Political Assassination - the American Way

[Ethereal]

Political Assassination - the American Way (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45273.htm)

By Finian Cunningham

August 11, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Sputnik" - Donald Trump has entered a political kill zone. And the American establishment is lining up to take him out. We are talking here in virtual terms - at least thus far.

Nowadays, political assassination by US powers-that-be does not necessarily involve physical liquidation of the individual deemed to be an enemy of the state. Who needs all that blood and controversy? Especially when character assassination achieves the same desired end result — that is, elimination of target from the public domain.
The fierce media crossfire that the Republican presidential contender is being subjected to leaves little doubt that this is a concerted effort to destroy this politician.

In the past week, we have seen a fusillade of vilification fired at the New York property tycoon-turned presidential hopeful. Everything, it seems, has been thrown at him, from his Slovenian-born wife's alleged US visa violations, to his bullying of crying babies at rallies, to his serving as an unwitting agent for Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

It's so transparent and preposterous, it is almost hilarious.

Evidently, the US corporate news media are out to bring Trump down in spite of his stubborn support among ordinary Republican voters. It is obvious that the Washington establishment has determined that Democrat rival Hillary Clinton is the preferred choice to protect their privileged interests as the next occupant of the White House.

And the US media — as a pillar of the establishment — is doing its bit to eliminate Trump from the supposedly free presidential election due in November by aiding and abetting in assassinating his character in the eyes of the public.

It is ironic really given that there is so much more sordid stories to be reported on Clinton, given her involvement in warmongering, clandestine regime-change operations and abuse of state secrecy for her own self-aggrandizement with foreign sources of money.
The latest sign that the secretive US Deep State — Pentagon, CIA, FBI, Wall Street financiers — is moving to install their White House candidate is the letter published this week by some 50 senior Republican "national security experts" who endorsed Clinton while eviscerating Trump.

Yes, that's right, Republicans backing a Democrat. Which just goes to show the uniformity of interests.

The signatories included former CIA director Michael Hayden, ex-chief of homeland security Michael Chertoff, both of whom served in the George W Bush administration, as well as John Negroponte who was a former director of national intelligence and alleged purveyor of death squads in Central America during the 1980s.

The joint anti-Trump letter followed the publication only days ago of an oped piece in the New York Times by another ex-CIA head, Michael Morell in which he lambasted Trump as a Russian stooge.

All of these figures are intimately connected to the US Deep State and all are unanimously pillorying Trump as a "dangerous threat to American national security".

For his part, Trump rebuffed the latest volley of vilification by saying that the list of national security "experts" are responsible for creating the Iraq war, the loss of American troops' lives and the rise of terrorism across the Middle East. Cheekily, he thanked them for all going public with their names so that the American people can hold them to account for foreign policy disasters.

However, the point here is that the campaign to discredit Trump is not just some haphazard run of bad luck on the candidate's part for mis-steps and mis-speaks that he may have issued on the hustings trail.

The intense, concerted nature of the campaign to destroy Trump demonstrates how the Washington power structure, including the corporate media, is setting him up for character assassination.

This is the kind of political liquidation that the American plutocracy excels at.

A few decades ago, American "executive action" — or "termination with extreme prejudice — involved, more often than not, literally murdering the individual target.

The most notorious case is that of President John F Kennedy who was assassinated on November 22, 1963, in Dallas. Around that time, several other foreign political leaders were also killed by American state agents, including Patrice Lumumba of Congo, Rafael Trujillo of Dominican Republic and Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam. Political murder was, still is, par for the American course.

The late New Orleans attorney, Jim Garrison, who probed the JFK assassination, said that the primary reason for his murder was that the president was working to end the Cold War with Russia. Kennedy was quietly using backchannels with Russian counterpart Nikita Krushchev to implement ambitious plans for nuclear weapons disarmament.

JFK had also flatly rejected secret proposals presented by the Pentagon for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union. He was in addition closing down CIA-sponsored terrorist operations in Cuba and he had declared a withdrawal of US troops from the nascent Vietnam war.

