative writer you know. #RedWedding2”
That’s the full quote. Did Welch call for “…all conservative writers be invited to a red-wedding style mass-slaughter…”? If in your fevered dreams, he WAS calling for that, was it for the party-going writers to be the dishers-out of the violence, as the victims, or as mere spectators? If as spectators, for their amusement, or to demonstrate the real horrors of real violence to them? Or, to see MOVIES about red weddings? … Y’all LOVE to rush to judgments, without any data, don’t you? Whenever doing so, fits YOUR story line!
Follow the links and see lots of references to movies and TV shows, etc.
“Party at my place. Invite your teenaged relatives and friends. #StarWars”
Did I just issue an invitation to blow up (“I sense disturbances in the Force”) entire planets full of teenagers, using Death Stars? … Well, yes, if you hate me and my kind, and honesty means NOTHING to you, I could see you using my party invitation that way, sure…
I’m sorry that you suffer under the illusion that you know exactly what Matt Welch meant by that. There are MANY possible interpretations!
Below is my interpretation:
He meant that the conservatives should be invited to a party in which “Red Wedding” is screened for all viewers, so that conservatives (ESPECIALLY Trump-cultist conservatives) could learn exactly WHAT it is like, to be invited to a party, in order for KILLINGS happen! And then maybe the Party of Trump Cultists will STOP inviting YOU to THEIR Party, in which democracy is deliberately murdered!!! (I know that it is WAAAAY too much to ask, that they should actually STOP trying to murder democracy, there in the Trump-Cult Party.)
MAN THE BARRICADES!!! The Satanic witches and Lizard People have stolen Trump’s erection; OUR erections!!! Our contaminated erections and formerly-pure essences are now being ground up into spamburger and are being force-fed to the children by Satanic groomers, who will turn the children into transsexual trannies from Transsexual Transylvania, and FORCE then to engorge in utterly demonic “Drag Queen Story Hours”!!!! Won’t someone PLEASE think of the children?!?!?
#MeInTheAss’CauseI’maGullibleLowBrowBlowHardConTard
Just don’t use a hyperbole about a woodchipper.
It seems to me that the violence is coming damn near exclusively from one side. It is aggressive violence, not defensive in nature. The violence is coming from the same side that controls the levers of establishment power.
A "both sides" mealy-mouthed criticism here betrays a lack of core libertarian principles and sensibility
Yes, and throw in all the tranny mass shooters as well, and it looks like one side has already declared war on the rest of us.
And remember, despite the existence of manifestos from at least one of the tranny shooters, we're not allowed to see it. Which is a good way to allow people to argue "we don't know what [pronoun] motive was".
"It seems to me that the violence is coming damn near exclusively from one side"
Very true, but we shouldn't assume that all conservatives advocate, or even support, political violence. I see it as a Trump-induced psychosis that will dissipate once he loses.
I continue to believe that, although wrong on most cultural issues and way too comfortable with government coercion, conservatives are not normally inclined towards violence.
You democrats are violent filth. This is almost exclusively of you. So stop lying.
Very true, but we shouldn’t assume that all conservatives advocate, or even support, political violence. I see it as a Trump-induced psychosis that will dissipate once he loses.
Interesting. Conservatives were the ones burning and looting American cities for several months in 2020?
If they donated to Act Blue and wanted to assassinate Trump, then certainly could be the case by some folks’ standards.
This is shrike levels of stupid. Be better than that.
Toosilly commenting on the leftist violence he helped foster as if it is some tactic employed by both sides equally instead of solely by his allies.
Elections should never be so important that people anticipate literally warring with their neighbors over the outcomes.
If elections are the way a polity chooses to organize and conduct war, then elections ARE going to be that important. There is no libertarian minarchist bafflegab possible. The problem is elections themselves not the stakes.
Elections by definition divide the polity before anything else can even happen. First you divide into winners and losers so the winners can choose what happens. Divide et impera becomes necessary. Which means the most skilled at that strategy are the ones who will run things. And if civil war, rather than external war, is what they want, then that’s what we all get.
