The target of dozens of death threats linked to the MAGA movement made a public plea to Republicans to halt Donald Trump’s vow of retribution Friday.

Eric Swalwell (D-CA) and his family have been hit by many “credible” threats that have been investigated by law enforcement.

“People are in jail for wanting to kill me and my kids," he wrote for MSNBC Friday. "I spent $315,000 this past Congress on personal security to protect myself and my family. I know the consequences of dissent."

Swalwell began receiving threats after speaking out on issues including gun control and investigations into Trump.

And he fears that now that Trump is returning to power, and has nominated Kash Patel — a man who has openly called for retribution — to head the FBI, the threats will worsen.

He said the only way to stop them is for individual Republicans to grow spines and stand up to their leader.

“The presidential election cycle wasn’t just about re-election: It was about avoiding justice and more importantly, for him, punishing those who oppose him,” Swalwell wrote.

“Many times this year he has threatened his perceived opponents, the press and even members of his own political party. Anyone who stands in his way is vulnerable. We should also assume that, since he was last president, he’s honed his ability to lash out against his opponents.”

Swalwell admitted he had no hope that individual Republicans will stand up to help him — and others in his position.

“If you’re counting on a single Republican congressman or senator to stop him, forget it,” he wrote.

“They’ll shrink. He’ll overpower them. They’ll fear they will become public enemy No. 1 among conservatives and their lives will be turned upside down with threats to their safety and country club memberships.”

But, he said the recent failure of former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) to become attorney general gave a clear message that members of the party will fight back — if they’re not alone.

“If they can take a silent, collective action, they can be effective. No one can point to a specific single senator who blocked the Gaetz nomination. That’s not an accident. By banding together, a half-dozen senators said, “Hell no” and made Gaetz’s path impossible

“Do they have it in them to do it again? And again? And again, until the message is received by Trump that they will not rubber stamp America’s path to a dictatorship?”

MSNBC

Whahahahaha!!!

This guy...

" In June 2020, Swalwell compared Richard Grenell, a Trump ally and former acting Director of National Intelligence, to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister. He referred to Grenell as “Goebbels with a Twitter account” in response to Grenell’s defense of Trump’s actions during protests. "

The same people that compare Trump and his allies to Nazis, stirring up unimaginable hate and confusion, culminating in assassination attempts...are crying about their own safety.

Pathetic.

...but it's what we've come to expect from you, Denise.

The batshit convicted felon's behaviour on Jan6 was disgustingly deplorable.

A shameful sies.

The moment I saw the name Swalwell it reminds me of the traitor who slept with a Chinse spy and has been lying almost as muchas Schoff about the Russian Hoax.   H e is filth adn nbdy threaten im - but the Republicans kicked hm out of the Secuioruty House Committeee because of that.  The threat about MAGA acting against him is BS.    The only threat scame from BLM and Antifa - te terroris subsidiaries of the DP started by Obama,

The fact is the Justice Depatment wil investigate the criminal looting of Sate resources like Swalwell using election dontions used to travel to the Gulf States, China and France and if he is guilty he would be charged - so Biden must also pardon that traitorous shit.

The man is filth of te wrst anture that has one common track with Biden - he is a liar,    If the present weaponized FBI became aware of the so-called Swallwel threat they would by now have arrested somebody they would accuse of it.    So there  was o threat - only BS  by a criminal BSter that is a scum piece of shit.

Keep on finding shit and spreading it on site.   I think he is afraid that tjhe Jstice Department will act  his criminal acivities and send him to jail,   That will rid the House from having scum like him maing BS statements to the media.

You are delightfiul when writing BS on site an so does Denny.   A bit of checking  would have found out tha Swallwel is in deep shit for a variety of reasons - least of all being a pofessional liar most importantly  being an alleged  criminal that would be investigated and if founmd of guiltym charged and ends up in jail.

 Sies          

If Trump was involved in anything on January 6 he would have been charged - but they waited for years bcause they new the incident was BS and there are still 400 in jail without being charged of anything after the security camera  release ad he findings of the scam show by the Pelosi Committee was discredited and shamed by the Official Hous report on the incident.

The shit knows what hey did and is now running for cover of destroying House documents after the sham hearings of the Pelosi Committee,    So you do not know the difference between reality and BS  propagada that in hend backfired on the Democrats because they se lawfare against Trump in he 2024 election camaign.

By the way tht 400 peope did nothing other han trespassing on Governmen property and tha is why the Supreme Court should ave been charged with trespassing on Government Property.  The propagand they made out of nothing is going to cost the U S Government billions of dollars in claims against the Biden regime paricipated in by using Gestapo methods.   So the taxpayers wil end up paying compensation to 1 100 people.    Sies BB

From the NY Post discussing how images of Nazi rallies were spliced into coverage of Trump's NY rally...

https://nypost.com/2024/10/28/us-news/shameful-msnbc-blasted-for-splicing-nazi-rally-clips-into-coverage-of-trumps-msg-rally/

But it's fine to convince people that the opposition is equivalent to the Nazi regime even though there are ZERO similarities.

It's fine to stir up hate and division to the point where people are so hateful towards the other side, which they have been told is evil, that they feel justified in their violence against them.

But heaven forbid a Dem who fully took part in all of that gets some of his own hate back.

It's a joke.

But keep posting this cope, Denise.

...it's wonderful watching you come apart.

LMFAOAYF!

Let the fear mongerers feel what fear feels like.

But it's fine to convince people that the opposition is equivalent to the Nazi regime even though there are ZERO similarities.

Zero? ...someone doesn't know their history.

Oh FFS...

Yes, Trump is a human with a zealous following. Yes he talks to crowds of people.

Where is the Nazi part?

Zero?...someone doesn't know their history.

Zero?...someone doesn't know.

 Stav

Sure there is no sign of any history of the Rpublican Party linked to any ulra-right wing organization and no lnk to Fascism - while there were plenty links between  Democrats supporting the Nazi's.    Those peope at tha rally 85 ears ago weer 90% certain to be Democrats.   They were the key part of he KKK until the 1960 and after that one of their  leading Senators(Byrne) in fact was the ex-leader of the KKK.   Biden was a speaker at Byrne's funera and praise him to  high  heaven'

There is plenty of evidence that the Biden Regime turned rogue and used the FBI in their Gestapo-style operations.    The House now produiced a 17 000 page report on how the FBI and Jutice Department were weaponized against the people of the USA that oposes the  dictatorship regime of Biden and especially the finding  of he FIS Court about how the FBI spied on 278 000 people illegaly and unconstitutionally.   

It deals with the WH, the FBI and the Justice Department use regular meetings with the meia and media plarforms to censor the media by not publishing news reports tha could b embarrassing the Biden Regime.    That set-up was originally exposed by Musk when he took over X - however, Zuckerberg has since confirmed what happened and apologizzed to the people o the USA by co-operating with a Stalinist Regime of Biden.

The people learned one bitter thing about the conduct of the Biden Regime and in an inion poll conducted by CNN indicated that Harris is a bigger threat to Democracy than Trump is.   Hrris 52% - Trump 45%.    CNN nearly had a seizure when the results came ou - but here were noth ing they could do about it.    After one panel discussion CNN drop the results and went on with their own campaign  - hiding the truth was less imporant than their lies about  Trump bing a Fascist.

So  Stav and Denny - provide us with proof that Trump or the Republican Partyy are Fascists.   What  proof have you got that the Republicans are Fasists,   BS by The Guardian is no proof, give us legal or financial proof of any linkage to Fascism of he Republican Party please.            .

I did not see your BS explanation and it is B S supreme.   When Trump attacked the Ope Border Policy he dealt also with the amssive drug operation and when he referred to poisoning it relates to the circa 150 000 people who died from Fentanyl poisoning as a result.  

Trump fired Kelly becuse he was incompetent  and the man hated him as a result,   What he ssid was not said nder oath in a court of law.

When in an opinion polls  61% of the voters in the US A  said there was election fraud in the 2020 election  and I even posted  full report of how many people - all Democrts - were charged and found  guilty of election fraud    The only problem is that there was mt immeiate proof of fraud,      Once Democrat fraud in election came out - the Republicans tried to prevent a repeat of fraud in 2024.   They had lawyers in each counting center and observers.    A  typical example was in he Senate Election in Pennsylvania where the D P tried to get fake votes counted,     The Court ruled that the votes cannot be counted and it became an embarrassment when Schumer tries to decide himself  who won the election and try to bar the elected Senator from the Senate.     There are court caes looming about the shit hapened when the D P delayed election results on lower level in California, Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin,     Fact is there will be an invesigation where people would give under oath of what happened in the case of a number of House and Sente seats,   So don't be too hapy that you proved anything - you wriote what the The Guardian told you to believe,

Star

Are you for real that absolute bunch horse shit that you just wasted my time with?

Wrong thread

Pres

It is no use to try and tell  Stav and D enny anthing - all they believe in si the BS they get from rags like The Guatdian.     

The last sentence of Stav above is weird.    I do not understand what he is driving at.   Biden was  weaklingand when i comes to inernational affairs so was Obama.     Obama was a total idiot on inerna ional level and he signed trade agreements with Canada and Mexico as well as an agrement woth China Trump tore up the agreements and started to negotiate new deals that would protect the interests of  all parties involvedm   The NAFTA deal was re-negotiated and a new dea was signed - even Pelosi bragged about how good the agreement was.   The China agreement was finalized and ready for sigbnature when Trump found out res Xi was lying abot the Covid issue and  refuse to sign it -why Biden was too stupid to take theamter firther.   

What I am trying to clarify foreign leades disliked to deal with rump because e wa princpled and a strong US leader,    Unlike Biden - that was weak shit - Putin told ABC that Trump is a difficult person to negotiate with on anything since he put the interests of the USA first.   Foreign leaders as well ss US citizens reggard Trump as a strong leader - but there is not a single case where he maltreated US citizens like was the case of Biden d his Administration,     The US people wants to hve a person respected by leaders worldwide and not the shit tht went all out to destroy the Country.          

He joked to Trudeau about annexing Canada.OMG he must be looking for lebensraum, perhaps he has Nazi leanings after all . …..hahaha. In inventing all this rubbish, you fellows only make yourselves look hysterical.

Relax, the people elected Trump fairly. If he gets out of line the institutions of American government will restrain him. In the meantime, with any luck he might fix a few things that need fixing.

Are you for real that absolute bunch horse shit that you just wasted my time with? 

If you can't see the similarities then you're ignorant of history.

I can see the similariies in action of Biden with Stalin and Hitler when  he got the FBI to spy on 278 000 potential opponents and when they arrest people and keep them in jail without trial - while tellig them if they admit guilt for a fairy tail the Justice Department compiled and tell them if they do not admit they would keep them in jail indefinitely. .    

That was practical and actual situations - not make belief BS.    I belief in what actually happened and not what you saw in the Gaurdian as evidence.     

Sorry Stav - I agree with Pres - what you wrote was typical Gardian horseshit.           

No you are the hysterical ones on the left…..there are plenty of hysterical ones on the right. But Russian Collusion and the Nazi take over of America are classics…what’s next membership pf the Golden Horde?

No you are the hysterical ones on the left…..there are plenty of hysterical ones on the right. But Russian Collusion and the Nazi take over of America are classics…what’s next membership pf the Golden Horde?

LOL Russian Collusion, its the right that spend all their time bringing it up . As for a Nazi take over, what the left is saying is that they can see some parallels with fascism and authoritarianism of the past. Do we know how serious Trump is when he says these things, well its hard to say but it feels like America is taking an awful risk voting him into office. The right is either ignorant of history, or they just don't care because its their team. You seem to have great faith in institutions of America restraining him, but I wouldn't want to take the risk in the first place.

"If you can't see the similarities then you're ignorant of history."

Umm you are the one comparing Trump's views on ILLEGAL immigration to Hitler's view on Jews.

South Africa has a huge illegal immigration problem and the local black people are complaining about it endlessly. They see it as a blight on the country. I guess that the Zulus and Xhosas here have Nazi tendencies.

Another occasion where TDS is causing you to suspend logic in order to toe the left line.

Umm you are the one comparing Trump's views on ILLEGAL immigration to Hitler's view on Jews.

No umm...when Trump refers to immigrants poisoning the blood of the country that strongly evokes Hitler/Nazi ideology of there being a superior race who's bloodline should not be contaminated by mixing with inferior bloodlines. That sort of language is an absolute dog whistle designed to appeal to racists.

Another occasion where TDS is causing you to suspend logic in order to toe the left line.

Scientology has nothing on the cult of Trump.

It evokes Hitler in your head because you don't understand that Democracy is the "blood" of the country and one party, namely the guys you support, letting illegal immigrants in knowing that they'll then vote for them...is literally poisoning democracy.

That is exactly what he was referring to. That is what all the hearings in congress are about and that is exactly what Elon was talking about. It's like you completely ignore every bit bit of evidence to arrive at your conclusions.

You don't have to imagine anything. The argument is very clear and it has nothing at all to do with labelling anyone of any race, religion or gender as "other".

It has absolutely nothing to do Nazism.