In this way, Kennedy had entered the political kill zone, as far as the powerful, unelected Deep State was concerned. His policies were threatening huge vested interests of military manufacturers, Big Oil and Wall Street financiers. Hence, the CIA and its contract killers were deployed to eliminate the "problem".

Donald Trump shares two aspects with JFK. Like Kennedy, the business magnate is independently wealthy, which allows him to speak his mind without apparently having to ingratiate himself with powerful sponsors.

Secondly, and more importantly, Trump has repeatedly pitched his election platform against the relentless build up of the US-led NATO military alliance in Eastern Europe, as well as overseas deployment of American forces, and, in particular, Washington's policy of hostility towards Russia.

Trump has called for the normalization of relations with Russia. His foreign policy position is anathema to the Washington establishment which requires — as an absolute necessity — the demonization of foreign countries as "national security threats" in order to maintain the gargantuan US militarized economy. In short, the American Deep State thrives on continual war-making. War is a permanent function of bankrupt American capitalism.

This systemic dysfunction is what the Cold War with Russia was and continues to be about — the pumping of trillions of dollars into corporate and financial elites, who get away with the scam because of their lackeys among the political and media channels.

Anyone who defies these powerful American interests is liable for termination. They have entered the kill zone.

In former times, the American methods of termination with extreme prejudice routinely involved physical elimination.

Five decades after JFK, the US methods of political assassination have evolved to become more sophisticated. Character assassination may suffice most of the time. No need for contract hitmen or messy public enquiries. Media hitmen will do.

...

The banking cartel and the military-industrial complex are fully behind Clinton. They have ordered the corporate media to do everything in their power to destroy him. Whatever you may think of Trump, that says something about what he represents.

[Don]

Maybe even little things like an ex CIA operative running against Trump to water the vote down a bit.

[sachem]

tldr

[FindersKeepers]

The banking cartel and the military-industrial complex are fully behind Clinton. They have ordered the corporate media to do everything in their power to destroy him. Whatever you may think of Trump, that says something about what he represents.



That is inescapably true.

It's easy to dislike Trump.

It's dangerous to ignore the scope and intent of those attacking him.

[IMPress Polly]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination. His supporters whine about (wholly earned) CHARACTER assassination and see no double-standard. :rollseyes:

[Peter1469]

We need the third parties in the debates. Maybe the sheep will wake up.

[Ravens Fan]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination. His supporters whine about (wholly earned) CHARACTER assassination and see no double-standard. :rollseyes:

That is untrue. Go back and read his actual words without adding your own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PolWatch]

Did Trump openly call for violence? No. Is his statement so ambiguous that it is open to different interpretation? Yes. That is one of the major problems with Trump. Leaders can not be imprecise in making public statements. Words do have power. When the speaker has the bully pulpit, their words resonate much further.

We don't need someone in the Oval Office that is incapable of controlling their own mouth.

[Common]

Did Trump openly call for violence? No. Is his statement so ambiguous that it is open to different interpretation? Yes. That is one of the major problems with Trump. Leaders can not be imprecise in making public statements. Words do have power. When the speaker has the bully pulpit, their words resonate much further.

We don't need someone in the Oval Office that is incapable of controlling their own mouth.

There is no one more imprecise than hillary clinton, she doesnt make ambiguous statements, She outright lies through her teeth. The woman is a fraud and a crook and a snake, just like her husband.

[Oboe]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination. His supporters whine about (wholly earned) CHARACTER assassination and see no double-standard. :rollseyes:

Lying sack.

[FindersKeepers]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination.




I love the creativity some folks put into their "theories."

[Ravens Fan]

I love the creativity some folks put into their "theories."

Yeah, creativity... That's the ticket...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FindersKeepers]

Lying sack.



I really don't think she's lying. And, it's kind of rude to call others "liars."

