Elections Second Assassination Attempt of Trump at his Florida golf course

[Bullitt68]

@Bullitt68
I won’t take take time to multi-quote everything from your post, but ill summarize.

—Yeah, we talked about the awesomeness of Fedor

—People think I come off as self-righteous too, or even arrogant. Sometimes I might do it rile someone a bit lol, but it sounds like we have the same sort of thing going on. I’m not a professor, but I’ve followed politics and studied history pretty closely since I was a kid. After 35+ years of that, I come off as self-assured because I know where I stand on all these things, and I get it can be off-putting.

—When you said I reminded you why you never post in here, I did sincerely feel bad. I’d never want to make anyone feel regretful of posting or unwelcome in any sub forum. I really am sorry about that.

But yeah, I think those of us that are WR regulars forget how it comes off. It is a bit like stepping in the ring, and when you hit Post Reply, the bell has rung. Someone might lob a jab at you, or they might just come out with haymakers, you never know
I’ve been on both sides of it.

Anyway, no hard feelings man, I don’t really take any of this stuff personally. Once the “fight” is over, it’s over.
Cheers.

I guess I can't fault a Fedor fan for coming out at the bell looking for instant annihilation

Where did I say that?

Here:

The issue is that you seem to be claiming that anyone calling attention to Trump's unique disdain for our democratic norms and institutions as evidenced by the Jan 6th plot is engaging in hyperbole and I disagree strongly with that. If that's not what you're claiming and you don't see any issue with singling out Trump here then we don't disagree but that you're equivocating between his attempted coup and Clinton's comments tells me that's not the case.

It seemed like we were maybe approaching a rapprochement, which I still think is - or should be - possible.

Evaluating Trump's rhetoric in isolation from the concrete actions he took to overturn the election strikes me as silly.

Ok.

Great you agree with that but you just don't think we should talk about it I guess?

I'm done repeating myself. If this is all that you're able to glean from what I've said, then that can be the last word.

Even if we keep it specific to the rhetoric Trump was fairly unique. Clinton claimed that there was Russian meddling in the election but she never made legally defamatory statements that specific voting machines were submitting fraudulent votes nor did she ever call out election workers by name and put the blame on them.

Trump did though, he claimed that Dominion voting machines were submitting votes cast for him as Biden votes and claimed that Ruby Freeman, an election worker in Georgia, was complicit in the fraud by bringing in suitcases of fraudulent votes and recounting Biden votes. Both of those claims ended up leading to defamation cases, one against FOX news by Dominion which was settled out of court and one successful litigated against Rudy Giuliani by Ruby Freeman and her daughter.

So in that sense Trump's rhetoric is fairly unique in that he amplified defamatory, statements against specific targets which generated a harassment campaign against them and ultimately culminated in successful defamation suits. Did Clinton make such claims? Has she or anyone else ever been successfully sued or settled out of court for defamation for repeating her claims of Russian meddling? I could be wrong but as far as I know the answer is no and its because Clinton was far less irresponsible with her rhetoric than Trump was.

I never said that what Clinton said or did was either the same as or worse than what Trump did or said. I said that Trump's rhetoric is not unique. Mine is a very simple and factually correct point. Anything beyond that is beyond that. This is what I meant when I told you that you were strawmanning me. Perhaps you don't know what a strawman is, but it's what you're doing.

So, we've learned that you don't have the best reading comprehension and that you're not very good at arguing points. Is it coming into focus why I was not keen to converse with you, and why I'm no keener now? Look at how BFoe and I have clarified our points and intentions. Can you do that? Do you have the same maturity of mind and security of ego? If not, then I don't plan to engage you any further, and you shouldn't plan to get responses from me if you continue to quote me.

 

[HOLA]

I know Giuliani and Eastman have been disbarred but who else?

Off the top of my head:

Michael Cohen: Part of what led to him going to prison and losing his ability to practice law was lying to congress about Trump Tower Moscow. While Trump was running for POTUS he was still actively working with a hostile foreign power in Russia to get this deal done. Cohen has admitted he lied about it.

Sydney Powell: The one who famously promised to "release the Kraken." Her lawyers actually defended her by saying "no reasonable person would believe the things she said" (we apparently have a lot of unreasonable people on Sherdog). She pled guilty and received like 6 years probation, only because she agreed to turn rat and testify against other defendants.

Lin Wood: He was actually forced to undergo psychiatric evaluations because of how crazy he was. He surrendered his law license and retired because he was facing disbarment.

Jenna Ellis: Famous for getting farted on by Giuliani at one of the hearings. She started a Go Fund Me, took hundreds of thousands of $ from Trump supporters, promising to fight, then she pled guilty, turned rat to avoid prison, and had her law license suspended.

