Does Trump advocate Clinton assassination?

a reply to: Annee

Pay no attention to the fact that the military is an agent of the state which is why Bush could not just order the National Guard into Louisiana to help out after Katrina. Such a thing is illegal as the states do have some sovereignty, and the governor of the state has to ask for such a thing.

So, to restrict firearms from all but the agents of the state negates on the failsafes built into the document - the right of the people to throw off government that has lost consent of the governed.

An unarmed people cannot rebel very well, and an armed populace is a natural check on a government that might otherwise take liberties with them.

Go to about 1:21:14 and watch the man with the white hair in the red shirt who is sitting behind Trump. He's pretty shocked! It's actually funny.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

Hey Introvert thats ok nbc evening news is spouting the same "he may have meant" crap that you are.
At least you and the msm are on the same page right?

I usually dislike promoting my own threads, but I touched on this topic here. The guesswork is not only nonsense, but unfitting of journalism.

In almost all cases additionally LM, it works really well for
the psychological community as well. We however in the US
and other tyrannies may have turned that art into a patriarch
of many cash cows, if not a global business model.

Oh well, only small lives are permanently destroyed-- and I'm
sure whatever a major player can summon to defend himself
will make the injury(ies) sustained less debilitating. In the
meantime the large majority are waking up to the Bolsheviks'
biggest tool in the box... character assassination.

PS if it sounds like (and if you think) I have a Rottweiler ready
to rock in this pen you're spot on. I'm saving him for Springfield..
and he's training on sparsely spaced sirloins.

originally posted by: Willtell
I just saw Trump’s statement and it appears to me he meant to suggest 2nd amendment people could do some harm to Hillary and he chuckled lightly.

Yes. You have to actually listen/watch.

As he intentionally leaves the ending open for interpretation.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: gps777

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: kaylaluv

Posters are leaving off the last sentence. Read the last sentence.

“By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks,” he then added.

“Though the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know.”

And here I was thinking the Second Amendment was a right and for the specific purpose of overthrowing a tyrannical Government that attempts to strip its citizens of their rights.

No one really knows 100% what the 2nd amendment means or was meant for.

Then I wonder why someone made this 'offtopic' comment ?

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Ohanka

Well, believe it or not, conservatives aren't the only Americans with guns.

When the raw truth of the values and aims of the oligarchy are clearly and overtly on the table and every nightly news show . . . which side do you anticipate that the liberals with guns will come down on?

a reply to: BO XIAN

No their destiny is to work with a gun in their back for a bowl of rice a day under Agenda 21 when their useful idiocy is over

I see him morally assassinating her quite soon.

a reply to: In4ormant


Well she and her husband are serial killers, so,

/sar

originally posted by: kaylaluv

This is exactly what Trump was referring to - and he wasn't talking about lobbying/voting (and neither are you).

"There's nothing you can do folks. Well, the second amendment people, maybe there is...."

But to suggest Trump is calling for Hillarie's assassination for saying the above is outlandish. Hillary putting in Judges to strip Americans from their rights should be seen as outlandish and unconstitutional for any and all Americans.

Obama wants Hillary to finish what he wants and his direction of Government in all area`s.

This is what Trump is getting at, time for an attempt to save America from being run into the ground, do it by vote, but if not people may be forced into the position of fighting for their rights in the coming years if Hillary gets in.

originally posted by: BO XIAN

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Ohanka

Well, believe it or not, conservatives aren't the only Americans with guns.

When the raw truth of the values and aims of the oligarchy are clearly and overtly on the table and every nightly news show . . . which side do you anticipate that the liberals with guns will come down on?

If we lived in MEXICO or the middle east the anti gunners would be arming us with ASSAULT WEAPONS, and worse things.

The ultimate insult to injury.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: stinkelbaum

Oh, geez.

Remember when Hillary "advocated" for Obama's assassination, in 2008?

“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right?” she (Hillary Clinton) said. “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.”

Bill Burton, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, which has refrained from engaging Mrs. Clinton in recent days, said her statement “was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign.”

Privately, aides to Mr. Obama were furious about the remark.