Hitler hated any/all Jews and wanted to exterminate them. It didn't matter if they were citizens or not. How the hell do you compare Trump to Hitler, with a straight face?

Like I said, a complete load of unadulterated horse shit.

Do better.

It evokes Hitler in your head because you don't understand that Democracy is the "blood" of the country and one party, namely the guys you support, letting illegal immigrants in knowing that they'll then vote for them...is literally poisoning democracy.

LOL you talk about me not understanding democracy and yet you think illegal immigrants can vote. ROFL

That is exactly what he was referring to. That is what all the hearings in congress are about and that is exactly what Elon was talking about. It's like you completely ignore every bit bit of evidence to arrive at your conclusions.

Well leaving aside your ignorance of American democracy for just a second... lets look at what Trump said in more detail.

“They let — I think the real number is 15, 16 million people into our country. When they do that, we got a lot of work to do. They’re poisoning the blood of our country, that’s what they’ve done. They poison mental institutions and prisons all over the world, not just in South America, not just to three or four countries that we think about, but all over the world. They’re coming into our country from Africa, from Asia, all over the world.”

And then he doubled down on it on social media with the post.

“illegal immigration is poisoning the blood of our nation. They’re coming from prisons, from mental institutions — from all over the world.”

He's clearing demonizing illegal immigrants as criminals and dangerous people. Absolutely nothing to do with voting and you know it. Your just making an excuse for him like a good little cultist.

It has absolutely nothing to do Nazism.

Hitler hated any/all Jews and wanted to exterminate them. It didn't matter if they were citizens or not. How the hell do you compare Trump to Hitler, with a straight face?

Like I said, a complete load of unadulterated horse shit.

Do better. 

When people compare Trump and Hitler its more a comparison of the methods they used to gain power. Hitler hated all Jews alright but the decision to exterminate them came much later. And when you say there was no difference between German Jews and Jews outside of Germany in Hitlers mind you're correct but on the long path to holocaust Hitler at first needed to convince the German population to turn against German Jews, it was a starting point. Now I'm not saying Trump is going do a holocaust on illegal immigrants, as while I do believe Trump is a racist I don't think its a motivating factor for him, he's more of a casual racist but he's more than happy to appeal to more hardcore racists and its both the emboldening of them, where it leaves them in the future along with a concern about Trump's authoritarian tendencies that's the concern.

Like I said, a complete load of unadulterated horse shit.

Do better. 

You're up there with Jon Snow. You know nothing. You don't understand history and you don't understand why the left criticize Trump. You just know the pre-programmed responses, but go on, just keep saying TDS.

Stav

Stop thinking - it is extemely dsngerous thing to do  by people like you.   

Oh, I didn't say illegals could vote, did I?

I said the Dems were letting in illegals and they would then vote Dem.

At some point they do become citizens. And when they do, you better believe they'll vote for the guys that let them in.

= Dems subverting democracy by allowing illegals into the USA.

But sure, Star...I obviously believe that illegals can turn up and vote in Federal elections.

I'd say I'm not sure why you keep pulling this stuff, but I've seen enough of how you operate to make my conclusions at this point.

Are illegal immigrants criminals? I'll give you a clue...it's in the name FFS. People that break US laws by entering the country illegally are CRIMINALS. Why? Because they have committed a crime.

But none of this means much because Trump might absolutely despise illegal immigrants. He might insult them at every turn. But that is not Nazism. Unless, of course, any person anywhere that is harsh on crime, doesn't like criminals, speaks out against them, and seeks to follow the law in dealing with whatever crime they have committed is a Nazi?

But this exactly the left tactic. Unless people want to accept mass illegal immigration, they are Nazis.

If they don't want to accept their kids being taught that there are an infinite amount of genders, they are homophobic.

...on and on.

Agree with us or you are the worst of the worst.

Follow our logic, or you're a Nazi.

And that's not dangerous rhetoric at all, right?

Please, don't talk about being programmed, cos you actually sound like a robot.

...spouting exactly the type of shit that causes people to attempt to assassinate presidents, physically attack people for their opinions...on and on.

Tell me, when Hillary called people deplorables...was that a Nazi dog whistle?

When those late night talk show hosts refer to the "rust belt" and "rednecks", are those Nazi dog whistles?

I mean, they are perpetuating the idea of "others", aren't they?

Comparing Trump to fascists

You're up there with Jon Snow. You know nothing. You don't understand history and you don't understand why the left criticize Trump. You just know the pre-programmed responses, but go on, just keep saying TDS.

Not sure why you bother Stav,  Buttplug is a typical Trump-Zombie with the added dimension of being an attention seeker. He loves his soap box, like a wound up toy he'll go forever and always finishes up with having the last say. He actually believes that he has a board audience I kid you not!

Through his public discourse he is cooking up an existential threat.

But we've been told to 'move on' now that Trump has been elected.....I only have one question why sh ould we.....has Trump changed? If anything he sounds and seems more threatening in a negative way. I hope I'm wrong.

H e was clearly batshit before the election .................. winning by the slimmest majority since ma fell off a bus doesn't 'unbatshit' him. What it does confirm though is that there are clearly more batshit folk in the US than I imagined . 

You're right Denny ...............  an angry felon seeking revenge & retribution, the classic 'ugly American.'

Not only an angry felon but also a very powerful angry felon. Put it this way, he owns the Republican Party, no-one in the party dares to disagree with him, it's his way or the highway, his appointees are all Yes people. The Trump Party owns both sides of the house, lawmakers will be compelled to sign off on his every demand. He also owns the Supreme Court and several Federal Courts, no-one will dare stand in his way because he is Emperor.

People like Liz Cheyney will be at the top of his revenge list and so also everyone else who dared to challenge him.....Michael Cohen is another.

It would be a grand act if he brought the country together as a kickoff point, better the economy and create more jobs, grow the middle class and fix the primitive gun laws.

It won't happen.

Only Denise is so y enough to make both of these post, one after the other.

"But we've been told to 'move on' now that Trump has been elected.....I only have one question why should we.....has Trump changed? If anything he sounds and seems more threatening in a negative way. I hope I'm wrong"

"It would be a grand act if he brought the country together as a kickoff point, better the economy and create more jobs, grow the middle class and fix the primitive gun laws."

Hopefully Americans aren't as brain damaged as you Denise.

Densie logic - Hopefully Trump unites America but at the same time we won't move on.

The hysterical girl doesn't seem to know what she wants

Against my better judgement, I read that article, Blo.

Did you read it?

It fails to site any examples of Trump's supposed Nazi'ness.

It says he made a poor comparison between himself and Mandela - last I checked this is not any proof of anything other than ego and human nature.

It then talks about "dehumanising" people.

Again, I draw your attention to Clinton, and so many other leftist statements on people that don't line up with their political views. And again, I will ask you...is this dehumanisation and does it equate to being a Nazi?

That entire article, supposedly attempting to assess whether the "Trump is a Nazi" claims are justified, makes absolutely zero case for it. It's a bunch of garbage aimed at character assassination without providing any evidence as to the assessment it's heading supposedly claims will make.

I do have a question for you.

You guys talk about "dangerous rhetoric". That's the underlying idea of this entire thread which Denise started. Basically the idea that "Trump Zombies" have supposedly threatened the life of a lefty politician and he's now so very afraid for his life.

Now tell me, when that same outlet that published the article Denise posted here, compared Trump to Stalin and Hitler, what kind of rhetoric do you think that was? Good faith? Safe?

And the very guy that wrote the original article in this thread, engaged in that same rhetoric of "Orange man is a Nazi."

Now, let's an assume a population is told this. That Trump is a Nazi and possibly the next Hitler or Stalin.

Within that population you will find a spectrum of reception of that information.

That spectrum will range from people like me that think it's complete bullshit, to people like you that actually believe it, to people that will believe that Trump is the equivalent of Stalin or Hitler who will murder tens of millions of people, and that it is in them to do something about it.

Do you see what I'm saying? I can assure you, that if I believe a person will be responsible for the death of tens of millions of people, I'm gonna grab my rifle and do something about it. I'm gonna lay in wait beside a road, on a roof, or in a bush...and when I lay eyes on that fucker, I'm gonna end him.

And I'll happily spend the rest of my life in prison knowing that I saved millions of lives.

Are you following?

So, show me the Nazi. Show me the Stalin. Show me the evidence.

Until then, don't be stupid enough to makes posts about dangerous rhetoric when the very person writing the article that is the subject of the post is literally spreading the most dangerous rhetoric that there is.

Explain to me how any of the above is illogical.

And just drive the nail home. I asked ChatGPT this question in brand new thread, where I did not coach it in any way. You can do the same exercise...

My Question; What is your opinion? In a couple of short paragraphs, are the comparisons of Trump to Hitler and Stalin justified or not, yes or no?

ChatGPT answer; No, the comparisons between Donald Trump and figures like Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin are not justified. While Trump’s rhetoric and actions, such as divisive language and challenges to democratic norms, raise legitimate concerns, they do not approach the level of atrocities or totalitarianism committed by Hitler or Stalin. These historical figures were responsible for mass genocide, political purges, and the systemic dismantling of freedoms on a catastrophic scale, which far exceeds anything Trump has said or done.

Comparing Trump to Hitler or Stalin risks trivializing the unique horrors of those regimes. While it is valid to critique Trump’s behavior for its potential impact on democracy and social cohesion, invoking such extreme comparisons undermines meaningful discourse and distracts from addressing specific issues with evidence and clarity.

My opinion; Isn't it very weird how an uncoached AI agrees with me, and provides an obviously logical answer. While you guys, supposedly not suffering from TDS, just can't see the wood for the trees.

There will not be any retribution.- Trump himself said he is not interested  in that and his previous stint as President prove it anyway.   

Since many of his enmies were involved in criminal activities - inclusing of  bibery, corruption ad lying to Congress at Hosue and Senate Hearibgs - a crime with a minimum senense of 6 years imprisonment -  could  result in msny of them ending up in jail for criminal activities    

Alhough the media will claim it in such caes are "retribution" it will not be as the result of hem being charge  in a court of law,    Under both Obama and Biden the Justice Dpartment and FBI and Justice Department became involved in crime protection units when it comes  to criminal activities by politicians and bureaiucrats  not being investiated,   

That protection racket  was also used as being weapnized politically - that will sot happen under Trumps new administation.      When and if individuals have been charged and sentenced by a proper court of law nothing will happen to them,    

For instance the Special Council indicated in is report about Biden's handling of documents as illegal the said Speciall Council stated that he cannot recomment laying of  charges will not lad to posecution of Biden himself bcause he is suffering from mental deficiency, so no court cases would not find a mentally defcicient of crimes he cimmitted himself will not lead to him  being charged himself - but that will not be the case  with other accused without mental poblems.

That is why the  chsrging of  people may - depite Biden' effort to protect people of being charged by his pardoning of people ivolved in criminology will not work out,  sice it is a Biden effort to put people aboe the rule of law and will be rejected by the courts'

That is why the media and Biden Administartion is shouting retribuion - while there will not be any retribtion - but will not be unlawfully used purely on pesonal and political issues,     That is why the courts rejected the charges laid against Trump or the fake charges disintegrrated,   .

There are a lot of court claims of libel against media laid by Trump - but that is going to cost media outles  having to pay hundreds of billions in cout cases.    Although not related to claims that Trump and all Republicans are Fascists ABC aleady agreed to pay Trump $16 million for another libel claim and that is chicken feed compaed to the Nazi story BS. 

Oh, I didn't say illegals could vote, did I?

You literally just did.

I said the Dems were letting in illegals and they would then vote Dem.

At some point they do become citizens. And when they do, you better believe they'll vote for the guys that let them in.

= Dems subverting democracy by allowing illegals into the USA.

Leaving aside the completely unnuanced claim that dems were letting in illegals and leaving aside the fact that if illegal immigrants become citizens that they are NO LONGER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ENTITLED TO VOTE, do illegal immigrants who go on to become citizen tend to vote democrat?

Well two reports published before the 2020 US census, looked into it and found the number of seats gained and lost by both sides was a wash.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/mar/25/more-immigrants-equal-better-odds-for-democrats-af/

LOL you have the gall to accuse the Dems of trying to subvert democracy after Trump's 2020 election result denial and January 6th.

But sure, Star...I obviously believe that illegals can turn up and vote in Federal elections.

You see here is the thing, you have expressed all manner of beliefs here on this forum in the past so it isn't a stretch that you would believe such a thing. Asides from which Republicans from Trump to Musk pushed the narrative that non citizens could vote during the election campaign.

Also I like the way you have in the past expressed support for the idea of election fraud in 2020 but now your saying illegals can't vote in election. I guess they must have some system in place to stop illegals voting right...but they couldn't possibly prevent other types of voting fraud right. LOL

I'd say I'm not sure why you keep pulling this stuff, but I've seen enough of how you operate to make my conclusions at this point.

I'm not pulling anything. Its clear Republicans had been pushing the narrative that illegal immigrants (not illegal immigrants who want on to becomes citizens though I'm sure that's been pushed too) are voting. You didn't differentiate between the two.

