Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon
- Thread starter kithnou
- Start date
- Status
Thank you for providing a clip with full context. I agree it was poor form to repeat a lie.
Thank goodness the orange man has never done so. Or is it genius when he does it? I forget.
He did call them fine people though. Must of given you a tingle in your gonads when he did, didn't it? You loved it.
Personally I’m comfortable with saying that anyone who was still marching whilst being surrounded by others bearing swastikas and chanting “Jews will not replace us” are not “very fine people”.
www.thebulwark.com
Here’s the actual “very fine people” comment:
Cortes claims that “Trump’s ‘fine people on both sides’ observation clearly related to those on both sides of the Confederate monument debate.” In other words, it was just a vague, general observation that good people can disagree on the issue. But as we’ve just seen, that’s not what Trump was saying. He was referring to a specific group of protesters present in Charlottesville on the night of August 11. And this was the context in which Trump denied that he was talking about white nationalists.
That’s right. The people marching in Charlottesville the night before were the guys with torches chanting “blood and soil” and “Jews will not replace us.”
So you can see where the mainstream view of this statement comes from. Cortes describes Trump’s words as “unambiguous” but his actual words are the very definition of ambiguity: He is denouncing the Nazis out of one side of his mouth, then calling them “very fine people” out of the other. He is saying, in effect, that he condemns the white nationalists but also that the people marching with torches and shouting at the Jews were very fine people. Do you find that a convincing “condemnation”? Would you find it convincing if any other politician said it?
The “Charlottesville Hoax” Hoax
Trump’s supporters are trying to gaslight you. Again.
www.thebulwark.com
So when he says “very fine people” he is referring to a specific group of protesters, and not only does he keep emphasizing this, but he gets more specific about them.
And later in the press conference:
He keeps going back to this idea that there was a separate group of protesters that weekend in Charlottesville, ordinary people who merely opposed the removal of Lee’s statue, and he keeps giving that group a specific time and place: in Charlottesville “the night before,” that is, the night of Friday, August 11.
Cortes claims that “Trump’s ‘fine people on both sides’ observation clearly related to those on both sides of the Confederate monument debate.” In other words, it was just a vague, general observation that good people can disagree on the issue. But as we’ve just seen, that’s not what Trump was saying. He was referring to a specific group of protesters present in Charlottesville on the night of August 11. And this was the context in which Trump denied that he was talking about white nationalists.
All right, so who are these people who were just there to protest the removal of the statues? Who was the group protesting “the night before”?
That’s right. The people marching in Charlottesville the night before were the guys with torches chanting “blood and soil” and “Jews will not replace us.”
So you can see where the mainstream view of this statement comes from. Cortes describes Trump’s words as “unambiguous” but his actual words are the very definition of ambiguity: He is denouncing the Nazis out of one side of his mouth, then calling them “very fine people” out of the other. He is saying, in effect, that he condemns the white nationalists but also that the people marching with torches and shouting at the Jews were very fine people. Do you find that a convincing “condemnation”? Would you find it convincing if any other politician said it?
“Proud Boys stand back and stand by”
I hope this pettiness continues, the two outside groups have no experience whereas Kemp’s GOTV operation has proved effective.
dylsexicbleu
Player Valuation: £8m
Kentucky Democratic Governor goes on TV and asks for JD Vance's wife or kids to be raped. Shocking.
dylsexicbleu
Player Valuation: £8m
Someone earlier in this thread implied support for Donald Trump to be raped in prison. Now we have JD Vance's wife targeted for the same thing. Democrats do somehow love the thought of their political opponents to be raped. Weird.
Why are they so weird?
Concerning Trump, that would be the one and only time I would feel sorry for the rapist.
You do know Trump was found civilly liable for rape right?
You really need new material
The absolute state of you
dylsexicbleu
Player Valuation: £8m
I'm not the one advocating rape, that's you.
Tommy Chong
Player Valuation: £70m
And I still can't believe that he had the nerve to suggest, even if it was subtle, that Harris's decision to overlooking Shapiro for VP was based on antisemitic reasons.Personally I’m comfortable with saying that anyone who was still marching whilst being surrounded by others bearing swastikas and chanting “Jews will not replace us” are not “very fine people”.
Here’s the actual “very fine people” comment:The “Charlottesville Hoax” Hoax
Trump’s supporters are trying to gaslight you. Again.
So when he says “very fine people” he is referring to a specific group of protesters, and not only does he keep emphasizing this, but he gets more specific about them.
And later in the press conference:
He keeps going back to this idea that there was a separate group of protesters that weekend in Charlottesville, ordinary people who merely opposed the removal of Lee’s statue, and he keeps giving that group a specific time and place: in Charlottesville “the night before,” that is, the night of Friday, August 11.
Cortes claims that “Trump’s ‘fine people on both sides’ observation clearly related to those on both sides of the Confederate monument debate.” In other words, it was just a vague, general observation that good people can disagree on the issue. But as we’ve just seen, that’s not what Trump was saying. He was referring to a specific group of protesters present in Charlottesville on the night of August 11. And this was the context in which Trump denied that he was talking about white nationalists.
All right, so who are these people who were just there to protest the removal of the statues? Who was the group protesting “the night before”?
That’s right. The people marching in Charlottesville the night before were the guys with torches chanting “blood and soil” and “Jews will not replace us.”
So you can see where the mainstream view of this statement comes from. Cortes describes Trump’s words as “unambiguous” but his actual words are the very definition of ambiguity: He is denouncing the Nazis out of one side of his mouth, then calling them “very fine people” out of the other. He is saying, in effect, that he condemns the white nationalists but also that the people marching with torches and shouting at the Jews were very fine people. Do you find that a convincing “condemnation”? Would you find it convincing if any other politician said it?
The same reasons that kopites are weird, I guess...
And unless you have a couple of PhD's in various different types of psychologies and psychiatries, and spent decades studying them, those reasons that will remain a mystery to us normal folk.
Damo_1878
Don't care. Not bothered.
Because Donald Trump spouts weird every time he opens his mouth
- Status