The Donald Trump thread

[Wales-Bales]

It's great that you're now a sticker for clarity and transparency before accepting something. That wasn't the case for the Clinton Enterprise's decades-long stranglehold on politics, media and the legal world, or North Korea being China's puppet, or that people on the left want to make paedophilia acceptable, or the same people on the left pushing an open borders agenda by somehow putting words into the mouth of Trump's political adviser, or that YouTube and Twitter are trying to control the minds of the majority (despite their unmoderated user comments showing a massive spectrum of opinion) - and that's just the last few pages of this thread. All of a sudden making inferences is not good enough...

To answer your questions.

Trump has never been shy about being speaking clearly about subjects. This time he made a clear refusal to specifically condemn the white supremacists and refused to say he didn't want their support. Plenty of other senators, governors, etc have clearly condemned them. Trump hasn't. If you're not condemning this, you're condoning it.

Are they paid actors? I don't know them personally so I cannot say. But their identities are being made known over social media and we will no doubt find out soon enough. But if you have spent time in the Deep South or spoken to anyone from there about attitudes, you'd know there's no need to pay people to act like this.

I am just trying to form an unbiased opinion, and the only information I have so far is coming from you. Do you have an outline of the policing strategy that was in play yesterday? Were both groups policed sufficiently and fairly?

Regarding Clinton, I never really paid much attention to her before. I only became aware of the progressive agenda after researching Brexit, and Soros's name kept popping up in all kinds of globalist subterfuge, which all seemed to be connected to the Democrats in some way.

[lardy]

I am just trying to form an unbiased opinion, and the only information I have so far is coming from you. Do you have an outline of the policing strategy that was in play yesterday? Were both groups policed sufficiently and fairly?

Regarding Clinton, I never really paid much attention to her before. I only became aware of the progressive agenda after researching Brexit, and Soros's name kept popping up in all kinds of globalist subterfuge, which all seemed to be connected to the Democrats in some way.

"The only information I have so far is coming from you"

It's leading global news mate.

[Wales-Bales]

"The only information I have so far is coming from you"

It's leading global news mate.

The MSM is a secondary source of news for me, as they are no doubt at the forefront of pushing the narrative that you succinctly repeated above, Trump is a Nazi, etc. We all know the modus operandi by now as it has been used countless times already.

[lardy]

The MSM is a secondary source of news for me, as they are no doubt at the forefront of pushing the narrative that you succinctly repeated above, Trump is a Nazi, etc. We all know the modus operandi by now as it has been used countless times already.

You can't hide behind this every time, mate, it's not a get out of jail free card to use when the conversation is going badly. This is no secondary source, it's Trump's own words.

Have I called Trump a Nazi? No.

The facts are that when a vehicle was driven into innocent people in another country (London) Trump was on the attack in no time. When it happened in his own country, but this time by white supremacists, his response was very muted.

In the words of one senator (a democrat if you want to dismiss it) "it's not too much to ask to have a president who explicitly condemns nazis"

[Wales-Bales]

You can't hide behind this every time, mate, it's not a get out of jail free card to use when the conversation is going badly. This is no secondary source, it's Trump's own words.

Have I called Trump a Nazi? No.

The facts are that when a vehicle was driven into innocent people in another country (London) Trump was on the attack in no time. When it happened in his own country, but this time by white supremacists, his response was very muted.

In the words of one senator (a democrat if you want to dismiss it) "it's not too much to ask to have a president who explicitly condemns nazis"

I see the new FBI director and the DOJ have started a federal enquiry into the events in Charlottesville, so hopefully all the stories will match up and they will get to the bottom of what happened.

All I know is that a permit was issued for the initial protest, and then the Antifa mob showed up without permission, with most of them being bussed in from out of town.

[surge]

You can't hide behind this every time, mate, it's not a get out of jail free card to use when the conversation is going badly. This is no secondary source, it's Trump's own words.

Have I called Trump a Nazi? No.

The facts are that when a vehicle was driven into innocent people in another country (London) Trump was on the attack in no time. When it happened in his own country, but this time by white supremacists, his response was very muted.

In the words of one senator (a democrat if you want to dismiss it) "it's not too much to ask to have a president who explicitly condemns nazis"

Trump appeared as an apologist when in all other occasions he has been happy to speak in the strongest possible terms - true. However, the violent outbreak seems to have not been just one group attacking the other (until the car attack) and it's not wrong to condemn violence on both sides, even if one side's viewpoint is very hard to listen to in 2017. Obama would not have spoke out against just the alt-right which is what I feel some in the media wanted Trump to do.

Trump, however, is a moron who seems to be pushing us all into a horrific war with his loose and aggressive twitter response.

[Wales-Bales]

Trump appeared as an apologist when in all other occasions he has been happy to speak in the strongest possible terms - true. However, the violent outbreak seems to have not been just one group attacking the other (until the car attack) and it's not wrong to condemn violence on both sides, even if one side's viewpoint is very hard to listen to in 2017. Obama would not have spoke out against just the alt-right which is what I feel some in the media wanted Trump to do.

Trump, however, is a moron who seems to be pushing us all into a horrific war with his loose and aggressive twitter response.

Yes, it's not as clearcut as lardy is making it out to be, he's just reiterating the MSM narrative without adding anything new. I'll be waiting for a proper investigation to take place before I pass any comment on what happened.

[lardy]

Trump appeared as an apologist when in all other occasions he has been happy to speak in the strongest possible terms - true. However, the violent outbreak seems to have not been just one group attacking the other (until the car attack) and it's not wrong to condemn violence on both sides, even if one side's viewpoint is very hard to listen to in 2017. Obama would not have spoke out against just the alt-right which is what I feel some in the media wanted Trump to do.

Trump, however, is a moron who seems to be pushing us all into a horrific war with his loose and aggressive twitter response.

I haven't said that Trump was wrong to say all violence, no matter from who, was wrong. You're coming from the same place as me from what I can tell - I also doubt that Obama would only have spoken against the 'alt-right', but I'm sure he (and every president from at least FDR onwards) would have taken a stronger line than Trump. When you consider that he has taken people with a white supremacist history close into his team, he's put himself in a very sticky situation when it comes to events like this. Actions and words are stacked against him.

[Wales-Bales]

I haven't said that Trump was wrong to say all violence, no matter from who, was wrong. You're coming from the same place as me from what I can tell - I also doubt that Obama would only have spoken against the 'alt-right', but I'm sure he (and every president from at least FDR onwards) would have taken a stronger line than Trump. When you consider that he has taken people with a white supremacist history close into his team, he's put himself in a very sticky situation when it comes to events like this. Actions and words are stacked against him.