Are illegal immigrants criminals? I'll give you a clue...it's in the name FFS. People that break US laws by entering the country illegally are CRIMINALS. Why? Because they have committed a crime.

Shifting the goalposts. Technically people who enter American illegally are committing a criminal act but that's not Trump is talking about when he makes speeches about illegal immigrants. He refers to them as drug dealers,rapists, and murders, criminals out of jail or insane asylums, people who are carrying deadly diseases, people who eat dogs and cats etc.  Of course you know this but your choosing to be deliberately obtuse.

But none of this means much because Trump might absolutely despise illegal immigrants. He might insult them at every turn. But that is not Nazism.

Insulting or demonizing them at every turn, is what Hitler did to the Jews, it was to condition the population to hate them.  Now you could say its just a coincidence that's what Trump is doing with immigrants but when he's refers to certain people as having good genes and immigrants poisoning the blood of the country, that is very Nazi-esque language.

Unless, of course, any person anywhere that is harsh on crime, doesn't like criminals, speaks out against them, and seeks to follow the law in dealing with whatever crime they have committed is a Nazi?

Strawman, no one is saying that.

But this exactly the left tactic. Unless people want to accept mass illegal immigration, they are Nazis.

Another strawman. What the left wants is a reasonable debate on immigration where the pro's and con's are discussed governed by facts, laws and human rights consideration.

If they don't want to accept their kids being taught that there are an infinite amount of genders, they are homophobic.

...on and on.

Agree with us or you are the worst of the worst.

Follow our logic, or you're a Nazi.

And that's not dangerous rhetoric at all, right?

Oh FFS you can't even straw man right, as if the Nazi's were pro LGBT. Jesus wept.

Please, don't talk about being programmed, cos you actually sound like a robot.

Herp derp TDS...herp derp...virtue signalling...herp derp

...spouting exactly the type of shit that causes people to attempt to assassinate presidents, physically attack people for their opinions...on and on. 

It looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck...how dare they call it a duck. Of course everyone should be against violence of any kind when it comes to politics but are you seriously going set their and pretend Trump's rhetoric doesn't result in more hate crimes against immigrants?

Tell me, when Hillary called people deplorables...was that a Nazi dog whistle?

When those late night talk show hosts refer to the "rust belt" and "rednecks", are those Nazi dog whistles?

I mean, they are perpetuating the idea of "others", aren't they?

Hillary didn't bring up bloodlines or genetics and when she used the basket of deplorables comment she specifically called them "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic", all but the latter were traits of Nazism. So I'm not sure how calling out traits that where mostly supported by Nazism is suppose to be a pro Nazi dog whistle.

Leaving that aside Hilary rode back on the comments the next day and unlike Trump it wasn't a reoccurring theme of her campaign.

As for rust belt and rednecks. Rust belt is not a slur, its just a term used for an area that's undergone industrial decline, if you think rust belt is a slur then your just looking for a reason to be offended. Redneck's is a slur and one that shouldn't be used but its mostly used as an insult to imply a person or people are stupid. The democrats are not going round trying to equate rednecks with criminal gangs, drug dealing, rape and murder.

No its not 'othering' because no one is arguing they are not really American or trying to drum up public support to deport them.

Not sure why you bother Stav,  Buttplug is a typical Trump-Zombie with the added dimension of being an attention seeker. He loves his soap box, like a wound up toy he'll go forever and always finishes up with having the last say. He actually believes that he has a board audience I kid you not!

Yeah I guess, but at least he's miles ahead of Mike and Beeno in that he isn't completely off the spectrum. He does seem to be a little obsessed with you though.

He does seem to be a little obsessed with you though.

It's called DDS(Denny Deranged Syndrome) 

There will be no retribution at all.   Waht the emdia fear is to deal with libel claims they face and  they may ed up paying hundreds of millions in reaching settlement agrements by especially outlets that is facing libel claims.    That is not at all retribution at all.

Many Democrat and other politicians are facing criminal charge of many different  nature and that is where they fear of retribution is used to protect libel and criminal consequeces.

I would leave it to the courts to deal with issues the Democrats and media claims as retribution and Politico is in the same boat - Polifact has never done ny real factchecks and what they came up with as facts are cover ups of BS the media spouts, 

     .      

This is the first bit of genuine wisdom I have seen from Chat responding to the Nazi question:

‘ Comparing Trump to Hitler or Stalin risks trivializing the unique horrors of those regimes’

I don’t suppose that has ever occurred to those pushing this narrative. But think about what Hitler did, the real horror in the extermination camps and ask yourself whether that suffering should be used to make a political point.

Gosh Anger….you do love this tit for tat ….let’s examine your first point:

Plum clearly qualifies his point that illegals would vote Dem by saying at some point they would become citizens and would then vote for their benefactors. Any kid in primary school could figure that out in a comprehension test.

Very dishonest…disappointing.

This is the first bit of genuine wisdom I have seen from Chat responding to the Nazi question:

‘ Comparing Trump to Hitler or Stalin risks trivializing the unique horrors of those regimes’

Hang on, who's comparing Trump to Stalin. That's muddying the water.

I don’t suppose that has ever occurred to those pushing this narrative. But think about what Hitler did, the real horror in the extermination camps and ask yourself whether that suffering should be used to make a political point.

Because the holocaust is the sole and one thing Hitler did right? Of course your deliberately missing the point. The comparison being made is in the playbook used to gain power and the groundwork being layed as well as Trump's apparent authoritarian leanings. Hitler didn't gain power and on day one go straight to the holocaust, he spent years exploiting pre existing anti-semitism both before and after he gained power and gradually increased anti-semitic feelings among the German population. Now I'm not saying Trump will go anywhere near committing genocide but I can potentially see a situation where mass deportations start of illegal immigrants were we see families broken up, human rights being trampled on and legal citizens wrongly being deported but the Trump supporting half of America will be A-okay with it, likewise we could see political motivated prosecutions of Trump political opponents and the Trump side will say, its fine sure the other side was doing it. Something that would not be the case without Trump laying the groundwork for it.

But as for making a political point out of the holocaust, I guess the term "never again" mean's nothing too you.

Plum clearly qualifies his point that illegals would vote Dem by saying at some point they would become citizens and would then vote for their benefactors. Any kid in primary school could figure that out in a comprehension test.

Excep t he made this post first.

letting illegal immigrants in knowing that they'll then vote for them...is literally poisoning democracy.

He said nothing about them becoming citizens. At which point they are no longer illegal immigrants.  

Very dishonest…disappointing.

Indeed you are...you know I was not referring to his later clarification in that post.

Rubbish….you put up the quote supporting your rebuttal and it was clearly misinterpreted. You then try to save yourself by producing another quote:

letting illegal immigrants in knowing that they'll then vote for them...is literally poisoning democracy.

But that quote also doesn’t support your point. He says nothing about illegals voting dishonestly….nothing about fraud. Instead his comment about ‘poisoning democracy’ suggests it will all take part within democratic boundaries. Your claim that he meant they would vote illegally is just a convenient assumption, rebutted by his later comment.

Let’s keep the debate honest shall we?

Stav, do you honestly think that I believe non citizens can vote in US elections?

Meaning that China, Russia, or anybody else, could pay for some holiday makers to visit the US...and completely screw up their elections. Laughable.

Stalin is relevant here because the OP article was published by MSNBC. The same outlet that spliced Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini into images of Trump's NY rally. Despite people of all races and religions being present.

The article writer is complaining about how unsafe he feels, and that money has had to be spent on his protection. Despite taking part in extremely hateful rhetoric that almost lead to an assassination. I'm calling out the hypocrisy.

...because Trump is actually the one that had bullets wizzing by his head.

That wooden leg you are standing on is full of termites, bud.

The rhetoric that the guys you appear to support spout, and which you seem to spout yourself, very nearly resulted in absolute global chaos...which is exactly what would have occurred had Trump not turned his head at the exact right moment.

But let's be precise since you seem to be stuck on the "poisoning of the US blood".

When Hitler used a similar phrase he was directly referring to genetics and race. Hence his use of the word blood. He was specifically advocating for maintaining the purity of the Aryan bloodline. That was the direct and provable context.

As I understand it, the US is around 58% white. Meaning that 42% are...umm "unclean", according to your summation of Trump's thinking. But they hold passports and Trump has no problem with them. He's also said, on many occasions, that you are welcome to come from anywhere in the world and make life in the USA if you do so LEGALLY.

So then Trump is not referring to bloodlines or genetics, is he? If you belive that he is then kindly elaborate on this contradiction.

I've never heard him disparage or offer a "solution" as to this 42% "problem" the US has.

I'm just trying to figure out what kind of Nazi he is. Because the Nazis didn't care if a Jew was German, Polish or French...they wanted them all exterminated.

But I'll take a guess and say that Trump is probably looking at closing the borders so that no new "others" can enter. And then, once he has ring-fenced the country, he'll call in the military and start to work on the 42% problem, right?

Either this is a very interesting new brand of Nazi, or you swallowed all the Kool Aid.

What I do notice from many of these conversations is that they tend to be very much about interpretation of words.

But what about actions? How was the US doing when Trump actually was president? We have 4 years of evidence. Show me the Nazi in those 4 years.

Were there death camps? Was there an increase in institutional discrimination against non whites? Where were the Nazis.

So you have no evidence other than intentionally poor interpretations.

Dishonest, illogical, massive TDS.

Lol political prosecutions...uhm pot? Kettle?

Groundwork being laid by deporting illegals? So Trump is laying the foundation for an authoritarian government, by applying the law and deporting people living illegally in the USA.

Obama deported 1,5million illegals.

...what groundwork was he laying?

Stav

The whole BS storu is reigning supreme agains/

Because the holocaust is the sole and one thing Hitler did right? Of course your deliberately missing the point. The comparison being made is in the playbook used to gain power and the groundwork being layed as well as Trump's apparent authoritarian leanings. Hitler didn't gain power and on day one go straight to the holocaust, he spent years exploiting pre existing anti-semitism both before and after he gained power 

Exctly How did Hitler gaimn power in Germany.  After World  War 1 yj German Economy collapsed totally  and tok yers to recover.    By 1925 the German People was sick and tired of   siffering an delected Hindenberg as President .  There were tpo main Reason for chaos all over Germany.   On te one side there ere te CommunictParty who occcupid some cities and effectively was involved in supprting a communist dictaorship in  General and on the other side the wealthy and middle class after Himdenberg  pledged to re-instate the monarchy in an effort to get stabiliy in Germany.    However, after  slight recovey in he German economy but that wa interupted in 1929 depression.      Rhat dicided Gemany into two working clas factions - - namely the Communists on the leff amd the Naz's on the right/ 

In 1932 Gemny wa hopelessly divided vetwen the Communist and Nazi's Barin g in mind Hindenberg ffered the German Cown Price the thrown of Germany - but he refused the thwon and said his father should return to rule as monarch,   That put Hindeberg in a difficult position and bearing the distrusts od espcially the aristoctd lost scires of family members killed by the Communists  in Russia = prompted Hindeberg to approach the Nazi's support nd appointed Hitler as Chancellor,   That dvelop into a clse patneship between thethe walthy in Germany and the Nazi's who believed hat te caould conmtro; Hitler - which turned out o be a disaster.

The mai lelment is that people want sabi;iy in their lives    The only way Hiler got appointed what that the people believed he wpi;d [rpvod stability,     By 1936 Germany was the richest country in Europe and the lifestyle of people improved apidly,   

Now back to e Present.    In teh US A rhe wealthy was initially supporting the Democatic Prty and funded the Party.   That did not ork out in 2016 when te working class left the DP nd after ears of decline in theur life they voted for Trump.   Tump in many ways favored the working  class and heir conditions in life improved,   That situation lasted until the Covid pademic and in 2020 Bden got into power,   He had his Green and  Health policies being compiled by Bill Gstes and his Open Border and Law and Order policy compiled by George Soros,    Under Biden the Government in multiple of the woke policies caused  virtually ciollapse in Federal Administraion.   

But lets look at what hapened undr Buden - he closely followed the Hitler example by weaponizing the FBI and Justice Department to deal woth opposition to him and the legacy media who never once criticized the incompetent Biden Administration and  ruined their lives,   Biden tried to get re-elected  based on fictional crime cases laid against Trump - another Nazi type of action.    It did not work out for Biden ,   

Biden's conduct about ultra-left policies - inclusive of family destruciion and sex polcies and the failing economic backgroud caused his demise,     He lost because he promted division in the country his policies oppoased by he majoriy of the USA Voters,      The Republicans contniued to get support fro, the working class made easier because of the  failures of he Biden Administration in mot fields.

Any candidate supporting the working class would have won the eelction - the key question asked was "are you ifnancially better of now than you were in 2019?    The voters answered that question by voting for Trump.     In the end it lead to Bezos and Zuckerberg abdoning their support for Biden and the D P ended up with Harris as candidate.   

How you got to comparing the way Tump got into power by using Hitler's methods is seriosuly laughable - the way Biden acted was much more in line with Hitler's actions.   So y our ideas are totally flawed .    

