Remember that picture of Trumps fist in the air and blood on his face?

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: AlroyFarms

Well ah, sure. But we all also know about how he had phony covers of Time displayed around several of his golf resorts, right?

Nobody cares about magazines anymore. It's almost Impossible to even find places that sell magazines anymore. Every 7/11 and other quickie marts no longer even sell any kinds of magazines. The grocery store I live by removed their magazine section about 2 years ago and they only sell a few magazines near the tills like the national
Enquirer, Star, people, soap opera magazine stuff like that.

This isn't 1994 anymore, magazines mean absolutely nothing

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: AwakeNotWoke

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I thought that when someone is shooting at you, and a stack of people are trying to keep you down out of harm's way, that standing up in a 'shoot at me, I'm an easy target' pose for the cameras is not the wisest move.

I'm not a Trump apologist. Still don't trust the man. But to this, I will say that after several seconds on the ground being dog-piled by a cadre of SS agents (several seconds that probably felt like minutes), he probably felt pretty certain that the threat has been neutralised and that - being the showman that he has always been - it was an opportune moment to make a statement.

No, probably wasn't wise, but I can see how the reasoning worked in his mind.

He had just been shot. 43 Seconds seems irrationally short period of time to do a photo op, and the Secret Service staff around him at the time weren't acting like the shooter had been neutralized.

What did Trump say about it?

He said some stupid stuff about being shot for democracy (like that is what denying elections is all about).

He was shot because of easy access to firearms (something that Trump had done nothing to restrict), and because his whole campaign is divisive and promotes outrage, of the type that riles up the kooks and those who believe all the online invective and propaganda.

Easy Access to Firearms eh ? You Do Realize Crooks BORROWED that Firearm from his LIBERAL Father and Lied to him that he was just going to the Shooting Range to Practice , Right Naughts ?

Why would his father, apparently a counsellor of some sort, require an assault rifle?

You just keep trying so hard not to see the bleeding obvious.

Are you one of those willfully ignorant people that think that "AR" stands for assault rifle?

Please define the term assault rifle please, in your best leftist.

Oh oh oh oh oh🤪

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I ain't playing that game with you Z. You made the accusation on a public forum calling a woman a HO so it's up to you to provide your ''proof''. Otherwise you are just a name caller spewing in the wind.

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I ain't playing that game with you Z. You made the accusation on a public forum calling a woman a HO so it's up to you to provide your ''proof''. Otherwise you are just a name caller spewing in the wind.

White Knighting for Kamala. That's cute.

a reply to: TheMisguidedAngel

As I stated earlier, I pay no attention to Time, or for that matter any other magazine as I guess you do not either. And sure, readership is down for a long time . But this was not about me or you or anyone but Trump who still thought enough about Time covers when he ran the first time that phony copies with his face on the cover were found displayed in some of his golf courses.

a reply to: chr0naut

Its not a LAW its a RIGHT.

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: Station27

What a great picture. Is it real? I looked and looked to find a Time cover with that photo but failed. So, is it real or fake? Where did you find this?

I created it myself because I wanted to imagine what it would look like. Thank you for asking - I'm proud of my work! (I am a graphic artist.)

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
I do. I thought at the time that that one would make a majestic cover for Time Magazine. Powerful, Iconic. Certainly an image to go down in history.

But did it make the cover of Time, we know how he loves his picture on the cover of Time.

Welllll, it got stolen from him. Bet that frosts his jo jos.

Yep. Getting beaten by a black woman must really roll up his hose. So to speak.

Wait, when did she beat him ? Oh you mean been age was just veep….
Geez you guys come up with sine wing dingers. Dems think they can buy the election with 200 mil

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: chr0naut

The real question is why do you want to take away our right to own firearms?

Because I wouldn't like someone to, like, just randomly shoot me?

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

It's been done before.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: AwakeNotWoke

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I thought that when someone is shooting at you, and a stack of people are trying to keep you down out of harm's way, that standing up in a 'shoot at me, I'm an easy target' pose for the cameras is not the wisest move.