I just think she, like so many others who desperately cling to progressive-type ideology, take it for granted that the liberal media has cornered the market on "reading between the lines."

There is an innate political immaturity coming from the Left of the political spectrum these days. I don't think they realize, as they fall victim to the biased attacks on conservatism, that they're silently accepting the same type of controlled, yellow, journalism that has historically been associated with fascism.

Their error may cost all of us.

Dearly.

[Mac-7]

Did Trump openly call for violence? No. Is his statement so ambiguous that it is open to different interpretation? Yes. That is one of the major problems with Trump. Leaders can not be imprecise in making public statements. Words do have power. When the speaker has the bully pulpit, their words resonate much further.

We don't need someone in the Oval Office that is incapable of controlling their own mouth.

Hillary is the most greedy and corrupt politician to live in the white house since warren g harding.

and you're worried that trump is not buttoned down enough by teleprompters and focus group handlers?

[Subdermal]

tldr

You and dull should get together. You'd have lots to say to each other.

[Subdermal]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination. His supporters whine about (wholly earned) CHARACTER assassination and see no double-standard. :rollseyes:

Nonsense bullsht, communist. You leave no room at all to distinguish what Trump actually said from a statement like this: "Will someone please shoot her?"

Duuurpppp.

[MisterVeritis]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination. His supporters whine about (wholly earned) CHARACTER assassination and see no double-standard. :rollseyes:
I love your goofy sense of humor.

Clinton's threat to the nation must be ended. If she is to be executed, as I hope she will be, the state must do it following indictment, trial, and conviction. We mere mortals can stop her by voting for Trump. So that is what we Second Amendment people shall do.

[Common Sense]

Cool OP...we don't have enough Russian propaganda around here. Ypa!

[nic34]

Do svidaniya!

[The Xl]

It's pretty obvious the media, banks, military industrial complex, establishment politicians, etc, only oppose him because they can't control him, it has nothing to do with anything else.

[The Xl]

Cool OP...we don't have enough Russian propaganda around here. Ypa!

Someone is eating up propaganda, all right....

[Subdermal]

It's pretty obvious the media, banks, military industrial complex, establishment politicians, etc, only oppose him because they can't control him, it has nothing to do with anything else.

They wouldn't worry nearly as much if they simply felt that the issue was lack of control. They're additionally worried that he'll do them - and the system of corruption and cronyism they've erected - damage.

[Ethereal]

Trump proposes an actual political assassination. His supporters whine about (wholly earned) CHARACTER assassination and see no double-standard. :rollseyes:

Except I don't support Trump. Did you read the article before you responded?

[Ethereal]

Cool OP...we don't have enough Russian propaganda around here. Ypa!

Thanks for stopping by, troll.

[PolWatch]

It's pretty obvious the media, banks, military industrial complex, establishment politicians, etc, only oppose him because they can't control him, it has nothing to do with anything else.

The problem is that Trump can't control Trump. How many times has the official campaign statement included something to the effect that he will start behaving in a more presidential manner? How long does this promise to discuss actual policies or plans last? Trump plays to the crowd...he says anything that gets cheers. That is not a leader....that's an entertainer. Do you want a president or a reality star? I won't defend Clinton because I'm not a fan of her candidacy either. This is not an election, its a tragedy. Stein or Johnson.....probably the only honest choices.

[Common]

The problem is that Trump can't control Trump. How many times has the official campaign statement included something to the effect that he will start behaving in a more presidential manner? How long does this promise to discuss actual policies or plans last? Trump plays to the crowd...he says anything that gets cheers. That is not a leader....that's an entertainer. Do you want a president or a reality star? I won't defend Clinton because I'm not a fan of her candidacy either. This is not an election, its a tragedy. Stein or Johnson.....probably the only honest choices.

I agree to a point, no one can take the media bias and scrutiny trump is recieving. I posted where even the NY times said the coverage isnt at all equal and the washington post said they media was lieing about the assassination statement.