Concerns about Mr. Obama’s safety led the Secret Service to give him protection last May, before it was afforded to any other presidential candidate, although Mrs. Clinton had protection, too, in her capacity as a former first lady. Mr. Obama’s wife, Michelle, voiced concerns about his safety before he was elected to the Senate, and some black voters have even said such fears weighed on their decision of whether to vote for him.

It was against that backdrop that Mrs. Clinton’s mentioning the Kennedy assassination in the same breath as her own political fate struck some as going too far. Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, an uncommitted superdelegate, said through a spokeswoman that the comments were “beyond the pale.”

Link to NYT


Maybe she shouldn't have set the bar so low?

*heavy snark*

Why am I more surprised that TRUMP would hint at assassinating his opponent, than I am about HILLARY hinting at assassinating her former opponent, Barack Obama?

Why has there not been a thread entitled, "Hillary Clinton Hints at Assassinating Her Opponents!" started??? It would certainly be true. Doesn't matter when she said it. In fact, Hillary's brain is more mixed-up and diabolical now, than it was in 2008.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: BO XIAN

No their destiny is to work with a gun in their back for a bowl of rice a day under Agenda 21 when their useful idiocy is over

No, the agitators are never given that chance. As soon as their useful idiocy is over, they are lined up and shot. Of course, those of us who saw all this coming won't be around to see it. They need the useful idiots around to both bring down the old regime and to round us up so our time can come first. Then it will be theirs. In the end, the ones who will labor with the gun at their back will be the cowed, complacent and the passive who sit it out watching their NFL.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Can someone tell me, if Hillary does become president, that is, if enough people vote for her - and she puts in an anti-2nd amendment justice in the S.C. - what is it exactly that the 2nd amendment people are going to do if that new S.C. repeals the 2nd amendment? They can't vote for Trump at that point, because Hillary is already president. You can't sue the S.C. because it is the highest court in the land.

So, what can the 2nd amendment people do to fix this situation if it were to occur and the 2nd amendment is repealed and guns are banned?

I think the whole issue was how far the SCOTUS could go-- in calling
laws passed that restrict the rights of Americans constitutional.
Because constitutional muster is their only job to adjudicate...
anything else is either political smack or worse legislating from
the bench.. oh wait they've already done that for the last 100
years or so.

For UKTruth: With context being the kingpin o' spin, it was a
refreshing change to see a full explanation of both points of
view in what Trump said in a major media source. I was stunned.

I still believe from the FULL content of his statement: that Trump
was entreating the Americans who still uphold the Constitution
to vote for him... in the prospect of appointing somebody to
the high bench who actually does the strictly enumerated job.
Of course, straw graspers gotta grasp. And we who comprehend
the meaning and intent of Plan 1787 are dropping dead quickly...
some more quickly than others if they have any political traction.

Congrats Trump! You're remarks are on the front pages of Politico, NY Times, CNN and the Washington Post!

originally posted by: muse7
Congrats Trump! You're remarks are on the front pages of Politico, NY Times, CNN and the Washington Post!

Congrats!

The only people that 'care' were never going to vote for him to begin with.

They are only jumping on the TRUMP HATE bandwagon because it already fits their preconceived BIAS.

a reply to: carewemust

Why am I more surprised that TRUMP would hint at assassinating his opponent, than I am about HILLARY hinting at assassinating her former opponent, Barack Obama?

The biggest difference between the two ?

Clinton ACTUALLY has a long list of bodies behind her.

Trump does not.

a reply to: ketsuko

I stand corrected its unbelievable no one studies who these peoples mentors are and what their grand plans are

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: muse7
Congrats Trump! You're remarks are on the front pages of Politico, NY Times, CNN and the Washington Post!

Congrats!

The only people that 'care' were never going to vote for him to begin with.

They are only jumping on the TRUMP HATE bandwagon because it already fits their preconceived BIAS.

Well

Apparently a lot of people cared about his remarks on the Khan's so much so that it put his campaign into free fall and put him consistently down by double digits in most polls.

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: Bone75
I swear everyone is losing their minds over this election... on both sides of the aisle.

Yes, Trump made a bad joke.

Trump supporters don't want to admit it and Hillary supporters are acting like a bunch of drama queens.

That's really not a joke.

There's too many disturbed people out there for him to even suggest this seriously

You're sort of right. He shouldn't have been joking about armed revolution if the second amendment is abolished, he should've been dead serious.