Rubbish….you put up the quote supporting your rebuttal and it was clearly misinterpreted. You then try to save yourself by producing another quote

"It evokes Hitler in your head because you don't understand that Democracy is the "blood" of the country and one party, namely the guys you support, letting illegal immigrants in knowing that they'll then vote for them...is literally poisoning democracy."

Which part of Plum's quote mention illegal immigrants turning into citizens before voting democrat.

Let’s keep the debate honest shall we?

By all means.

Stav, do you honestly think that I believe non citizens can vote in US elections?

Meaning that China, Russia, or anybody else, could pay for some holiday makers to visit the US...and completely screw up their elections. Laughable.

Well now that you have clarified your position then no. And yes its laughable but its a argument that's being pushed by both Trump and Musk so laugh at them.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-noncitizen-voter-fraud-fact-check/

Stalin is relevant here because the OP article was published by MSNBC. The same outlet that spliced Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini into images of Trump's NY rally. Despite people of all races and religions being present.

Did they really splice in images of Stalin when talking about the rally, sounds kinda sus?.

The article writer is complaining about how unsafe he feels, and that money has had to be spent on his protection. Despite taking part in extremely hateful rhetoric that almost lead to an assassination. I'm calling out the hypocrisy.

Just make sure to call it out on all sides and maybe note how much more of it comes from the right wing.

...because Trump is actually the one that had bullets wizzing by his head.

The rhetoric that the guys you appear to support spout, and which you seem to spout yourself, very nearly resulted in absolute global chaos...which is exactly what would have occurred had Trump not turned his head at the exact right moment.

Global chaos how? He wasn't even President at the time.

But let's be precise since you seem to be stuck on the "poisoning of the US blood".

When Hitler used a similar phrase he was directly referring to genetics and race. Hence his use of the word blood. He was specifically advocating for maintaining the purity of the Aryan bloodline. That was the direct and provable context.

Okay yeah that's fine.

As I understand it, the US is around 58% white.

Okay I'll take your word on that.

 Meaning that 42% are...umm "unclean", according to your summation of Trump's thinking.

What the actual f**k?.

 But they hold passports and Trump has no problem with them.

I think he's a problem with anyone who doesn't vote for him whites included. That doesn't mean I think he's going to round up and deport every single one of them.

 He's also said, on many occasions, that you are welcome to come from anywhere in the world and make life in the USA if you do so LEGALLY.

He also called Hati and African countries shitholes and wanted more Norwegian immigrants.

So then Trump is not referring to bloodlines or genetics, is he? If you belive that he is then kindly elaborate on this contradiction.

Its simple, if Trump wanted to make the point that you claim he was making without being mistaken for speaking like a Nazi he could of simply not used the term poisoning the blood of the country. He could of said something like "the democrats are allowing illegal immigrants into the country so they will vote democrat". Now that would of been a lie but at least it wouldn't have been a white supremacist dog whistle at the same time

I'm just trying to figure out what kind of Nazi he is. Because the Nazis didn't care if a Jew was German, Polish or French...they wanted them all exterminated.

Try to figure out what the other side is actually saying first.

But I'll take a guess and say that Trump is probably looking at closing the borders so that no new "others" can enter. And then, once he has ring-fenced the country, he'll call in the military and start to work on the 42% problem, right?

Either this is a very interesting new brand of Nazi, or you swallowed all the Kool Aid.

Man alive, these strawman arguments are so utterly ridiculous. Are you snorting something when you come up with them.

What I do notice from many of these conversations is that they tend to be very much about interpretation of words.

A very long long long list of Trump own words.

But what about actions? How was the US doing when Trump actually was president? We have 4 years of evidence. Show me the Nazi in those 4 years.

A political leader can evolve over time and take ever more extreme positions.

Were there death camps?

No one claimed there was.

Was there an increase in institutional discrimination against non whites? Where were the Nazis.

https://www.newsweek.com/hate-crimes-under-trump-surged-nearly-20-percent-says-fbi-report-1547870

So you have no evidence other than intentionally poor interpretations.

We just have a better understanding of history than you do.

Dishonest, illogical, massive TDS.

The indoctrination is strong with this one.

You don't even realize your programming just has you constantly strawmaning.

Let’s keep the debate honest shall we?

By all means

Do it then, what you tried here today was misleading if not outright dishonest.

I see you're basically giving up.

Funny. Trump is using "blood" like Hitler did, but he's also not using it like Hitler did...but also he is and at the same time definitely is not. Perhaps, make up your mind.

What do you mean "What the actual F?"?

Let's get this straight, are you or are you not saying that Trump thinks non-whites are unclean and will poison the "blood" of America? That what you were getting at, wasn't it? Because that's what a Nazi would say, isn't it?

You do realise that if 1000 Trump voters have read My Struggle that would be a lot?

I think you should perhaps just admit that you really want to believe that Trump was using the term in some Nazi type way but you don't really know how to justify this particular stance of yours. Because he was obviously not talking about genetics and was speaking metaphorically about democracy, security, and the American way of life. Something that would obviously be poisoned by mass illegal immigration.

The best you can do is to claim it's some kind of dog whistle. Which might be a valid argument if perhaps more than 1% of his voters had ever read My Struggle. But I'd be really surprised if that was the case. I'm the only person I know that has read it. And I only did so to educate myself since I was at school during apartheid and never took history so didn't know much about WW2. So would Trump risk saying something like that, meaning it as you apparently believe he did, when the pay-off would be practically non-existent and the risk ridiculously high? Of course not.

Have you been to Africa? I've been to Egypt, Morocco, Mozambique, Angola, Namibia, Botswana, Zim, Malawi, Lesotho...they are shitholes of the highest order. The best thing about them is the nature, obviously. And of course, in Egypt, the things that were built thousands of years ago are amazing. But everything else is completely shit. Poverty, pollution, corruption, rape rates that are astronomical despite the majority of it going unreported. Oh, then there are child soldiers, civil wars, brutal dictatorships, modern slavery where more than 1,000,000 people are literal slaves. South Africa is easily the best place in Africa and it has rolling blackouts, water shortages, ghetto like CBDs that are best described as post apocalyptic, extreme crime, murder rates that on par with countries experiencing civil war...on and on. Trump is 100% correct in his assessment. Does this make him a Nazi?

Why do you think Africans risk their lives crossing the Med to get to Europe? Do you think it's because Africa isn't a shithole?

Lol

After all this word salad of yours, and you've failed to make an adequate case for justifying the comparison between Trump and Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini.

And yes, MSNBC did make those comparisons. Google is your friend.

Oh, word of warning Stav...

Densie assumes that, because you and I are debating this, we are enemies. The poor dear is terrified of me, she's terrified of most things in life, so expect her to suck up to you like nobody's business haha

EG You'll note the new thread she made that was addressed directly to you. That wasn't a spontaneous post.

Absolute spineless cringe.

Do it then, what you tried here today was misleading if not outright dishonest.

Nope, your just confused.

I see you're basically giving up.

Funny. Trump is using "blood" like Hitler did, but he's also not using it like Hitler did...but also he is and at the same time definitely is not. Perhaps, make up your mind.

Okay I'm try to simplify. When people compare Trump to Hitler, when they compare him to a Nazi or a fascist, or when the talk about his authoritarian bent, we are not arguing that he's 100% identical clone of Hitler or that he 100% shares the same view as Nazi's or fascists or that he intends to enact ever single policy they ever had. What we are saying is we have seen some of Trump's playbook before being used by Nazi's and fascists to gain and maintain power that he appears to have started down a similar path but we don't know how far down the path he will go. Do I personally think he's going to enact the holocaust against illegal immigrants in the US, no I don't but I'd still have great reservations if Trump enacts a plan to deport anywhere between 10-20 million people. How would he go about doing it, how many families would be broken up, would innocent people get swept up the drag net and will his rhetoric cause violence and hate crimes against immigrants to increase. But its not just immigration's I have concerns about, its the damage he could to American democracy in the long run if he gets all his little toady yes men appointed.

What do you mean "What the actual F?"?

As in how the f**k did you think that was my summation of Trump's thinking.

Let's get this straight, are you or are you not saying that Trump thinks non-whites are unclean and will poison the "blood" of America? That what you were getting at, wasn't it? Because that's what a Nazi would say, isn't it?

I'm saying Trump is willing to demonize and dehumanize illegal immigrants in a similar manner to how Hitler demonized and dehumanized the Jews. Also while the Nazi's were without doubt racist to black people, they did not necessarily deem all non white's as inferior and white people weren't viewed as one big master race. They had their own hierarchy of racial purity. Several white races where considered inferior by the Nazi's.

I think you should perhaps just admit that you really want to believe that Trump was using the term in some Nazi type way but you don't really know how to justify this particular stance of yours.

As I already said Trump could of made the argument your claiming he was trying to make by not using a term which does have strong connotations with Nazism. He didn't because he was deliberately dog whistling.

Because he was obviously not talking about genetics and was speaking metaphorically about democracy, security, and the American way of life.

Again with the pre-programmed response. Everything can be excused as a metaphor or joke.

Something that would obviously be poisoned by mass illegal immigration. 

Evidence?

Which might be a valid argument if perhaps more than 1% of his voters had ever read My Struggle.

So would Trump risk saying something like that, meaning it as you apparently believe he did, when the pay-off would be practically non-existent and the risk ridiculously high? Of course not.

Because its a dog attracts all sorts of groups and people within those groups be they Neo-Nazi's Neo-Confederates, white Supremacists and just good old bog standard vanilla racists. Mein Kampf isn't required reading to be one of them. Bit of a co-incidence that white supremacist groups keep endorsing Trump as well.

Have you been to Africa? I've been to Egypt, Morocco, Mozambique, Angola, Namibia, Botswana, Zim, Malawi, Lesotho...they are shitholes of the highest order.

Yes I've been to Morocco and Tunisia. And I argue Morocco isn't actually that bad crime wise.

Trump is 100% correct in his assessment. Does this make him a Nazi?

Oh you can absolutely criticize countries for various faults and failings. But calling a place a shit hole is inappropriate language for any world leader to use. That doesn't make him a Nazi but by saying that he's casting aspirations on the people from those countries and just another indication why Trump is unsuitable to be the leader of country, let alone the leader of the most powerful country.

After all this word salad of yours, and you've failed to make an adequate case for justifying the comparison between Trump and Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini.

And all I have got from you is either strawmaning or a lack of understanding of what the other side is actually saying. And Stalin...who shoehorned him into this conversation. I certainly didn't.

And yes, MSNBC did make those comparisons. Google is your friend.

Oh I'm aware of them comparing that rally he did in Madison Square Garden to that rally held by fascists there before WW2. I'm just really curious how Stalin would have made it into that comparison considering you know he wasn't an actual Nazi or fascist. Did they genuinely splice in pictures of Stalin?

 Bit of a co-incidence that white supremacist groups keep endorsing Trump as well.

Kinda puts things into perspective dontchas think? hahahahaha

Denise finally said something that made sense, but I had to fix it a little.

"Bit of a co-incidence"

Bitco-in.

Bitcoin.

Stav, again...you are intentionally assuming something without any evidence. Show me the evidence that Trump was using this phrase in any way as a dog whistle to Neo Nazis or white nationalists...where is the evidence?

Because I can also provide you with phrases used by Hitler that Democrats have used. Here are some;

“The Big Lie”: • Nancy Pelosi: In January 2021, Speaker Pelosi referred to false claims about the 2020 election as “the big lie,” condemning misinformation regarding election integrity. So I could argue similarly to you and say that Nancy is using "Big Liars" as a dog whistle.

“Enemies of the People”: • Bernie Sanders: In a 2017 tweet, Senator Sanders criticized corporate media, stating, “The media is not the enemy of the people,” indirectly referencing the phrase while defending press freedom. And of course Bernie is pointing out that the media are not the enemy of the people and indirectly saying that there are enemies of the people out there and it's not his party or the media...so it's the "others".

Do I have any evidence for making speculations like this?

No, I don't.

But I don't suffer from any sort of derangement syndrome so I tend not to attempt to use tenuous links to attempt to demonise and spread hate.

Hitler also praised the way that Britain would draw from all of its classes when gathering for war. That is something I also respect. Does it make me a Nazi?

What a stupid game to play.

And just because you call an argument a straw man, doesn't mean that it is. All it means is that that you aren't able to counter it so you chuck a label on it, let out a sigh of relief and move on.

Remember, you are the one making the claim that Trump's use of "blood" is a fascist dog whistle. Therefore the onus of evidence rests with you.

Where is it?

...or just admit that you have no evidence other than your poorly put together and intentional misrepresentation.

Stav, again...you are intentionally assuming something without any evidence. Show me the evidence that Trump was using this phrase in any way as a dog whistle to Neo Nazis or white nationalists...where is the evidence?

I'm am assuming it based on Trumps past record where he has made numerous racist comments. From the very fine people comment when talking about the Charlottesville protesters to his stand back and stand by comment when asked about the proud boys to his association with people like Steve Bannon, Roy Moore, Nick Fuentes.