Polwatch all their nasty negative only coverage of trump can cover the constant lieing and constant criminal acts of Hillary and her campaign. ANOTHER FBI investigation into her and bills dirty deals foundation.

[del]

the party of personal responsibility says it's not trump's fault that the media is mean to him.

you can't make this shit up

[Common Sense]

Thanks for stopping by, troll.

Thanks for posting Putin's thoughts on the matter, stooge.

[AZ Jim]

Did Trump openly call for violence? No. Is his statement so ambiguous that it is open to different interpretation? Yes. That is one of the major problems with Trump. Leaders can not be imprecise in making public statements. Words do have power. When the speaker has the bully pulpit, their words resonate much further.

We don't need someone in the Oval Office that is incapable of controlling their own mouth.You post seldom but when you do the post contains wise words.

[PolWatch]

I agree to a point, no one can take the media bias and scrutiny trump is recieving. I posted where even the NY times said the coverage isnt at all equal and the washington post said they media was lieing about the assassination statement.

Polwatch all their nasty negative only coverage of trump can cover the constant lieing and constant criminal acts of Hillary and her campaign. ANOTHER FBI investigation into her and bills dirty deals foundation.

opinion pieces are one thing....but when the reports consist of actual video of Trump's remarks? How can that be bias? The reports I have seen are direct videos of his remarks....I have checked numerous sources to be sure they were not edited....they were not edited. When someone makes remarks that can be interpreted in several ways, it is the speaker's problem. Trump is his own worse enemy. He has been so busy saying anything to inspire cheers by his supporters, he has ignored several issues about Clinton that he could have really made ground on. Hillary isn't winning....Trump is giving her the election. His recent remarks about the election being rigged are just another victim card so he can blame his own failure on others.

[Docthehun]

Did Trump openly call for violence? No. Is his statement so ambiguous that it is open to different interpretation? Yes. That is one of the major problems with Trump. Leaders can not be imprecise in making public statements. Words do have power. When the speaker has the bully pulpit, their words resonate much further.

We don't need someone in the Oval Office that is incapable of controlling their own mouth.

"Loose lips sink ships." < "Walk softly and carry a big stick."

[PolWatch]

Lying sack.

Poster has been thread banned for name calling. Do not respond to thread banned posts.

[Subdermal]

the party of personal responsibility says it's not trump's fault that the media is mean to him.

you can't make this $#@! up

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html?_r=0

Oh, don't sell your imagination short, dull.

[Ethereal]

the party of personal responsibility says it's not trump's fault that the media is mean to him.

you can't make this $#@! up

The author of this article is an Irish socialist. Pretty sure he doesn't belong to the Republican party.

[Ethereal]

Thanks for posting Putin's thoughts on the matter, stooge.

Even if they were Putin's thoughts (and they're not), what would it matter? You refuse to discuss the issue, as usual. Instead, you just show up and crap on my thread.

[Ethereal]

opinion pieces are one thing....but when the reports consist of actual video of Trump's remarks? How can that be bias? The reports I have seen are direct videos of his remarks....I have checked numerous sources to be sure they were not edited....they were not edited. When someone makes remarks that can be interpreted in several ways, it is the speaker's problem. Trump is his own worse enemy. He has been so busy saying anything to inspire cheers by his supporters, he has ignored several issues about Clinton that he could have really made ground on. Hillary isn't winning....Trump is giving her the election. His recent remarks about the election being rigged are just another victim card so he can blame his own failure on others.

This thread isn't about Trump's second amendment comments. It's about the interests arrayed against him and their motivations for doing so. I would encourage forum members to read the article before responding.

[Ethereal]

The problem is that Trump can't control Trump. How many times has the official campaign statement included something to the effect that he will start behaving in a more presidential manner? How long does this promise to discuss actual policies or plans last? Trump plays to the crowd...he says anything that gets cheers. That is not a leader....that's an entertainer. Do you want a president or a reality star? I won't defend Clinton because I'm not a fan of her candidacy either. This is not an election, its a tragedy. Stein or Johnson.....probably the only honest choices.