Sortition (random selection of citizens) is the only way out of that. Juries do not identify and divide themselves before they go into the jury room. Demagoguery can work to corrupt them but that is different than divide et impera and it can be countered better.
The big point is that government shouldn’t be as powerful as it is, so elections wouldn’t have so many consequences.
Agreed! In spades! THIS is a short and sweet summary!
As long as one of those consequences is war, then that’s the stakes. The candidates in this election are vying to be CinC. The problem is elections.
No, you imbecile, it’s the increasing stakes brought about by the increasing power accumulated by your lefty boos in the leviathan executive branch
Nonsense. The crazies target the Prez because of the PUBLICITY that elections bring. The non-crazies more often than not target because of a war power of CinC.
It’s good that you preface your post to alert us that it’s pure nonsense. Although most people here were already aware of that.
In real life, the courts often have to summon 100+ potential jurors to actually find 12 that are qualified and willing.
Although in principle, willingness has nothing to do with it, in practice they don't heavily coerce the unwilling. Why? Because an angry, embittered person who really doesn't want to be there has many ways to make them regret calling him.
It would be the same with your sortition. You either let people opt out, in which case the wannabe politicians dominate, or you've got a bunch of conscripts with no higher officers to prevent a mutiny.
Opt out is ok. I don’t think that would let pols dominate. There are many reasons why jury duty has a much larger 'opt out' than is necessary or wise.
"...then far too much power has been concentrated in government."
Sometimes, after much verbiage and back and forth, they get to the heart of the matter.
Which side is most invested in empowering more government any way?
BOTH sides!!! THIS is why the SMART people "waste their votes" on "Team L"!
The GOP has been targeted for assassination twice now, yet it is evidence of a general rise in political violence, not anything specific.
Trump’s nomination in 2016 came about in no small part as a reactionto the GOP’s perceived milquetoast to absurd hatefilled rhetoric by the Democrats like Joe Biden in 2012 saying.that Mitt Romney, of all people, was going to reinstittute black slavery, somehow. Yet, in 2020, Biden is marketed to the electorate as some kind of paragon of bygone political civility and restraint. The bias on the subject of inappropriate rhetoric has been ridiculous in favor of one side.
It is possibly 3xs now. Apparently, explosives were found in a car near Trump's rally site in Long Island this morning. The driver abandoned his car and ran.
Or not -
https://notthebee.com/article/car-parked-near-trumps-nyc-rally-not-explosives
Schools in Springfield, Ohio have been inundated with bomb threats amidst the controversy over the city's sizeable population of Haitian immigrants. In July, an 80-year old man putting up a Trump campaign sign was run over by a politically motivated attacker who later killed himself. Arsonists have targeted Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), the offices of conservative organizations in Minnesota, and an Ohio church that hosted a drag event, among others.
Bomb threat hoax from a foreign country, oddly not said which, is the same as murder?
Is this like 2020 where we ignore all the violence from the left, multiple people hit by cars, or compare it to something insignificant to yell both sides?
Yeah, I was going to point that out, too. ALL the bomb threats have been hoaxes, some unspecified mix of foreign government(s) and domestic players attempting to generate an illusion that Trump supporters are making violent threats.
And Tuccille falls for it like a ton of bricks.
Trump AND Trump supporters DO make violent threats! "Hang Mike Pence" comes to mind!
When did Trump say that?
Trump agrees with “Hang Mike Pence!”
https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/25/politics/donald-trump-january-6-mike-pence-chants/index.html
Trump reacted with approval to ‘hang Mike Pence’ chants from rioters on January 6
Trump offers to pay legal bills for violent offender at Trump rally…
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html
Trump’s endorsement of violence reaches new level: He may pay legal fees for assault suspect
So Trump didn't actually say that.
“Hang Mike Pence”!!! Dear Leader agrees!!!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-defends-jan-6-rioters-hang-mike-pence-chant-newly-n1283798
Trump defends Jan. 6 rioters’ ‘hang Mike Pence’ chant in new audio
The audio captured part of an interview ABC News’ Jonathan Karl conducted with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in March for Karl’s upcoming book.