“The Big Lie”: • Nancy Pelosi: In January 2021, Speaker Pelosi referred to false claims about the 2020 election as “the big lie,” condemning misinformation regarding election integrity. So I could argue similarly to you and say that Nancy is using "Big Liars" as a dog whistle.

Enemies of the People”: • Bernie Sanders: In a 2017 tweet, Senator Sanders criticized corporate media, stating, “The media is not the enemy of the people,” indirectly referencing the phrase while defending press freedom. And of course Bernie is pointing out that the media are not the enemy of the people and indirectly saying that there are enemies of the people out there and it's not his party or the media...so it's the "others".

Do I have any evidence for making speculations like this?

No, I don't.

Of course you don't, as you have made up another ridiculous strawman where you some how construe calling out Nazi/fascist like rhetoric as being nazi/fascist dog whistling.

There is also a world of difference between a one off quote and an established pattern.

With Trump there is far too many of these comments for it to be coincidence.

But I don't suffer from any sort of derangement syndrome so I tend not to attempt to use tenuous links to attempt to demonise and spread hate.

The programming kicking in again, must push Trump derangement syndrome defense.

Hitler also praised the way that Britain would draw from all of its classes when gathering for war. That is something I also respect. Does it make me a Nazi?

OMG stop with the ridiculousness arguments. No one would give a shit if Trump's only similarity to Hitler is that they where both tea-teetotalers who where against fox hunting. Its their racism and authoritarian leanings that are the issue.

What a stupid game to play.

Indeed.

And just because you call an argument a straw man, doesn't mean that it is. All it means is that that you aren't able to counter it so you chuck a label on it, let out a sigh of relief and move on.

That is literally all your doing at this point. Constantly misrepresenting the position the other side is making.  Where pray tell did anyone make the claim that if you "harsh on crime" you're a Nazi or if you don't accept mass illegal immigration you're a Nazi, or if you don't support LGBT you're a Nazi, because pretty much no one is making those arguments.

Remember, you are the one making the claim that Trump's use of "blood" is a fascist dog whistle. Therefore the onus of evidence rests with you.

Where is it?

...or just admit that you have no evidence other than your poorly put together and intentional misrepresentation.

Ah, okay. Now we are getting somewhere.

You are "assuming".

So you admit that there is no evidence of Trump supporting Nazis, taking any action relating to Naziism, or actually saying anything Nazis said and intending it the same way they did.

It's absolutely fine for you to make that assumption. I could probably even steel-man that argument for you if I tried.

But that's not what this thread is about. This thread is about a politician claiming he fears for his life because of rhetoric that has been used against him.

See, on here, in a pub, or over dinner...you are more than welcome to make assumptions and voice them.

But when you have a large following and you are a public figure or are a large media outlet, it's not the same. If you have no evidence, and based purely on an assumption, you equate someone with literally the most evil people in history, who killed millions, and you spread that kind of misinformative hate...then you really should not complain about dangerous hate coming back your way.

I guess it comes down to a simple question.

Do you think it's wise, or in line with journalistic integrity, for MSNBC to have equated Trump with Hitler and Stalin, based on an assumption?

I will say that I have on numerous occasions heard right wing media refer to certain Dem actions as Stalinist.

Do it then, what you tried here today was misleading if not outright dishonest.

Nope, you’re just confused.

Rubbish you made two attempts to validate your claim that Plum said Illegals would be voting. Both were easily  disproven. Make a valid argument, or concede or at worst, just stop lying.

"But when you have a large following and you are a public figure or are a large media outlet, it's not the same. If you have no evidence, and based purely on an assumption, you equate someone with literally the most evil people in history, who killed millions, and you spread that kind of misinformative hate...then you really should not complain about dangerous hate coming back your way."

And therein lies the truth ....... no assumptions needed at all .

Stav

"Ah right so media outlets can't give an opinion without 100% concrete evidence that will hold up in a court of law, I guess the US media will be mostly just playing static noise for 20 hours of the day so."

No. But, libel and defamation aside, the topic here is the spreading of dangerous information and the consequences thereof. Particularly in light of the evidence being circumstantial at best. The original post in this thread is directly relating to death threats that are very likely the result of dangerous lies spread en masse.

Now who is using a straw man argument?

And in terms of the right using the Stalinist comparison, they are more justified in doing so since there are far more openly communist people in the US than there are Nazis. But even though that is the case, I still believe it to be dangerous rhetoric.

Here is one MSNBC segment where the comparison is made, in great detail.

On my phone so the link is for YouTube mobile.

https://youtu.be/XmmxaCU2-Lc?si=VPoNSdg7VuKE3a28

Search this phrase on YouTube if the link doesn't work for you...

"Trump speaks like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini says Pulitzer prize-winning historian"

That is BS propaganda without any proof whatsoever,      What they are talking  about is BS and part of the  DP agenda,      The  DP fucked up th e US Constiotution all t h time and they pretend otherwise,   The Supreme  Court ruled many things Biden did was Unconstitutional nd that show that Biden acted illeglly in many spheres  of govtnment.   .                   

Here is one MSNBC segment where the comparison is made, in great detail.

On my phone so the link is for YouTube mobile.

https://youtu.be/XmmxaCU2-Lc?si=VPoNSdg7VuKE3a28 

Search this phrase on YouTube if the link doesn't work for you...

"Trump speaks like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini says Pulitzer prize-winning historian"

Okay I'll start off and say that linking Trump's McDonald's job election campaign stunt with Mussolini is complete bullshit on MSNBC's part. All that was standard political campaigning during an election campaign and actually quite good campaigning by Trump. By that logic anyone with a job is fascist. 

But I would also argue an historian is a good a person to ask to make a comparison between Trump and those various historical leaders. Now she did bring up Stalin, but as I suspected this isn't MSNBC splicing in footage of Stalin in a comparison to Trump's Madison Square Garden rally, with the interview occurring days before Trump's rally.

Trump shares a similarity to Stalin in his authoritarian leanings and there is some similarities to the terminology used by Stalin and Trump but there is greater similarities due to the frequent racists undertones of Trumps speeches.

Stav,

I actually posted the YouTube clip I'm talking about on a thread here me a few weeks back. I assure you, I'm not telling porkies. You'll find that I'm not dishonest about such things.

I'll try to find it.

I believe it may have been on a thread that Denise made. I could be wrong.

Outrage…..hahaha…I just enjoyed seeing somebody so sanctimonious squirm. End of the day you were defending the indefensible unsuccessfully.

Outrage…..hahaha…I just enjoyed seeing somebody so sanctimonious squirm. End of the day you were defending the indefensible unsuccessfully.

This is hilarious. You obviously mistook the the part where I said "you literally just did" and then quoted another post he made underneath which you thought I was using to support the line "you literally just did", when what I was actually doing was just my normal method of breaking up peoples posts to respond to the individual points underneath the quotes, you know the same method of posting I have been using for years.

Are you really that dense you can't figure that our or you have but your just embarrassed you made a mistake and you think some sort of ruckersforum street cred is on the line here so you feel compelled to double, then triple then quadrupple down on it. You're Trump like with the ego, this incessant childlike need to have to be seen to win every single argument not matter how ridiculously trivial.

Oh now I’m like Trump and Trump is like Hitler…..I guess that makes me like Hitler. Childish drivel by a man who can’t give one cogent reason why it’s okay to assume Plum meant illegals would be illegally voting….except by assuming that’s what he meant, when in a subsequent post he explained that wasn’t what he meant.

Civilized debate requires a bit of integrity and a willingness to see the other person’s point of view, clearly not strengths of your’s.

But keep on digging.

 Stav

Start dealing wih proven facts and stop being illogocal amnd prejusice cause you to produce sub-standard discussions on the Board.    I condemn t e Biden Regime of weponizing the Justice D epartment and FBI against potential opponents like they did in numerous ccassions in the past.  

As far a Trump is concerned I would criticiz him as well if he did what Biden did already,   Bit toa ssume from mdia repors and self-opinionated prejudice I ppose ou onsite based on facual proof that you prtend sis not true - which in Court cases was proved to be trrue, you  ignore facts and acccept media fiction.

If rump did what Biden did I would criticize him based on facts.  At present the emdia atacks on him all accuse himof being a fascist without any proof of fascist   axctins by Trmp.

There are two ings he emdia hated and the Democrats in general  is that -

*    the media is facing  claims of libel in their reporting amouning to billions of dollars for claims about Trump and the new Government  he appointed  and is bound to lose cases  in court; and 

*     and the new  FBI and Justice  Department start investiging the criminal conduct by both politcians and bureaucrats and they are fighting to the full to stop investigatios - with Biden himself trying to sabotage such invesigaions by his pardons.

That is why the media and the Democrats  fear what is going to them in futuire nd their present defense is hysteria.   

,                       

In light of this statement...

"But it does indicate that those beliefs are held by substantial numbers of Trump/Musk supporters and right wing people, unless you want to get into argument that what they say has no influence over the public."

Would you like to revisit my point on the fact that there is a spectrum of reception of rhetoric. Which goes all the way from not believing it to believing it 100%.

And if MSM is spouting rhetoric that Trump is a Nazi, and killing Nazis is a good thing, then there is that section of the population that will try to assassinate him and or carry out violent acts towards his supporters.

As I gather thus far, we have gotten you to admit that you are basing everything you are saying on tenuous interpretative assumptions, and also that you in fact agree that dangerous rhetoric spread at large scale, is in fact dangerous.

Let's deal with your accusations of racism next. Again, you are the one making the claim so the onus of evidence rests with you.

List just three overtly racist things that Trump has said. Now I understand that if he says he likes white coffee because he can't stand black coffee, you'll claim this is racist. But let's try and get away from your biased interpretations here and deal with actual racism.

You appear to take it has fact that he is racist, and assume that you're on stable ground when making those accusations.

I know that for me to be that sure of something, I would be able to list clear examples.

So, the floor is yours.

Oh now I’m like Trump and Trump is like Hitler…..I guess that makes me like Hitler.

Now who's being dishonest and making assumptions. But yeah next I'll be claiming vegetarians are like Hitler.

Childish drivel by a man who can’t give one cogent reason why it’s okay to assume Plum meant illegals would be illegally voting….except by assuming that’s what he meant, 

Because the wording of his original post didn't specific that he meant illegal immigrants would vote democrat only after they gained citizenship. Asides from which, if they become citizens they are no longer illegal immigrants hence implying illegal immigrants can vote is just wrong and as I said its not like assuming that was his position is a stretch considering its a position pushed heavily by major figures on the right wing.

when in a subsequent post he explained that wasn’t what he meant.

Which I acknowledged

Civilized debate requires a bit of integrity and a willingness to see the other person’s point of view, clearly not strengths of your’s.

Would you like to revisit my point on the fact that there is a spectrum of reception of rhetoric. Which goes all the way from not believing it to believing it 100%.

I've already acknowledged this in a manner of speaking when I said I don't believe Trump is going do a holocaust on illegal immigrants. I've already said he's not necessarily a 100% clone of Hitler or that he he shares every single view that the Nazi's or fascists shared.

And if MSM is spouting rhetoric that Trump is a Nazi, and killing Nazis is a good thing, then there is that section of the population that will try to assassinate him and or carry out violent acts towards his supporters.

Hold on there is a difference between saying Trump is a Nazi and Trump is Nazi like or using Nazi like methods. What some in the MSM are saying is several similarities between some of the methods used by Trump and Hitler and have reservations about where this will lead too.

Also the mainstream media isn't advocating a position that killing Nazi's is a good thing. Yes fighting the Nazi's in WW2 was a good thing but they are not advocating anyone go out and kill Neo-Nazi's or Trump.

Ah interesting you seem to acknowledge Stochastic terrorism is a thing. It does stand to reason that if people consider Trump a Nazi, they could consider him a grave threat to the US and some might try to use violence against him or his supporters in order to stop the perceived threat.

But by acknowledging Stochastic terrorism as a thing, then we have to go back to Trump and January 6th where if Trump is spouting rhetoric that the election has been stolen, then it stands to reason that people who believed Trump would consider the US to be under grave and would take violent action to stop the threat, which they did. That's why so many people view Trump as responsible for January 6th.

So is their a difference between the two situations. Yes I think so. I think you make a credible comparison between Trump-Hitler/fascism/nazism/authoritarian based on what Trump has said and done in the past, but the media does have a responsibility not to over egg the pudding so to speak. Can I say the media hasn't overdone it with the comparisons, well no I can't but then  its just not possible to go through every media report on it, so yeah its quite possible the media has overdone it but I don't think they where wrong to make the comparison in the first place.

But on the other hands with Trump and January 6th that was based on complete and utter lies with absolutely no evidence what so ever to support it. I also think below Trump, the discourse online and from the alt media that a lot of the Trump supporters get their news is far more virulent and aggressive and more likely to incite violence than what's coming out of the left. When leftist media where talking about Trump being like Hitler/Nazi/Fascist they where trying to get people to stop him by voting against him in the election not to actually go out and harm him.