Haven't you ever felt so suffocated and oppressed by something that you'll do almost anything to escape its clutches? It could be anything from some fat bully who was sitting on your chest in grade school to an authoritarian plutocracy that systematically rapes humanity. Either way, it creates desperation in people, which is why they will embrace increasingly extreme and unpredictable means of extricating themselves from the situation. At this point, I don't care if Trump wins or loses. I just want him to behave like a wrecking ball for this horrible, corrupt system. His intentions are irrelevant because the results speak for themselves. All the most evil people in the world are aligned against Trump. That says something!

[del]

The author of this article is an Irish socialist. Pretty sure he doesn't belong to the Republican party.

i wasn't talking about the the author but rather the responses here.

spacebo

[Crepitus]

That is untrue. Go back and read his actual words without adding your own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You guys keep saying that. I've read the whole thing, there is no mistaking what he was hinting at. It probably wasn't meant seriously but that doesn't excuse it.

[Crepitus]

Lying sack.

This is the same thing Trump was doing. Everybody knows what you stopped short of openly saying, just like everybody knows what Trump was getting at. Even those who deny it know.

[Ravens Fan]

You guys keep saying that. I've read the whole thing, there is no mistaking what he was hinting at. It probably wasn't meant seriously but that doesn't excuse it.

See post #7. Stop adding your own words to it. Anything you may think he said is simply opinion, not fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crepitus]

Nonsense bullsht, communist. You leave no room at all to distinguish what Trump actually said from a statement like this: "Will someone please shoot her?"

Duuurpppp.

Excuse you.

[Crepitus]

See post #7. Stop adding your own words to it. Anything you may think he said is simply opinion, not fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did I add any words to it? I didn't. You know I didn't. You also know what he meant when he said it. You will continue to deny it because you don't like it and you know it was wrong but you do know it.

[Ravens Fan]

Where did I add any words to it? I didn't. You know I didn't. You also know what he meant when he said it. You will continue to deny it because you don't like it and you know it was wrong but you do know it.

Are you a mind reader? Your sure seem to like acting as though you are. But I can promise you that your attempt with me was incorrect.

The first time I heard it, I figured he meant gun lobbyists and supporters of the second amendment. And there was nothing there to make me think he meant anything illegal, such as murder.

I also do know that you guys are getting pretty desperate in the attacks against him. Can't you just attack him for the words that he does say? In context? He sticks his foot in his mouth quite often enough on his own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crepitus]

Are you a mind reader? Your sure seem to like acting as though you are. But I can promise you that your attempt with me was incorrect.

The first time I heard it, I figured he meant gun lobbyists and supporters of the second amendment. And there was nothing there to make me think he meant anything illegal, such as murder.

I also do know that you guys are getting pretty desperate in the attacks against him. Can't you just attack him for the words that he does say? In context? He sticks his foot in his mouth quite often enough on his own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I stand by what I said. You know I'm right. I don't expect you to admit it though.

[Ravens Fan]

I stand by what I said. You know I'm right. I don't expect you to admit it though.

And I stand by what I said. You are wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crepitus]

And I stand by what I said. You are wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except that I'm not.

[del]

Are you a mind reader? Your sure seem to like acting as though you are. But I can promise you that your attempt with me was incorrect.

The first time I heard it, I figured he meant gun lobbyists and supporters of the second amendment. And there was nothing there to make me think he meant anything illegal, such as murder.

I also do know that you guys are getting pretty desperate in the attacks against him. Can't you just attack him for the words that he does say? In context? He sticks his foot in his mouth quite often enough on his own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

that's exactly what he's being attacked for. if you choose to believe that he was talking about voting and gun lobbyists, good for you, but there's a fairly substantial portion of the population that disagrees with you, including me.

he says things like this and then pretends he didn't really mean what he said, or it's being interpreted wrong or some other sad excuse for a sad excuse.

he's your guy. i get it, but don't expect me to go check the weather report when donnie boy pisses down your back and tries to do the same to me.