PS, Mike Pence’s dangerous words and ideas were that votes, voters, established democratic norms and processes, peaceful transfers of power, and the USA Constitution should actually be RESPECTED!!! Now just IMAGINE THAT!!! This was HERESY to True Trumpaloos!!!
Nothing in that article supports the idea that Trump agreed with "hang Mike Pence". All he said was that is was understandable that they protesters were angry and would say such things. That is in no way an endorsement of actually executing the VP.
What would Trump and his black-suited goons say and do if we all chanted "Hang Donald Trump"?
Also this... Trump forwards social media messages threatening judges hearing his cases... https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-threats-courts/ Happened all of the time... "Trump blasts his trial judges. Then his fans call for violence."
WHAT are the excuses of the Donald? Does a judge or a VEEP have to DIE before He stops this shit?
Well, I hope no one has to die. And I agree that internet assholes calling for violence against judges and politicians isn't great. But as with the invocation of woodchippers, these are often not serious threats, but simply people venting frustrations. Stop pretending like there aren't thousands of people regularly calling for Trump's death.
Unless there is a specific threat, then it's just speech. I haven't seen anything to show that anyone had a plan to actually hang mike pence. We know for sure that people have made actual plans to kill trump.
That sounds reasonable, not treasonable, to me!
More like NPR’s gradual slide into irrelevancy since the early 00s. Where they get an cosmopolitan, leftist writer for a big name media outlet and a urban, center-left writer for another big name media outlet together, call it “All Things Considered” and say it's ‘fair and balanced’.
Only to wake up 20 yrs. later with no listeners and political revolt among their own shitty staff because they packed the place with and coddled fake diversity, sub-par intellect, and unprincipled and conflicted narratives over actual talent.
But they still have their superiority complex going for them.
Yeah, this was dismissed by the governor of Ohio a day or two ago, and announced as a foreign hoax from one particular (unnamed) country.
Which means it wasn't Russia, because if it was, it would have been said.
Which means they probably came from Haiti, or from spoofers.
Or Ukraine.
The violence being inflicted on America is all due to Democrat policies. All of it. From the violence in democrat controlled cities to the violence committed by the democrats little pets, illegal aliens, America is suffering it's worst crisis ever in history. The crisis of an open border invasion and out of control crime. And don't even try to bring u the b.s. about decreasing crime.
Thank the Democrats for releasing violent criminals back onto the streets. Thank the democrats for allowing violent criminal illegal aliens into our country. Thank the democrats for allowing riots and nearly $2 billion in destruction of small businesses.
BLM, ANTIFA, Black Bloc are all violent leftist groups who somehow always manage to avoid prosecution.
Yet, somehow, the left always manages to blame conservatives for all the violence and the legacy media is simply an echo chamber.
The truth is both attempts on Trump's life are due to the incessant bleating of the left, particularly from has been television actors, brainless unfunny, late night talk show hosts and a certain news channel that hosts several women whose combined IQ barely reaches into double digits. They have all called for the outright murder of Trump.
So who's responsible for the violence?
"The violence being inflicted on America is all due to Democrat policies. All of it."
“Hang Mike Pence” came from the Demon-Craps, ye say?
Don't understand the word policy?
Words ARE a tiny bit like guns… Aim the both of them only at justified targets! CUNTROL yerselves, Trumps, Trumpistas, and Trumpaloos!
And Demon-Craps ass well! Butt I haven't heard of them chanting "Hang Mike Pence" and putting up makeshift gallows! Not lately, at least...
""Words ARE a tiny bit like guns""
Yeah, easily misrepresented by morons.
The only people being killed for their politics are MAGA, and the ones doing it are always unhinged Democrats, but look at you keep quoting a lie because it's all that you have.
Whinining about what some asshole said versus someone actually planting a pipe bomb near DNC Headquarters.
“Whinining about what some asshole said…” when the words (cumming from THE Cummander in Chief of the supposedly Free World) are WAY dangerous, is BAD? Can you bring yourself to saying BAD things, instead, about Our Asshole In Chief, when He sets a WAAAAY bad example for all of us? Shit flows downhill, ya know!!! And there’s a TON of shit flowing down from our Asshole In Chief!!! We follow (and try to obey shit like "Hang MikePence") at our own peril!