As I gather thus far, we have gotten you to admit that you are basing everything you are saying on tenuous interpretative assumptions, and also that you in fact agree that dangerous rhetoric spread at large scale, is in fact dangerous.

I don't consider my position based on tenuous interpretative assumptions. I think its a solid comparison based on what we know about Hitler/Fascism and Nazism. I do agree dangerous rhetoric spread at large scale is in fact dangerous and I'm very curious as to what mental gymnastics your going to have to do to get Trump off the hook for January 6th now that you have established it as your position. But I also hold the view that accurate reporting can also be dangerous. If a sex offender has broken out of prison and the media report on it, then that person is attacked by vigilantes well yeah you could argue that's because the media acted dangerously by reporting on it, even though they where factually accurate.

Let's deal with your accusations of racism next. Again, you are the one making the claim so the onus of evidence rests with you.

List just three overtly racist things that Trump has said. Now I understand that if he says he likes white coffee because he can't stand black coffee, you'll claim this is racist. But let's try and get away from your biased interpretations here and deal with actual racism.

You appear to take it has fact that he is racist, and assume that you're on stable ground when making those accusations.

I know that for me to be that sure of something, I would be able to list clear examples.

So, the floor is yours.

Just three.

Kung Flu. 

Immigrants from Hati all have aids.

Nigerians should go back to their huts.

During his 1993 testimony when commenting. on Native American casino operators, where he said they "don't look like Indians to me."

Referring to Hispanic Miss Universe as Miss Housekeeping.

Some very fine people (referencing people who included white supremacists)

His Mexican comment on the judge overseeing the Trump University case.

Telling 4 black American congresswomen (the Squad) to go back home. 

Okay, let's look at these statements:

Kung Flu
This was an attempt at humor. He also referred to it as the China virus. Whether the virus came from a lab or a bat that bit a pangolin, it came from China. Kung Fu is from China too. It's like calling the Spanish Flu the Mariachi Malady—nothing racist about it. Kung Fu is from China, and so is COVID. You’ve interpreted it as racism.

Haitians with HIV/AIDS
2% of the Haitian population is infected. He never mentioned Blacks, Indians, Asians, or Whites from Haiti. The country has a high infection rate, and he was drawing attention to the health risks posed by immigrants from there—a place, not a people. You’ve interpreted it as racism.

Nigerians back to their "huts"
The UN estimates that 80% of Nigerians live in slums, which you could call shanties or huts. In South Africa, the terms "shanty" and "hut" are used interchangeably, even by Black people themselves. Trump said that once Nigerians saw America, they would never go back to their huts. Since 80% of them live in huts, this is an accurate statement and has nothing to do with their skin color. I suppose you’ve interpreted it as racism because you’re upset that most Nigerians live in huts.

Miss Housekeeping
There is no evidence for this. And while there is no evidence, it obviously becomes a case of what you WANT to believe. Also, this is from 1996—almost 30 years ago. I’m sure you believe it more and are more offended by it than the many Hispanics who voted for Trump in this election. Another case of a liberal being ever so offended on behalf of somebody else. I could easily say that I find this to be a type of condescending racism, as if Hispanics are not smart enough to find the truth or understand how offended they should be. But I won’t go that far, because I don’t like making silly assumptions. You simply chose to believe what you wanted to.

Fine people on both sides
It’s funny that you are still holding onto this. It has been disproven and debunked. It was debunked almost immediately by Trump himself, in the very same interview, within a few sentences of each other, when he CLEARLY denounced white nationalism and neo-Nazis. So, he believes that white nationalists and racists are fine people but also denounces them?

For the last time, here are his exact words:
"You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."
...he then elaborated...
"I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally."

It’s hilarious to me that you chose to take the first part of what he said ever so seriously but completely discount his actual words when he denounces Nazis and white nationalists. He mentions "bad people," and he denounces racists in the very next sentence. In fact, the white nationalists and the neo-Nazis are the only ones he denounces here. You chose to believe otherwise.

Mexican Judge
Trump was making the point that the judge's heritage may mean that he would not get a fair trial. See Mexico/US "build the wall" for reference. It’s similar to how, in South Africa, Whites often don’t get fair trials from the entirely Black Human Rights Commission. This is the opposite of racism—it is, in fact, fear of discrimination. Funny how you turned that around on Trump. But when a Black or Mexican person claims they won’t get fair treatment from a White cop or judge, then it’s a valid point because we certainly don’t like discrimination. You decided to view this as Trump being racist.

Telling the Squad to go home
Trump stated that if they have such a big problem with the USA, they can leave. He said they are welcome to go back to the crime-infested places they came from. Again, this has nothing to do with race. And for context, let’s look at some of the things the Squad have said:

• Rashida Tlaib:
  "There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust." (Made during an interview discussing the establishment of Israel, which sparked significant backlash in 2019.)
  Imagine if Trump said something like this.

• Ilhan Omar:
  "Some people did something." (Referring to the 9/11 attacks during a 2019 CAIR event.)

So, we are left with you, yet again, not being able to provide evidence of actual racism. Where is Trump disparaging or discriminating against someone based on their race?

Not even one instance of him calling someone a slur, or referring to someone as inferior due to their race. No attempt at dividing people based on race or evidence of him giving someone less of an opportunity because of their race.

So you assume that Trump aligns with Nazi beliefs because you assume that Trump is a racist.

Is that about right?

This has gone on for quite a while now, and all we are arriving at are your assumptions and biased interpretations. Sure, you can say that my interpretations are biased, but this is why actual evidence is required. And there doesn’t appear to be any. As I recall, that is what I asked for—evidence.

This has gone way off topic, but I’m pretty happy we went this far because, though it took time, we managed to show that the TDS is pretty deep. It’s all assumption-based, all driven by what you think is the right thing to believe. But the actual evidence, which is what we should base our views on, is non-existent.

Lets getback to the original threat.   The assassinatin attempts on Trump was followed by bomb threats b BLM on Trump nominnees,   The FBI knew who wer involved - but didnohing about it,  

Thatwas folowed by 4 DP House members from Connecticutt.     Th e FBI ad Loca authority went dead quiet on that one    I rned ou to be a nthing burgr,   

Swallwel  then came up with his own stroy - but the guy is a low level  imbecile whose main  claim to fame was he fact that he cheated on his wife by having slept with a Chinese spy by the name of Fang.  He is really supershit and a liar who is a deadly enemy of the truth.   Whether there was an acual threat nobody would evenr really know,  Nobody who knows anout him is aware he is a nincumpoop with no standig in the House and it can be expected from him to come up with the above story by an entirely untrustorthy idiot.    His chances of going to jail with Schiff is excellent,     Swallwel served a member of the House Securty Commiiee was kicked from the Committee because of huim fucking Fang which mean tha he cannot be tusted with classifid documents  .   .  

Because the wording of his original post didn't specific that he meant illegal immigrants would vote democrat only after they gained citizenship. Asides from which, if they become citizens they are no longer illegal immigrants hence implying illegal immigrants can vote is just wrong and as I said its not like assuming that was his position is a stretch considering its a position pushed heavily by major figures on the right wing.

……

So those are your three defenses. Here are their flaws:

1 The fact that somebody doesn’t specify that something that is illegal isn’t what he is implying does not mean you have any right to assume he is implying that. You have never successfully rebutted that point.

2 If they become citizens they can vote.  Yes you are right and there are various ways they can do that. So what does that imply. It means the vast inflow of illegal immigrants eventually become voters. You are trapped in semantics….the real effect is that this unregulated flow of people coming into the country is beginning to affect the voting calculus.

So illegal entry is affecting the democratic process through legal voting, Plums real point.

3 Assuming he meant illegals vote is reasonable because majority figures said it. If you were talking about HasBeen maybe that’s a valid point, he is led by the nose all the time. But it’s still an assumption and in Plum's case he has his own strong views.

…

I sympathize with people who are simply coming over here to work and help their families. They shouldn’t be vilified . But the system can’t be uncontrolled and the path to citizenship can’t be via illegal immigration.

This entire thread has been a lesson in the dangers of assumption stacking.

Courtesy of ChatGPT

The dangers of biased interpretation are magnified when assumptions are stacked upon one another. When one assumption is treated as a fact, it becomes the foundation for further assumptions. This process can snowball, creating a chain of reasoning that appears internally consistent but is entirely detached from objective reality.

Consider a scenario where someone assumes that a colleague’s neutral behavior—such as not smiling in a meeting—indicates hostility. From this initial assumption, they might infer that the colleague is plotting against them, leading to further assumptions about their motivations and actions. Over time, the individual becomes convinced of a conspiracy that may never have existed. Each new assumption feels more credible because it is built upon the shaky foundation of previous assumptions, creating an echo chamber of self-reinforcing beliefs.

 Stav

Let me give you a bit of reality of the illegal migrant voting  issue:-

*    In 2021 Biden gave an instruction  that Government officials to help foreigners to get US citizens ASAP so they can get registered as voters on the votes role.   The signed by Biden  document  was  discoverd in Alabama and taken to court aa an illeegal instructions since it did deal with the issue on  a political rather than legal based issue.    :The Court ruled that  the instuction was illegal since he issue could lead to illegal undemining of reqirement for US  Ciizenship.

*      Ae their foireigners registered as voters in the USA?    In terms of  Virgina  Election Law  foreigners are to be removed from the voters role,    When foreigners were on the Virginia   voters role in September 2024 they were removed  from the voters role.  The Fedral Justice Department took the  Virginia  removal of foreigners from the voters role to court on the basis that removal of the foreigners from the voters role so close to the November 2024 election umdermines democratic elections.     The Judge hearing the case ruled in fasvor of the appeal by the Justice Depatment.    The  Virginia State Government took the court ruling on appeal and the Federal Court ruled in fsavor of removing of the  foreigners from the vots role.   It was not the first time the relevant foreigners were remved from the voters role - thy were removr fro the role previously and smehow every time they were removed from the roe they somehow was re-registered as voters,

Both the court cases indicate that there is official present Federal Government policies to undermine the laws governing citizenship so as to get people registered as voters.   So are there other states where foreignes are registered as voters in the USA - yes there are and those registraions having the blessing of the Biden Regime.    The voters roles in the USA are in fact in a chaotic condition.   In California in a court case in 2017  it was proved that there were 5,8 million voters registered who are dead or could not be traced and has gone missing,   The Court ruled that the 5,8 million voters be removed from the voters role.    The Caifornia State Government then passed a law that voters may not be removed from the role unless the voters themselves apply to be renoved fom he role,    So have the dead applied for removal from the role and how is that prcedure to be implemented?    The answer is simple since te court ruling nobody was removed.    Since 2017 more than 1,5 million voters fled from California to other  US States and even to Mexico and their names were not removed from te voters role,   Coupled with it there were subequent  to  2017 and those are still on the voters roles.  So put the number of illegal registration of voters at 6,2 million.  

But California is not the only State where the roles  are in chaos.  In Wisconsin there are 150 000 voters registered whose date of  first registration as a votsrs are given as 1 Jnuary 1918 and they ares still on the role,    Aside from that their are 6,3 million grant recipits in the USA at the ae   112 years and older/     If they get grants from the US Government on a monthly basis they most certainly are on the voters roles as well.

 The Democratic Pary is a very polite Party -  they send letters to people after elections thanking them for supporting the DP in elections.    Thousands of cases has emerged where letters were forwarded to them in the states where they were moved to.    Such letters are regularly produced where people did not vote at all and they died years before and the children who moved to other states and the dead parents got letters as well.

The moral of  story is that the voters roles in all Sates in the USA should be audited to reduce election fraud,    Such an audit would also reveal how many foreigners are regsitered as votes in the USA as well.    It is unfortunate that all dead voters regisered religously vote for the DP - so they have a huge number of voters  in reseve who support the Party when needed.    ,   .

     .                           

   .       .                             .             

Kung Flu

This was an attempt at humor. He also referred to it as the China virus. Whether the virus came from a lab or a bat that bit a pangolin, it came from China. Kung Fu is from China too. It's like calling the Spanish Flu the Mariachi Malady—nothing racist about it. Kung Fu is from China, and so is COVID. You’ve interpreted it as racism.

Yes it was an attempt at humor, racist humor. You've interpreted it as not racist.

Haitians with HIV/AIDS
2% of the Haitian population is infected. He never mentioned Blacks, Indians, Asians, or Whites from Haiti. The country has a high infection rate, and he was drawing attention to the health risks posed by immigrants from there—a place, not a people. You’ve interpreted it as racism.

I note the heading Haitians with HIV/AIDS you address this point under, a subtle change but one that skirts the issue of Trump claiming all Haitians have aids. Its irrelevant if a portion of the Haitian population is infected with HIV/Aids, Trump is casting aspirations on the entire population. If I was to say all black people where murderers and someone called me racist all I have to do is give the percentage of murders committed by black people (whatever its is) and I'm off the hook right? Also you have interpreted it as not racist.