[Ravens Fan]

Except that I'm not.

Can you prove his intent?

Can you prove what you claim I think?

Didn't think so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crepitus]

Can you prove his intent?

Can you prove what you claim I think?

Didn't think so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You aren't stupid. You know what he was hinting at.

[Hal Jordan]

Except that I'm not.

Except that you are. I see it as pretty clear that he was talking about voting. I understand how you can see it otherwise, but think it's a bit of a stretch.

Keep in mind that I hate Trump, think he's unqualified to be President, and has speaking issues.

[Ravens Fan]

that's exactly what he's being attacked for. if you choose to believe that he was talking about voting and gun lobbyists, good for you, but there's a fairly substantial portion of the population that disagrees with you, including me.

he says things like this and then pretends he didn't really mean what he said, or it's being interpreted wrong or some other sad excuse for a sad excuse.

he's your guy. i get it, but don't expect me to go check the weather report when donnie boy pisses down your back and tries to do the same to me.

You don't get it. He is not my boy at all. I am just able to see the lopsided reporting and the fabrications going on in order to distract from Hillary's issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crepitus]

Except that you are. I see it as pretty clear that he was talking about voting. I understand how you can see it otherwise, but think it's a bit of a stretch.

Keep in mind that I hate Trump, think he's unqualified to be President, and has speaking issues.

I do not think for a second that he was talking about voting. That is just him trying to cover after the fact

[Ravens Fan]

You aren't stupid. You know what he was hinting at.

I have already told you what I took it as. Disagreeing does not make someone stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hal Jordan]

I do not think for a second that he was talking about voting. That is just him trying to cover after the fact

Except I saw it as clearly being about that before I heard anyone "covering".

[del]

You don't get it. He is not my boy at all. I am just able to see the lopsided reporting and the fabrications going on in order to distract from Hillary's issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

uh huh

[Crepitus]

I have already told you what I took it as. Disagreeing does not make someone stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I actually said you aren't stupid, that's why I'm so sure that you know what he meant.

[Ravens Fan]

uh huh

Should I call you Hilary's boy? You do like to follow hangar and Pete around anytime they post something bad about her... Just saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[del]

Should I call you Hilary's boy? You do like to follow hangar and Pete around anytime they post something bad about her... Just saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you can call me whatever you like.

try to keep this under your hat; i don't give a fuck

[Ravens Fan]

I actually said you aren't stupid, that's why I'm so sure that you know what he meant.

I don't KNOW what he meant. You don't either. He was to incoherent and scatterbrained to be sure what the hell he meant. But the just I got was not one of inciting violence against Hillary. It was about fighting (politically) for the second amendment.

I am smart enough not to assume. Show me proof that he meant what you think and I will join those demonizing him. Until then I remain skeptical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crepitus]

Except I saw it as clearly being about that before I heard anyone "covering".

I don't understand how. The "nudge nudge" manner, the expression on his face, all of it points to hinting at something he wasn't saying out loud. And since what he was ostensibly talking about was voting I must believe he meant that to be interpreted the other way.

[Ravens Fan]

you can call me whatever you like.

try to keep this under your hat; i don't give a fuck

I was trying to point out how wrong you were. I have stated enough times that I don't like Trump. I just don't like Clinton even more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[del]

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest."

*shrug

[Crepitus]

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest."

*shrug

Simon and Garfunkel. Not a huge fan however I've heard them all way to many times.

[del]

Simon and Garfunkel. Not a huge fan however I've heard them all way to many times.

i always liked that line and this one

I have squandered my resistance
For a pocketful of mumbles,
Such are promises

[Hal Jordan]

I don't understand how. The "nudge nudge" manner, the expression on his face, all of it points to hinting at something he wasn't saying out loud. And since what he was ostensibly talking about was voting I must believe he meant that to be interpreted the other way.