For my next virus, I am working on something that causes brain aneurisms if it detects thoughts of interfering with other people's desires.
Did you test it on Joe?
I built up an immunity years ago. Kinda requisite to the title of ‘Parent’.
I think that needs some more work before you release it. In addition to mad's comment about parenting, there are also situations like people who desire to murder or rape you where you might have good reason to interfere.
“”CNN pundit Scott Jennings accused the network of allowing comments by Donald Trump to repeatedly be taken out of context to stoke fear and anger.
The senior political commentator argued CNN has let the Kamala Harris mischaracterize comments by Trump in a way that is ‘designed to radicalize’ his critics.
Jennings made the comments during a panel the day after an apparent second assassination on the former Republican president, who has claimed rhetoric by Democrats is putting him in danger.
The pundit said that Trump’s comments that ‘there will be a bloodbath’ in the economy if he loses the election are an example of how the left has misconstrued his comments to stoke fear.
Multiple Trump critics ignored the fact that Trump was talking about a potential economic bloodbath and have claimed he was instead warning of violence erupting on America’s streets. ""
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cnn-star-slams-own-network-for-taking-trump-s-remarks-out-of-context/ar-AA1qM6xo?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=be1845d7c39e435ca28e33d4b2c5c173&ei=23
Come on, man. It is a core progressive value that believing something makes it true. They have college degrees and everything.
Also CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/14/politics/fact-check-harris-campaign-social-media/index.html
Fact check: Harris campaign social media account has repeatedly deceived with misleading edits and captions
[multiple examples provided]
So, does stochastic terrorism exist, or not?
>Trump Targeted Again Amidst Rising Tide of Political Violence
Its amazing how this only happens on the left though. Gun nuts on the right aren't getting violent.
Its like how the 'accidental' censorship only ever favors the left.
Trump is guilty of his own overheated rhetoric, of course.
Give me one fucking example of Trump's "overheated rhetoric" Just one. And "we should deport illegals" is not it.
Hang Mike Pence!!!
Something Trump did not say.
But that won’t stop the heckler’s pedo from repeating it.
Twat is the difference between "say" and "agree with"? Only a lawyer gives a shit!!! Trump has a LONG history of forwarding threats and lies that OTHER people make, on social media! I bet he even has his secret flunkies make up these threats FOR him! See Trump's lies about the father of Ted Cruz, for example. He has used this tactic to indirectly threaten judges ruling on Trump-shit.
Also https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/national-international/national-enquirer-made-up-story-about-ted-cruz-father-and-lee-harvey-oswald-former-publisher-says/3496187/
National Enquirer made up the story about Ted Cruz’s father and Lee Harvey Oswald, former publisher says
Wow, Dear Leader is a True Bleever who will fall for ANY pile of horse-shit, so long ass Dear Leader thinks shit will help Him!!!
(Actually Dear Leader had this story created for Him to use. Read the link to see.)
Oh, look at the psycho switch topics when his lies are challenged.
This is on topic, lying servant and serpent of the Evil One!
Trump has a LONG history of forwarding threats and lies that OTHER people make, on social media! I bet he even has his secret flunkies make up these threats FOR him!
Also this… Trump forwards social media messages threatening judges hearing his cases… https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-threats-courts/ Happens all of the time… “Trump blasts his trial judges. Then his fans call for violence.”
WHAT are the excuses of the Donald? Does a judge or a VEEP have to DIE before He stops this shit?
If people just took the jab willingly, there would not be the need to force it on them. If Trump would just follow the unipolar globohomo agenda and not go against it with his rhetoric, there would not be the need for what is occurring.
^ this,. And i've heard people say this ironically in not so many words.
If Trump would just STOP SAYING OR BLESSING SHIT LIKE HANG MIKE PENCE!!!
Which he didn't say, you liar.
So Ye, Oh PervFected All-Knowing and All-Seeing Wonder Child, have witnessed EVERYTHING that Dear Leader has EVER uddered? And Ye will testify to this? Do You ever even SLEEP, Oh PervFected All-Knowing and All-Seeing Wonder Child? All-seeing Eye of Saronic (AND MORONIC) BULLSHIT?!?!?
