The Media Industry

mchammer said:
How did you arrive at this conclusion that Trump was referring to people at the tiki torch parade? Trump was speaking to the melee that occurred during the day.
Click to expand...
POTUS said so. At 2:40. He was very specific. He even mentions they had a permit. Counter protesters did not.

Who was the organizer with the permit? Fine people at Unite the Right.
 
LongestHorn said:
POTUS said so. At 2:40. He was very specific. He even mentions they had a permit. Counter protesters did not.

Who was the organizer with the permit? Fine people at Unite the Right.
Click to expand...

Yes, Trump was specific that he was referring to fine people and that didn’t include nazi’s and white supremacists. According to wiki, there were no permits issued for Friday, only Saturday. So, Trump must have been referring to the events on Saturday. Here is the transcript (see below). He wasn’t talking about the events on Friday. He said on Friday night he looked at who was supposed to be where: protesters at Lee Park and counter protesters at two other parks. He had already said the protesters included fine people along with the Nazi’s and white supremacists. This is not complicated or a conspiracy.

“I looked the night before -- if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. ... You had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest -- because I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit.”
 
Last edited:
mchammer said:
Yes, Trump was specific that he was referring to fine people and that didn’t include nazi’s and white supremacists. According to wiki, there were no permits issued for Friday, only Saturday. So, Trump must have been referring to the events on Saturday. Here is the transcript (see below). He wasn’t talking about Friday. He said on Friday night he looked at who was supposed to be where: protesters at Lee Park and counter protesters at two other parks. He had already said the protesters included fine people along with the Nazi’s and white supremacists. This is not complicated or a conspiracy.

“I looked the night before -- if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. ... You had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest -- because I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit.”
Click to expand...

You know that he won't admit to the fact that he fell for fake news.
 
mchammer said:
Yes, Trump was specific that he was referring to fine people and that didn’t include nazi’s and white supremacists. According to wiki, there were no permits issued for Friday, only Saturday. So, Trump must have been referring to the events on Saturday.
Click to expand...

He must have. Yep. That’s it. He just MUST have.
 
What's remarkable to me is that admitting that the media's characterization is wrong doesn't make Trump a good guy or his policies good. People can still debate those points all day long and can still debate whether or not he should be reelected. They can even debate whether or not Trump is a racist. Someone isn't defined by one incident.

Despite that, he can't admit that he's wrong even with conclusive proof right in front of his face. I'm not surprised. I saw this coming when I raised the issue, but it's still remarkable how rabid partisanship and contempt can blind someone to reality.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Despite that, he can't admit that he's wrong even with conclusive proof right in front of his face.
Click to expand...

Michelle Piercy has been repeatedly marched out as evidence that good people who drove to the rally and did not know it was a nazi rally.

We know that’s a lie. Are you prepared to dispute it?

So then who were these many fine people who traveled to the rally?

Fact is, it was a white power rally organized by racists and for racists. The only permit issued that weekend was issued to racists. That is not in dispute. And when the POTUS was watching the peaceful fine people quietly holding their tiki torches on TV Friday night, he was watching white power/militia.

I heard the POTUS say he condemned the racist protestors. His problem is that all the protesters who attended the rally that weekend were racists. Dozens of groups. All racist.

Is there evidence to the contrary? Show me.
 
Well, it looks like he condemned everyone at the rally based upon your irrefutable, iron clad evidence (I assume you have all of the names and the details on every individual at your disposal). Too bad for you that Trump's expressly stated condemnation of neo-nazis and white nationalists ends your false accusation and incessant, childlike whining of racism that serves no point whatsoever.
 
iatrogenic said:
Well, it looks like he condemned everyone at the rally based upon your irrefutable, iron clad evidence (I assume you have all of the names and the details on every individual at your disposal). Too bad for you that Trump's expressly stated condemnation of neo-nazis and white nationalists ends your false accusation and incessant, childlike whining of racism that serves no point whatsoever.
Click to expand...
This is the first time I've ever noticed LongestHorn talk about racism. Where do you get the word incessant from?
 
LongestHorn said:
Michelle Piercy has been repeatedly marched out as evidence that good people who drove to the rally and did not know it was a nazi rally.

We know that’s a lie. Are you prepared to dispute it?

So then who were these many fine people who traveled to the rally?

Fact is, it was a white power rally organized by racists and for racists. The only permit issued that weekend was issued to racists. That is not in dispute. And when the POTUS was watching the peaceful fine people quietly holding their tiki torches on TV Friday night, he was watching white power/militia.

I heard the POTUS say he condemned the racist protestors. His problem is that all the protesters who attended the rally that weekend were racists. Dozens of groups. All racist.

Is there evidence to the contrary? Show me.
Click to expand...

You won't give two squirts of piss for reasons I've already stated, but there are two problems with this that frankly, have nothing to do with politics but are simple matters of logic. First, to make the assertion you do, you would have to know the politics and activities of literally every man, woman, and child who was in attendance. You don't know and can't know. You simply presume them. I don't know either, but I don't assume them.