Nigerians back to their "huts"
The UN estimates that 80% of Nigerians live in slums, which you could call shanties or huts. In South Africa, the terms "shanty" and "hut" are used interchangeably, even by Black people themselves. Trump said that once Nigerians saw America, they would never go back to their huts. Since 80% of them live in huts, this is an accurate statement and has nothing to do with their skin color. I suppose you’ve interpreted it as racism because you’re upset that most Nigerians live in huts.

See my last point. Also you have decided to interpret it as not racist.

Miss Housekeeping
There is no evidence for this. And while there is no evidence, it obviously becomes a case of what you WANT to believe. Also, this is from 1996—almost 30 years ago. I’m sure you believe it more and are more offended by it than the many Hispanics who voted for Trump in this election. Another case of a liberal being ever so offended on behalf of somebody else. I could easily say that I find this to be a type of condescending racism, as if Hispanics are not smart enough to find the truth or understand how offended they should be. But I won’t go that far, because I don’t like making silly assumptions. You simply chose to believe what you wanted to.

Fair enough we just have the word of one person, but the sheer amount of allegations against Trump about the things he has allegedly said (including non racial comments) is more than a little coincidentally. Trump's version of events is always believed by his supporters despite his insanely long and demonstrable track record of dishonesty. Am also baffled when people defend Trump by saying the alleged comments/event is old, as if that somehow invalidates the claim when it in fact make Trump look worse. Oh its old they say, look how little you have if you have to go back 30 years, to which the other sides point out, that just indicates how long Trump has said and done racist stuff. Also love the argument of Hispanics voting for Trump invalidates claims of racism, its like a variant of the classic "but I have black friends" therefore I can't be racist argument. Also you simply choose to not believe what you wanted to (see what I'm doing here)

Fine people on both sides
It’s funny that you are still holding onto this. It has been disproven and debunked. It was debunked almost immediately by Trump himself, in the very same interview, within a few sentences of each other, when he CLEARLY denounced white nationalism and neo-Nazis. So, he believes that white nationalists and racists are fine people but also denounces them?

For the last time, here are his exact words:
"You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."
...he then elaborated...
"I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally."

It’s hilarious to me that you chose to take the first part of what he said ever so seriously but completely discount his actual words when he denounces Nazis and white nationalists. He mentions "bad people," and he denounces racists in the very next sentence. In fact, the white nationalists and the neo-Nazis are the only ones he denounces here. You chose to believe otherwise.

Disproven, nope. What's happened is you have merely accepted the right wing narrative. And this is the real hilarious part. You accuse me of taking the first part of his comments seriously and then ignoring his comments where he denounces the Nazi's and white nationalists just a few moments later, but then you leave out what he said after he denounced the Nazi's and white nationalists when he said "but you had many other people in that group other than neo-nazi's and white nationalists, okay"

Who are these many other people? You said in that you have supported Trump's statement on this. Google search the Charlottesville protest and select images. Show me the photo's of the many people in that group that weren't neo-nazi's and white nationalists, show me those very fine people please.

Mexican Judge
Trump was making the point that the judge's heritage may mean that he would not get a fair trial. See Mexico/US "build the wall" for reference. It’s similar to how, in South Africa, Whites often don’t get fair trials from the entirely Black Human Rights Commission. This is the opposite of racism—it is, in fact, fear of discrimination. Funny how you turned that around on Trump. But when a Black or Mexican person claims they won’t get fair treatment from a White cop or judge, then it’s a valid point because we certainly don’t like discrimination. You decided to view this as Trump being racist.

I have to ask at this point, do you think racism is even a thing? Does a person have to literally goose march around the place with a Swastika armband and being holding a copy of Mein Kampf before he qualifies as racist?

Telling the Squad to go home
Trump stated that if they have such a big problem with the USA, they can leave. He said they are welcome to go back to the crime-infested places they came from. Again, this has nothing to do with race.

It had everything to do with race and you know it. He would never in a million years said it had they been white. And again with the subtle attempt at switching to imply Trump was saying they could leave America if they had a problem with it. He said it because he assumed by the color of their skin that where not originally from America or people of that descent are not really American.

• Rashida Tlaib:
  "There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust." (Made during an interview discussing the establishment of Israel, which sparked significant backlash in 2019.)
  Imagine if Trump said something like this.

• Ilhan Omar:
  "Some people did something." (Referring to the 9/11 attacks during a 2019 CAIR event.)

So, we are left with you, yet again, not being able to provide evidence of actual racism. Where is Trump disparaging or discriminating against someone based on their race?

Not even one instance of him calling someone a slur, or referring to someone as inferior due to their race. No attempt at dividing people based on race or evidence of him giving someone less of an opportunity because of their race.

So you assume that Trump aligns with Nazi beliefs because you assume that Trump is a racist.

Is that about right?

What we have is you being literally able to ignore your eyes and ears. You can go back years and see and hear all of Trump's comments, the various legal cases against his organization, the people he associates with and the people and organizations that support him and yet somehow come to the conclusion that during all that time he was just joking, he was taken out of context, it was a metaphor, he didn't mean it, its coincidental, its a witch hunt. Absolutely boggles the mind.

This has gone on for quite a while now, and all we are arriving at are your assumptions and biased interpretations. Sure, you can say that my interpretations are biased, but this is why actual evidence is required. And there doesn’t appear to be any. As I recall, that is what I asked for—evidence.

You where presented with evidence. You just "interpreted" as not racist.

This has gone way off topic, but I’m pretty happy we went this far because, though it took time, we managed to show that the TDS is pretty deep. It’s all assumption-based, all driven by what you think is the right thing to believe. But the actual evidence, which is what we should base our views on, is non-existent.

I finally realized your major malfunction Anger. You have zero sense of humor. So when Trump makes one of his clumsy jokes, you get an electric shock through your woke antenna.

I finally realized your major malfunction Anger. You have zero sense of humor. So when Trump makes one of his clumsy jokes, you get an electric shock through your woke antenna.

Pres

I don't like the repetitive BS on site involving Stav,  I am at times sorry for Stav -  he ahs been told things to believe - but that does not count for the ruling elite.   They have told him everything he thinks and he lost totally the ability to think for himself, 

But that is not the reason why I interrupted this endless and dubious discussion and ask you about the followingL-

"No. But, libel and defamation aside, the topic here is the spreading of dangerous information and the consequences thereof. Particularly in light of the evidence being circumstantial at best. The original post in this thread is directly relating to death threats that are very likely the result of dangerous lies spread en masse. 

You know what the real situation is that he paid nothing out of his own pocket for security.  What acually happen is a con by many of the ultra-racist Democrats is to defund the Police - supporting it all-out was amongst others Swallwel/   What then followed is that the DP members (inclusive of Swallwel) apply for reimbursement of the cost they incurred in having used  private security agencies to guard their homes,   So Swallwel was lying about that part - but that is not all -  when a sound comes out of the mouth of that idiot - would be a lie,

Another bit of info -Swallwel's actually salary is  $172 000 a year. o if he claieed he paid for it out-of-his own pocket - where did the money he supposedly paid - whee did the money cme from?  Maybe from China after he fucked one of their spies and want to protect their agent .

It’s ’au contraire’….now that really made me laugh. Well done Anger, hold on, isn’t that what you just said about Trump.

Swat and Swat!

Waaaaaaaaaaahahaha!

I found  out  from the aboive that both Stav and BB are in fact COMMUNISTS  that fight agaibnt Trump because he opposed their Commnism dictatroships that they support all out;   Very clear that  they are indeed fighting for a Communist dictatorship in the USA and is against any  opposition to their Communist dictatorship support is being threatened by  Trump and  they use the classical story that anybody against them are called Facsist so they are covinced in their own minds that Trump is a Fascist,

Really funny how they twisted eveything  around and when caught out they continue with their farcical arguments.   LMA O .

What’s sad is a narrow minded bigot, who has to paint a human totally black, instead of seeing any nuances. Who pretends to be this rational intellectual….but makes mistakes and then refuses to enjoy the chuckle.

My advice to you ….if you don’t speak the language, take the time to look up what you are quoting. Or better yet, don’t use it at all.

"My advice to you ….if you don’t speak the language, take the time to look up what you are quoting."

No Moz, only the right has bigots...the lefties are exempt from being called bigots for their bigotry...it's perfectly OK to call half of America stupid Nazzi redneck racists all the time...ant Trumpanzees...but it's fine...sticks 'n stones...

What’s sad is a narrow minded bigot, who has to paint a human totally black, instead of seeing any nuances.

Yes because that's totally what I've done right. How many times did I say on this very thread that Trump isn't a 100% clone of Hitler/Nazi/Fascism and doesn't necessarily share every single view they had and that I don't believe he's going trying to organize a holocaust against migrants.

Who pretends to be this rational intellectual….but makes mistakes and then refuses to enjoy the chuckle.

Another similarity you have with Trump, not only are your jokes not funny, you try to be funny in the most obnoxious way possible. People do laugh, just at you, not with you.

My advice to you ….if you don’t speak the language, take the time to look up what you are quoting. Or better yet, don't use it at all"

The problem is that the most incredible sories on site comerom the eople that knows only what the brainwashed handlers tell them only they know what is going on and anybody opposing their BS are alays wrong.

The prblem is yers of brainwashing has resulte in them being unable to think for themselves and obey's everything they are told.   The perpetual lie is the world hey live in.   Goebbels would have been proud of his successors bwing so successful in spreading lies,   The norm is if the lie is spead ften enough idiots believe it is true,   

So it is no use to paste reports on site and statements under oath of decisions where the court threw out cases because they lied,  All that means nothing to them because it does not tie in with what they were told to believe.    The bigger the lie - the more they believe it.

So lets keep the biggering down a bit - talking to idiots would not help - they will remain idiots.           

"People do laugh, just at you, not with you."

Rich coming from a fool who couldn’t get the play on words with the Libbok ‘ex’ factor.  What a silly fool you are and what a boring, humorless old toad Anger is.

You boys should get on like a house on fire.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha!!!

The ex-factor!

It's very late in the y ear but a candidate for funniest blunder of the year!

A "play on words"!

Aaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaha!

Too funny! My sides are splitting!

Oh dear…now we are adding dishonesty to stupidity. 

You sides are splitting because your a fat, greasy toad.

"You sides are splitting because your a fat, greasy toad."

I stand corrected …….’you’re a fat, greasy toad’

What about "you sides are splitting", stupidissimo. Did you miss that one even after I pointed it out to you?

LMAO!

You keep correcting everyone else you semi-literate old fool!

boring, humorless old toad Anger is.

I'm the boring one says the Grammar Nazi. 

The irony probably flies high over Moffie's flat, sloping forehead.

Who knew we'd wait until the last day of the year to have the funniest and most embarrassing blunders of the year from the most self-important but hypocritical old clown?

"You sides are splitting because your a fat, greasy toad."

LMAO!

Rooi didn't get the "glass act" joke either.

...we should probably get Denise's advice, she has plenty of xx factor.

When people dfoffer from the brainwashed idiotic site liars - the pesona attacks start and shit like Rooinek pollute the board.    

Stav,

People are locked up in South Africa for being provably racist. Actually locked up. 

Now, it is my view that calls to incitement singing "Kill the boer! Kill the farmer!" are given far too much "traditional" privilege, but there are nevertheless laws against such things. From incitement to using slurs and even racial laws in business, and they carry real legal liabilities.

What you provided does not meet any of the standards for prosecution in a hyper race focused country like South Africa. I'd challenge you to make an actual case for any of those.

So, I'll ask again. Do you have any actual evidence that would hold up and meet any legal standard for litigation?

Because if you don't, then you're challenging the prescribed requirements for racially based convictions, and we are talking about your feelings.

TLDR: Trumps give you racist "feels" but you got no receipts.

Your moving the goal posts. A person can't be racist unless they have a conviction for it or a jail sentence?

Different countries have different laws. I have no idea why the US lets groups march down the street with Swastika's, doing Hitler salutes and shouting the Jews will not replace us, like what occurred at the unite the right rally. But according to US law they were not doing anything illegal (until violence broke out). Are you going tell me there was no racists in that group?

There's also a difference between the average person and Donald Trump. Trump being mega rich and being a major political figure make it hard er for any criminal charges to stick to him.

When did that Swastika thing happened?     There was  nothing like that for 85 years/   What there was were US Flag burning  and people shouting  "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" at the recent Hamas Riots organized by the terroist subsidiaries of the Democrats -  BLM and Antifa",   Where did you get the above shit from anyway?   

What criminal charges that had any subnstance was laid against him and what laws did he break?  You were at a scream level when it was pointed out that the so-called charges laid was an election strategy based on the Hitler principles by Biden and his fellow Communist clique.

You were told 50 times that the FBI acted like the Gestapo and the KGB to try and undermine oppositin to the Biden Regime and protect people who looted money from the US Government and the taxpayers of the USA,    The most corrupt Government in the history of the USA,

There will be no retribution by Trump despite yeasrs of libelous comments.    The thieves who stole money and used bribery and corruption will go to jail.    The two people who tried to Assassinate Trump  both worked for a subsidiary of Black Rock with ties to the CIA,   Both were used by the mongrels to kill Trump.   The one is now held in prison by the Florida Police nd they would not allow the FBI nd CIA to get near him - because he would be murdered if their agents can get to him. 