I’m sure MS-13 and the Venesualan gangs aren’t vermin and are in fact “very fine people”. I’m sure Tuccille and Sarc will be more than happy to have them as neighbors rather than providing poor neighborhoods elsewhere with this cultural enrichment.
Trump Targeted Again Amidst Rising Tide of Political Violence
Is this a rising tide of violence that's not 'skyrocketing' during a major downfall in crime?
Interesting, isn't it.
The leftist useful idiots preach peace, love and tolerance, and yet are the most intolerant, violent and hypocrites on our tortured planet.
Leftist, thy name is fascist.
Incidents now of people all over the country being killed by Democrats for being MAGA, but the Democrats are the ones pretending to be scared for their lives.
Just like in the when Democrats hung black men all over the South like Christmas ornaments, because their wimmin might be raped and murdered by blacks.
The simple reason the actual violence comes from one side... mental illness statistics. Liberals are twice as likely to have mental illness issues. I would guess, but cannot document any evidence, that a condition that leads to greater mental illness frequency also leads to more significant mental illness. I cannot tell you whether being crazy makes you a Democrat or being a Democrat makes you crazy. My belief is that it is a positive feedback loop. Their side has a broader, deeper pool of crazy to draw on.
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/03/how-to-understand-the-well-being-gap-between-liberals-and-conservatives/
John Adams said that our system of government was suited "for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." We are no longer that. We also disagree on everything. In a more perfect world, I'd say that my view of government's role in most issues is, "government shouldn't." Due to a collapse of shared values, it must get involved in disputes where it was never involved before. 100 years ago, had I followed someone's daughter into the ladies room, 100% of society would have been on the father's side regarding any measure he took to correct that situation. Since we can't agree on a basic thing like the distinction between male and female, everything ends up in the political arena. In theory Federalism provides the solution of allowing different states to make their own laws and people being free to self sort. Consolidation of power in the federal government now prevents this.
I don't have any practical solutions. My best hope is that we can delay an explosion of internal violence until something changes.
we need to limit the voting franchise. It's essential.
Giving equal votes to every single person regardless of capacity and value is madness.
As Toqueville said, (paraphrased) once the masses figure out they can just vote themselves the treasury, america is finished.
Yep. If you are a net recipient of unearned government benefits, you should not be allowed to vote.
Young Democrats are abnormally nervous, depressed, bisexual, and eager to defund the police, according to a new poll from the Harvard Kennedy School of Politics.
The poll asked respondents between the ages of 18 and 29 how often they had experienced a certain emotion or problem over the past two weeks, and the results among Democrats were rather shocking. Here’s how young Democrats reported feeling “at least several days” over that period:
• 61 percent reported feeling “nervous, anxious, or on edge”
• 57 percent said they had “trouble relaxing”
• 55 percent said they felt “unsafe”
• 52 percent reported feeling “down, depressed, or hopeless”
• 49 percent said they felt “little interest or pleasure in doing things”
• 47 percent said they experienced “loneliness”
• 46 percent reported “feeling afraid as if something awful might happen”
• 27 percent said they had entertained “thoughts that [they] would be better off dead” or “thoughts of hurting [themselves] in some way”
That doesn’t seem very healthy. And in case you were wondering: Yes, those numbers were significantly smaller among young Republicans. Despite feeling nervous and unsafe all the time, nearly 4 in 10 young Democrats said they support “defunding police departments” in their communities. Nearly one in three said police officers make them feel “less safe.”
Other noteworthy findings include the following:
• 32 percent said they regularly use TikTok for “news and current events related content,” compared with 21 percent of young Republicans
• 25 percent said they disagree with the statement “I would rather live in America than any other place,” compared with 10 percent of young Republicans; just 49 percent of Democrats agree with the statement, compared with 71 percent of GOP respondents
https://freebeacon.com/democrats/theres-something-wrong-with-young-democrats-poll
The Left views words as violence so Trump speaking is violent. You can't be violent if you have the right feels and causes.