Second, let's assume for the sake of discussion that you do know them all and that they indeed were all racists with no exceptions. That wouldn't prove what you think it proves. It wouldn't prove Trump is a racist. It wouldn't prove that he was calling racists "fine people." It would only prove that he was incorrect about who was present. The bottom line is that he expressly excluded neo-Nazis from any and all positive comments and condemned them. You're coming up with every garbage diversion that you can to ignore or diminish that fact, but there's no escaping it. The self-serving and politically convenient narrative is ********* - plain and simple. It has no more support than birtherism - might have even less.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
You won't give two squirts of piss for reasons I've already stated, but there are two problems with this that frankly, have nothing to do with politics but are simple matters of logic. First, to make the assertion you do, you would have to know the politics and activities of literally every man, woman, and child who was in attendance. You don't know and can't know. You simply presume them. I don't know either, but I don't assume them.

Second, let's assume for the sake of discussion that you do know them all and that they indeed were all racists with no exceptions. That wouldn't prove what you think it proves. It wouldn't prove Trump is a racist. It wouldn't prove that he was calling racists "fine people." It would only prove that he was incorrect about who was present. The bottom line is that he expressly excluded neo-Nazis from any and all positive comments and condemned them. You're coming up with every garbage diversion that you can to ignore or diminish that fact, but there's no escaping it. The self-serving and politically convenient narrative is ********* - plain and simple. It has no more support than birtherism - might have even less.
Click to expand...

What specifically has no more support than birtherism? That I believe Trump is a racist?
 
Mr. Deez said:
You won't give two squirts of piss for reasons I've already stated, but there are two problems with this that frankly, have nothing to do with politics but are simple matters of logic. First, to make the assertion you do, you would have to know the politics and activities of literally every man, woman, and child who was in attendance. You don't know and can't know. You simply presume them. I don't know either, but I don't assume them.

Second, let's assume for the sake of discussion that you do know them all and that they indeed were all racists with no exceptions. That wouldn't prove what you think it proves. It wouldn't prove Trump is a racist. It wouldn't prove that he was calling racists "fine people." It would only prove that he was incorrect about who was present. The bottom line is that he expressly excluded neo-Nazis from any and all positive comments and condemned them. You're coming up with every garbage diversion that you can to ignore or diminish that fact, but there's no escaping it. The self-serving and politically convenient narrative is ********* - plain and simple. It has no more support than birtherism - might have even less.
Click to expand...
Do you think he/she even has the analytical skills to understand the logic you are referring too? From what I've read, I'm not sure he/she can grasp if a=b and b=c then a=c.
 
LongestHorn said:
What specifically has no more support than birtherism? That I believe Trump is a racist?
Click to expand...

No, and that's what is so silly about your position. What has no more support than birtherism is the contention that he called neo-Nazis "fine people."

Like I said earlier, one isn't defined by one statement or incident. That goes both ways. You can still argue that he's a racist based on other things he has said or done. For example, you weren't here during the campaign, but I took flack for calling the Judge Curiel comment racist. It's not as sexy, because it happened 3 years ago and nobody got hurt, but at least it was real.

Going the other way, Joe Biden's "clean and articulate" comment is one of the most racist things I've ever heard a politician in the modern era say. He basically called every black person who has run for president dirty, incoherent, stupid, and scary. Does that mean Joe Biden has a white robe and hood in his closet? No.
 
Last edited:
Run Pincher said:
Do you think he/she even has the analytical skills to understand the logic you are referring too? From what I've read, I'm not sure he/she can grasp if a=b and b=c then a=c.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think he does. This is poor logic caused by partisanship and contempt, not stupidity.
 
LongestHorn only cares about racism when it comes from those he views as conservatives. I've never heard him denounce the squad's antisemitism.
 
Monahorns said:
I think this article clarifies LongestHorn's motivation for focusing on racism so much. He first and foremost is a Progressive Democrat and he probably knows the electoral reality. He is just ruthlessly and deceptively doing what must be done for his tribe.

President Trump and the Black Vote | National Review
Click to expand...
Great article. Dems and the MSM are doing their best to manipulate black voters. They know they cannot win back Pennsylvania and Ohio without a higher turnout of black voters. Its truly shameful.
 
I think the election of the first black president did more to harm the cause of equal opportunity than anyone could have imagined. Remember the Tea Party? They were out in full force to stop the socialist Kenyan with the national debt as their stated cause. The national debt at the time was under $11 trillion. The movement has somehow died despite Trump's wailing away at the national debt.

A good old boy that I know has a son who my daughter considers her best friend. They are going to take care of mine if we perish in a plane crash. He's pretty conservative....I think. He's a part time cattleman and works a factory job. He relayed his paper mill experience to me. He's been there since the late 1980's. He said, "we never talked politics at work. Always football, fishing, etc. Then Obama got elected. Now all they talk about is stinking politics. I didn't realize how racist some of them were..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top