FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / MIKES GRIPES /  'Not an accident': Target of death threats points to way GOP can end Trump retribution vow

'Not an accident': Target of death threats points to way GOP can end Trump retribution vow

Started by Denny124 REPLIES1,625 VIEWS· 20 Dec 2024, 22:51
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
31 Dec 2024, 21:40
#121
31 Dec 2024, 21:40#121

"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,    

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
31 Dec 2024, 21:59
#122
31 Dec 2024, 21:59#122

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.

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
01 Jan 2025, 13:24
#123
01 Jan 2025, 13:24#123

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. 

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
01 Jan 2025, 19:17
#124
01 Jan 2025, 19:17#124

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.

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
02 Jan 2025, 18:33
#125
02 Jan 2025, 18:33#125
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.
— END OF THREAD —

More from Mikes Gripes