The Right view violences as violence. Waters, Waltz, Biden, Harris - "get in their face. Harass them. They are a threat to democracy. They are the end of the world. They will lock everyone up."
Yeah, it's the Right. What a hack.
Guy Benson (TownHall.com):
I do not blame Kamala Harris or Democrats for the assassination attempt against Trump, but Trump does. And in doing so, he is merely directly applying their own standards to them. Many in the press are pressing forward with their typical garbage narratives, despite what happened to Trump -- again. Others are openly blaming Trump for the murderous hatred against him, as if it's his fault. He had it coming. Victim-blaming is appalling, but it's becoming the style guide in newsrooms against Republicans. As Charles Cooke writes, there must either be a consistent standard, or none at all.
Spoiler -- It's just partisan Calvinball:
Donald Trump was targeted by a shooter for the second time in two months, and, somehow, the former president is the one being blamed for it. Consider this a forlorn cry for exposition and specificity. Will someone, somewhere, in the name of all that is good and true, tell me what the bloody rules are for determining whether rhetorical bombast counts as mere everyday hyperbole or as the ineluctable prerequisite to political violence? I have looked and looked for a pattern, but, despite having pried up the floorboards and scoured the attic and investigated every last corner of the basement, I can find no standard that I find satisfactory. Surely, there must be more undergirding all this than just Calvinball?
Ever since WWII there has been the philosophical question of "if you could go back in time and kill Hitler would you do it" the perceived correct answer was alway Yes. Well here we have politicians and medias mouthpieces claiming Trump is Hitler for 8 years now. some one is bound to take up the philosophical idea to its fullest reality. So yes it is teh Democratic rhetoric that is putting Trump into harms way
How about: if you could go back in time and kill karl Marx, or Lenin, or Joe Stalin would you do it? How about Trotsky? Or Mao Tse Tung?
I suppose this will put me on the list of right wing terrorists.
Humorously Hitler was the leader of the [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] party.
Democrats calling Trump Hitler is 100% a self-projection.
If those who are drawn to political power are so dangerous that they threaten "our democracy and fundamental freedoms".
Problem is the brain washing there.
[OUR] gangster 'democratic' [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism]
*is* mutually exclusive of
Fundamental Freedoms.
Nothing about [WE] mob 'democracy' ensures any Fundamental Freedom. In fact it's the very reason "far too much power has been concentrated in government" and the very reason power hasn't been "stripped of the ability to do so much damage".
The USA ........... IS NOT ................. a democracy.
It is a *Constitutional* Union of Republican States.
Not as though anyone would recognize it as such with the Nazi-Empire taking over it's place.
"Again"? 2 days later? You trying to confuse the count? It's been only twice, you made me think there was a 3rd time with your untimely headline.
Trump is guilty of his own overheated rhetoric, of course. But so far, he's been the one on the receiving end of those who take such language seriously. Well, Trump and regular people caught up in political tensions and a rising tide of violence have been on the receiving end.
What's that tell you about the mindset of regular people, vs that of unhinged leftists?
If Trump was who we thought he was the first time, he would had run on the Democratic Party ticket for re-election.
But, like Nixon, you cornered him doing what he most prefers. Nixon thought hidden microphones could save the American presidency from another assassination. Trump thought January 6th was the greatness American needed with marines sacrificing their own life for the most dubious of causes. And you do not have to go back too very far in history to read of Oliver North trading cocaine for spending money in extraordinary rendition fashion, aka “off the books.” Whatever does this Republican ticket that Trump has nailed himself with yet champion?
Now reform might be the cure to greatness. I should not pretend that Trump understands something as big as the Republican Party, He may understand the Constitution — it would be good idea — well, because it holds the only way for America to be great again in terms that make rational sense.
The latest would-be assassin could not quite remove the lawless Republican Party by targeting Trump. I am only suggesting that we have certain problems caused by the Republican Party label in a chain of abuses that date way back.
You think that cocaine recently found in Biden’s White House being covered up by the Biden-Harris administration could be Oliver North’s?
You seem to be saying that there has never been independent proof that Oliver North ever sold cocaine.
At this point, perhaps cocaine tastes more like the media, in case they try to sell us that again!