So the ncxt attempt will be before or on 20 January 2025 when Trump is sworne in as President/   The reason is that the US Federal Government are infested by criminals stealing billions from the State and these people are going to end up in jail.   The Reginme - much admired by you - is the most corrupt and incompetent regime ever in the history of the USA.   So when they start court cases against the crooks - you will claim it is reributionn.   

The Chinese have a curse - "May you live in interesting times" -  so you will shout retribution when crooks are being sentenced, mant, many times,                              

"Different countries have different laws. I have no idea why the US lets groups march down the street with Swastika's, doing Hitler salutes and shouting the Jews will not replace us, like what occurred at the unite the right rally. But according to US law they were not doing anything illegal (until violence broke out). Are you going tell me there was no racists in that group?"

Which is why I raised South African law. Here, you would get locked up for that...quickly. 

Let's stick to Trump shall we.

Unless you want me to bring out the strawman that you love so much.

...and the fact that Trump has not met the requirements for any sort of reasonable litigation against him even under the strict racial defamation laws in South Africa. 

You've deduced racism without being able to provide evidence for such. And you've used that to support claims of fascism.

If he says Latvia is full of run-down ghettos it's bad taste, but as soon as they are a different race then its automatically racism. Where he to disparage Russia then nobody would care, but when its Nigeria, is auto-racist. 

Where is any racism that meets any standard, anywhere in the world, for a racial crime, including crimen injuria...anything.

I' ve gotten nothing from you other than how you feel. Can we deal in fact?

"Your moving the goal posts. A person can't be racist unless they have a conviction for it or a jail sentence?"

Of coarse you can and of course you can claim someone is racist all you like, but the proof you put up for Trump being racist won't hold up in any court...illegal in the US or not...it's simple, what you perceive as racism simply isn't...being rude and being racist are not the same things...and Trump's motivation and reasoning for some things he says is not necessarily what you make them out to be...sometimes it's a good thing stepping on a few toes...

Draad

Trump has been involved in many projects in t he USA using people of all races and he was never one accused by either the Unions or any of the workers of being a racist.   Huge numbers of Hispanics, Asians and Blacks have voted for Trump this electin because they were in the past conned by the Democrats and again amogst them were different races as well.    So when Trump is  opposing the open border policy of Biden it had a bearing on all illegal migrants and not only iro Blacks,   

Stav has a mania against any people who do not agree with his assumptions - he never came up with what he believes Trump means when he talks about issues,   So he has a problem with Trump and not with the other countries like Germany who clearly stated no moe illegal migrants in the country - but of course he things that any Conservtive people are racist and hate-filled people.   In other words he believe 100% the shit spread by papers like The Guardian - that distort news to the extent that they only spread lies and has been doing this for decades,    

Example - The Guardian was the main propaganda paper when the Communists ruled in Rssia and the praised them consistently and attack the hated west.   A fter the Communist Regime collapsed,  the new Government in Russia became the hate target of  The Guardian and you would never find of criticism of Communist Regimes throughout the world.   They believe in extreme Socialism and anybody differ n from them they call Fascist and nothing will chnage that, 

.   

Okay so even after your nervous breakdown about me using your rather than you’re …..Anger, posts this not even a day later. Show you have some sense of fair play and call him a slope headed, uneducated buffoon:

Stavanger1

Senior player

3138 posts

Stav

Every last person at a Trump rally could be racist, it doesn't make Trump racist. Obviously, if you are cruising around with a swastika anywhere on your person then you're likely a racist.

But you seem to be somehow trying make that mean that Trump is a racist. 

Perhaps you could go that far if this happened at 5% of Trump's rallies...but FFS, this was a group of people, in a heated time, looking for their 5 minutes of fame. That's what most of these stupid protests since the BLM Covid riots were about. And it was a complete outlier in terms of what his rallies normally are.

You are playing guilt by association, with very low numbers. The vast majority of Trump voters are ordinary people...and now the younger generation because they're tired of being told to feel like shit all the time. 

Okay, was that enough of a deviation for you?

You really are proving exactly why a legal standard must exist for being accused of racism. And it actually raises an interesting legal question. That being, what liability should arise from unproven claims of racism? In the US that's probably not such a big deal, but in South Africa it is. As  I mentioned, you'll be locked up quick-sticks here.

For me, if you're gonna be fine with accusing someone of reviving Hitler, then you simply must at least have an adequate legal argument for racism.

You even go as far as to say that "Words matter." By this standard, a bad speaker can be accused of racism. It's absolutely nonsensical. Of course, words matter within diplomacy, but at the same time, one can be brash without being a racist. Trump has never been accused of eloquence.

It's strange to me that you seem almost allergic to an actual legal test for racism. 

From my position, it looks like you wish to, with no evidence, be able to make a defamatory claim, and then use that claim to propose something far more defamatory, and you don't expect that there should be any repercussions.

The reason I'm not gonna buy your method for arriving at racism is because it is entirely open-ended. There is no standard. It's simply feels, and anybody can "feels" anything.

One would think that in a place like the US, where race laws are less strict, a racist would be comfortable enough to say and do things that would at least meet, or approach, the legal standard here in race-obsessed South Africa. But it really doesn't. Perhaps there's a ChatGPT adventure in there for you...hint hint.

Each one of the examples you provided is a logical fallacy, and then you seem almost surprised that your sniff test isn't taken as gospel.

Nice white privilege, bro 

Moffie, you just don't get it. Why would I pick on Stav for spelling errors? Does he run around the board like you do squealing about punctuation errors, spelling errors and incorrect grammar?

No? Well have a little think about that.

Not that you are remotely qualified to comment on anyone else's grammar or spelling . . . but you do it anyway. I'll pick out your poor language just to expose your ignorance, your hypocrisy and the double standards that you apply.

Spelling and/or typing shouldn't be a big deal on a rugby message board - you seem to be the only one who is so anal about it - but when I see a pompous and conceited old toad who has such laughably poor language skills of his own gloating and sniggering like a 5 year old child over anyone else's mistakes . . . well . . . then I'm "from" (sic) the manor born!

LMAO!

"Yeah I guess, but at least he's miles ahead of Mike and Beeno in that he isn't completely off the spectrum. He does seem to be a little obsessed with you though"

That coming from an idiot who  cannot think for himself and was spectrum resulted from the Goebbels strategy - if you repeat lies often enough peoplle of loer intelligence end up in beleibig te lies.   In other words  he was lied to in the media and ignore facts totally becase his spectum is controlled by the brainwashing  media.   He never produce anything factual in life because facts became ignored totally since it does not tie in what  he iss told to believe.    He cannot believe anything outside of his spectrum that may be right and proven facts  because it does not fit in what  he is told to believe,    

A beautifully simple proof…..who has used (sic) more than any other poster on this Board by a factor of 10? That’s right Peeper. Every one of those (sics) was intended as a gotcha for the poster involved.

The fact that you could criticize anybody else for the tactics you introduced into the debate is laughably hypocritical. And please don’t ask me to dig up all the examples…Chat did that and confirmed, that’s what you do.

Poor old STAVASS getting schooled by Plum, Mike and Mozzie - reminds me of how StavASS got schooled on the subject of climate change where the poor dud crashed and burned in the most humiliating fashion. 

StavAss is a very weak man. He ranks high up on the Servile GIMP rankings.  While other Irish People are rising up and protesting the invasion of Ireland poor StavAss doesn't find it in him to defend Ireland. 

Thankfully Ireland have people with great spirit so there is hope they can r eclaim their country from the open Border Globalists ruling Ireland and begin mass deportations. 

Stav

Every last person at a Trump rally could be racist, it doesn't make Trump racist. Obviously, if you are cruising around with a swastika anywhere on your person then you're likely a racist.

No I am not. I'm simply pointing out a person can be an obvious racist and not face legal consequences for it, which you now seem to have acknowledge.

But you seem to be somehow trying make that mean that Trump is a racist.

No I would take it as supporting evidence that goes along with Trump's long history of being associated with racist incidents, saying racist things (confirmed and alleged) and being associated and supported by known racists. You could dismiss one or two as just coincidence or a slip of the tongue, but by now there is a far too many of these incidents for it to be a coincidence.

Perhaps you could go that far if this happened at 5% of Trump's rallies...but FFS, this was a group of people, in a heated time, looking for their 5 minutes of fame. That's what most of these stupid protests since the BLM Covid riots were about. And it was a complete outlier in terms of what his rallies normally are.

The Unite the Right rally was not a Trump rally. It was the protest organized by Neo-Nazi's/alt-right/white nationalist against the removal of Confederate statues that led to the events in Charlottesville in 2017. It had nothing to do with Trump until after the incident where a person drove a car into a crowd and Trump made his comments that where seen as Trump applying equivalence between Neo-Nazi's and anti Neo-Nazi protesters and saying their was fine people among the neo-nazi protesters.

You are playing guilt by association, with very low numbers. The vast majority of Trump voters are ordinary people...and now the younger generation because they're tired of being told to feel like shit all the time.

Except their not being told to feel like shit, that's a lie being told by the right wing media, that the left is telling to feel like shit and they need to be outraged all the time by shit that either doesn't exist or doesn't affect them in anyway. This is why you hear so much hot air coming out of the right wing about say trans women competing in women's sports. An issue that effects an extremely small amount of competitions in sports that f**k all they people complain actually watch or care about. Ditto with the removal of confederate statues/memorials, oh no the right wing moan's the woke lefties are destroying out heritage and it should be up to the state and people local to the area where the monuments are to decide whether those moments should be taken down or not...wait whats that you say, it is the local people who decide that...well shiiiitttt.

You even go as far as to say that "Words matter." By this standard, a bad speaker can be accused of racism. It's absolutely nonsensical. Of course, words matter within diplomacy, but at the same time, one can be brash without being a racist.

No there is a difference between between a bad speaker that accidentally says something racist in a one off capacity as opposed to Trump who has a laundry list of such occurrences.

Trump has never been accused of eloquence.

Understatement of the century.

From my position, it looks like you wish to, with no evidence, be able to make a defamatory claim, and then use that claim to propose something far more defamatory, and you don't expect that there should be any repercussions.

Well that's the thing I have provided evidence.

The reason I'm not gonna buy your method for arriving at racism is because it is entirely open-ended. There is no standard. It's simply feels, and anybody can "feels" anything.

We can do this dance for ever, you simply "feels" that the incidents I cited are not racist.

Nice white privilege, bro 

Ughh more culture war "feels" terminology.

Once again, we find ourselves bogged down in “culture war” terminology based entirely on subjective feelings rather than objective facts.

I was obviously joking about white privilege haha.

Still, accusing someone of racism without evidence that could hold up in a court of law is deeply unethical. It’s not just a matter of fairness; it undermines the principle of innocent until proven guilty—a cornerstone of justice.

You keep insisting you’ve provided “evidence.” But merely believing that what you’ve presented qualifies as evidence doesn’t make it so. Evidence isn’t determined by personal conviction; it’s determined by standards of proof that can withstand scrutiny.

Your argument boils down to this: “You perceive it as non-racism, but actually it is.” And that’s precisely why I’m asking for evidence that a court would accept—evidence that could lead to a legitimate finding of racial discrimination. Without that, what you’re presenting is not evidence; it’s opinion.

This isn’t about me wanting to defend Trump or refusing to believe he’s made racist statements. It’s about adhering to the legal and ethical requirement for evidence before labeling someone as a racist. Nothing he’s done, as far as I’ve seen, meets the legal threshold for racism or racial discrimination. Shouldn’t we all agree that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty? Or have we abandoned that principle in favor of accusations based on perception?

Your assumption rests entirely on personal bias, while mine is grounded in the law and the absence of credible, legally sound evidence. Which do you think is more reasonable?

It’s also worth pointing out: just as someone can exhibit racism without being convicted of a crime, it’s equally possible that someone simply isn’t racist at all. The fact that this possibility is rarely entertained by people eager to level accusations speaks volumes.

So let’s be clear: what you’re doing is inferring racism because it serves a narrative or supports a specific claim—like the “Nazi” accusations. But inference isn’t evidence. The standards of proof in a legal system, however imperfect, are designed to ensure fairness and protect against baseless accusations.

You have provided zero evidence that meets any reasonable standard for proving racism, let alone one that a court would accept. If you genuinely believe your claim, it should be simple: produce one piece of credible evidence—something that meets the requirements for racial discrimination in any court. Until then, this is nothing more than trial by public opinion, and that’s not justice. It’s a smear tactic.

As I told you before, you are assumption stacking. Unless your are setting out accepting that all you wish to do is speculate about possible outcomes, perhaps as a thought experiment, then what you're doing is so obviously intellectually dangerous.

I could probably find numerous quotes from people of colour that have dealt with Trump in the past and who would attest to how well he treated them. And then you would simply counter by saying...Just because that black guy says Trump isn't a racist, doesn't mean that Trump is not racist. Round and round we'll go.

So I hope that you are slowly starting to understand why actual evidence is so important.

I'm guessing not.