The how is that I understand the way he speaks. I've heard enough of it that I don't find it hard to understand what he's trying to say. It may help that I have a lot of conversations that involve his style of speaking, albeit with less arrogance, etc.

[Hal Jordan]

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest."

*shrug

Well, since I want to hear him being such an idiot that he gets booted from the race...

Wouldn't mind Hillary getting booted either...

[del]

Well, since I want to hear him being such an idiot that he gets booted from the race...

as i said before, sure

[Dr. Who]

I don't KNOW what he meant. You don't either. He was to incoherent and scatterbrained to be sure what the hell he meant. But the just I got was not one of inciting violence against Hillary. It was about fighting (politically) for the second amendment.

I am smart enough not to assume. Show me proof that he meant what you think and I will join those demonizing him. Until then I remain skeptical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's what dogwhistle means. If you are not attuned to certain turns of phrase, you won't hear it. In this case, the dogwhistle was to those who believe the 2nd addresses a tyrannical government, even if it was a joke. The libs actually pay more attention to what he actually does say than the right, just as the right pays special attention to what Hillary says. Otherwise people listen with filters.

[Ethereal]

You guys keep saying that. I've read the whole thing, there is no mistaking what he was hinting at. It probably wasn't meant seriously but that doesn't excuse it.

This thread isn't about what Trump did or did not mean when he referenced Clinton and second amendment people - there are several other threads where that is being discussed at length. This thread is about the vested interests who are aligning against Trump and what their motivations are. I don't mind if Trump's statements are introduced into the discussion, but it would be nice if they could be tied into the thread topic somehow.

[Ethereal]

I'm willing to concede, for the sake of argument, that Trump meant what his critics are claiming he meant. It doesn't change the points I raised in my OP. Trump could take a dump on Clinton's face during the presidential debates and the points I raised would still be valid.

[Ransom]

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest."

*shrug

And you ladies are different? In through one ear and out the other means selective filtering. Ask your husband, walnut.

:biglaugh:

[Ransom]

That's what dogwhistle means. If you are not attuned to certain turns of phrase, you won't hear it. In this case, the dogwhistle was to those who believe the 2nd addresses a tyrannical government, even if it was a joke. The libs actually pay more attention to what he actually does say than the right, just as the right pays special attention to what Hillary says. Otherwise people listen with filters.

Let me learn you a thing or two about the Right, Who, you like to speak for the Right a lot. We care what Hillary actually does...not what she says.

Labeling the Right her enemy...her repeated lies to the American People, this is not why the Right think she should face charges in the face of clear negligence.

It's because she's actually been negligent. She's actually killed people, been responsible for their deaths. She was flaunting around abroad including nations hostile to us.......with unsecured data, putting our nation and individuals at risk.

We're concerned about what is going on right now. Pallets of cash showing up on Iranian runways, a stagnant economy, our education crisis, our divided communities and families. Actually what is going on. Reality. Not what this woman is saying, not what this President is reading off his teleprompter. What's actually going on. We're less impressed with talk, we'd like to see the walk.

By the way, Who. Given an opportunity, who would you vote for? Be honest.

[stjames1_53]

I really don't think she's lying. And, it's kind of rude to call others "liars."

I just think she, like so many others who desperately cling to progressive-type ideology, take it for granted that the liberal media has cornered the market on "reading between the lines."

There is an innate political immaturity coming from the Left of the political spectrum these days. I don't think they realize, as they fall victim to the biased attacks on conservatism, that they're silently accepting the same type of controlled, yellow, journalism that has historically been associated with fascism.

Their error may cost all of us.

Dearly.

Venezuela is the latest shining example of progressive liberalism.............this is what they want here

[stjames1_53]

you can call me whatever you like.

try to keep this under your hat; i don't give a $#@!

so you stalk him and hanger both because you don't give a shit.....
this is typical of low information voters ....you stalk become rude and obnoxious, then claim you don't give a shit........
what you don't give a shit about, is anyone standing between you and your welfare check