I'm not a Trump apologist. Still don't trust the man. But to this, I will say that after several seconds on the ground being dog-piled by a cadre of SS agents (several seconds that probably felt like minutes), he probably felt pretty certain that the threat has been neutralised and that - being the showman that he has always been - it was an opportune moment to make a statement.

No, probably wasn't wise, but I can see how the reasoning worked in his mind.

He had just been shot. 43 Seconds seems irrationally short period of time to do a photo op, and the Secret Service staff around him at the time weren't acting like the shooter had been neutralized.

What did Trump say about it?

He said some stupid stuff about being shot for democracy (like that is what denying elections is all about).

He was shot because of easy access to firearms (something that Trump had done nothing to restrict), and because his whole campaign is divisive and promotes outrage, of the type that riles up the kooks and those who believe all the online invective and propaganda.

Easy Access to Firearms eh ? You Do Realize Crooks BORROWED that Firearm from his LIBERAL Father and Lied to him that he was just going to the Shooting Range to Practice , Right Naughts ?

Why would his father, apparently a counsellor of some sort, require an assault rifle?

You just keep trying so hard not to see the bleeding obvious.

Are you one of those willfully ignorant people that think that "AR" stands for assault rifle?

Please define the term assault rifle please, in your best leftist.

It is believed that the AR is short for ArmaLite Rifle. The ArmaLite company designed the rifle and then sold the patent to Colt in 1963. Due to the popularity of the design, it has been copied by numerous other manufacturers other than Colt.

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban specifically restricted the sale of the Colt AR-15 and derivatives in the United States, so I suppose that by legal definition, AR-15 style rifles are 'assault weapons' by their explicit inclusion in the legislation:

1994 Ban Assault Weapon Definition

That was passed into law by Bill Clinton and expired in September 13, 2004.

I know you are old, but do you understand that we are 20 years past that point here in America, a place where you don't live?

So do you have a newer and more 'up to date' legal definition? Please post it.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: chr0naut

Its not a LAW its a RIGHT.

So, essentially you are saying that Brawndo is what plants crave - it's got electrolytes!



Yeah, and the 2nd also doesn't specifically say guns or firearms, so literally the 2nd Amendment grants the right to bear any sort of arms.

Tactical nukes, anthrax, and ricin, anyone?

But that would be a stupid right, right, and contradictory the right of recourse to fair and just laws, because you don't have recourse to the law to defend you, if someone has just shot you dead?

By making the 2nd a right, it actually negates other human rights and makes the USA a tyranny ruled by whomever has the most money and wields the most powerful weapons. A balance of terror at best.

Imagine if someone based the law of a country on # like that!

a reply to: ArMaP

Not many people over here like Trump or his brand/style of 'politics' either.
He's viewed as a self-promoting, egotistical, narcissist, traits that seem to dictate his every thought and action.

For the record; neither did/do they like Biden.....and the few that are aware of Harris like her even less.

a reply to: TheTardis2

Isn't it funny how the biggest Trump critics on ATS aren't even from the U.S.? Quint, chronic, they're all so jelly of the American freedom.

a reply to: SourGrapes

You're point?

Are we not allowed an opinion or to post our observations?

Dbl

Wrong thread.

My point is that there are a few non-Americans here that seem to have a full time job denouncing Trump.

Why is that?

a reply to: SourGrapes

My point is that you offered up a media lie ("talking point").

What lie?
Specifics please.

You're the one that brought up "trickle down" economics, like it's a real thing.

In a completely different thread totally unrelated to this one.

It's not.

'

It certainly doesn't happen......but again, relevance to this thread and my point to how Trump is observed by people from outside the US?

The Democrats in the US have been liars for a very long time.

My take on things is that most politicians lie....as do most people who put political ideology before anything else.

a reply to: Freeborn

The "lie" is on the other thread we're in. I replied to this one by mistake.