 

[Barteh]

Off the top of my head:

Michael Cohen: Part of what led to him going to prison and losing his ability to practice law was lying to congress about Trump Tower Moscow. While Trump was running for POTUS he was still actively working with a hostile foreign power in Russia to get this deal done. Cohen has admitted he lied about it.

Sydney Powell: (the one who famously promised to "release the Kraken." Her lawyers actually defended her by saying "no reasonable person would believe the things she said" (we apparently have a lot of unreasonable people on Sherdog). She pled guilty and received like 6 years probation, only because she agreed to turn rat and testify against other defendants.

Lin Wood: He was actually forced to undergo psychiatric evaluations because of how crazy he was. He surrendered his law license and retired because he was facing disbarment.

Jenna Ellis: Famous for getting farted on by Giuliani at one of the hearings. She started a Go Fund Me, took hundreds of thousands of $ from Trump supporters, promising to fight, then she pled guilty, turned rat to avoid prison, and had her law license suspended.

Making a strong case for the weaponization of the justice system.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Here:

Right, the full sentence is:

If that's not what you're claiming and you don't see any issue with singling out Trump here then we don't disagree but that you're equivocating between his attempted coup and Clinton's comments tells me that's not the case.

So I asked it as a clarifying question and if anything your posts afterwards suggest you don't agree.

It seemed like we were maybe approaching a rapprochement, which I still think is - or should be - possible.

I'm not against that but you're quite uncharitable to me so I don't think its likely and I'm skeptical you're interested in anything of the sort.

I'm done repeating myself. If this is all that you're able to glean from what I've said, then that can be the last word.

The issue is how do you distinguish between what is sober, grounded critique and what isn't. Where is the line? You don't seem to disagree that Trump's attempted coup was bad but just pointing that out comes off as "TDS" to many people. How should one approach those folks?

I never said that what Clinton said or did was either the same as or worse than what Trump did or said. I said that Trump's rhetoric is not unique. Mine is a very simple and factually correct point. Anything beyond that is beyond that. This is what I meant when I told you that you were strawmanning me. Perhaps you don't know what a strawman is, but it's what you're doing.

This is you trying to win an argument on a minor technical point while missing the forest for the trees. The distinction I made there is what makes Trump's claims unique, that they're defamatory and that they were part of a concerted effort to overturn the election

You don't even contest that but instead try to retreat to this semantic argument which is telling. If you agree that Trump's rhetoric was worse than what Clinton said and more importantly that it was part of an overarching campaign to overturn the election which is significantly worse than anything attempted by a candidate in recent American history then we don't disagree. If you disagree with some part of that argument let's hash it out.

So, we've learned that you don't have the best reading comprehension and that you're not very good at arguing points. Is it coming into focus why I was not keen to converse with you, and why I'm no keener now? Look at how BFoe and I have clarified our points and intentions. Can you do that? Do you have the same maturity of mind and security of ego? If not, then I don't plan to engage you any further, and you shouldn't plan to get responses from me if you continue to quote me.

I have clarified my points multiple times and in response you resort to semantics. My intention is to push back against the idea that singling out Trump as a uniquely unfit candidate is wrong and rhetorically ineffective. I think its both true and should figure as a core part of the campaign against him.

To use your own argument against you, why doesn't BFoe liking my posts give you any pause as to whether or not I'm making a fair case here? You respect his take right?

 

[kflo]

Making a strong case for the weaponization of the justice system.

lol

 

[HOLA]

Oh yeah @Islam Imamate, there's also Kenneth Chesebro, AKA Cheese Bro, who is/was a lawyer. How could I forget him? I'm not sure if he was disbarred but his firm fired him.

On August 14, 2023, Chesebro was indicted along with eighteen others in the Georgia election racketeering prosecution.[5] On October 20, he pleaded guilty to one felony count of conspiracy to commit filing false documents.[6] As part of his plea bargain, Chesebro accepted five years of probation, $5,000 in restitution, 100 hours of community service, and agreed to testify against Donald Trump and the remaining defendants.[7]

 

[ChosenOne]

where's that ranking, I am sure you got objective evidence to back that up .

JD Vance is now the least popular VP candidate in modern history – even below Sarah Palin​

Polling averages show that JD Vance has a -9 net popularity rating, worse than Sarah Palin’s low in 2008

Yea sitcom dad that is easy to make fun of and laugh at, like Allen in the hangover. But should not have any kind of power

Trump is easy to make fun of. Vance is easy to make fun of. And neither of them are likeable, even a little bit, unless you are racist or xenophobic. And neither should have any level of power.
So there is that.
​

 

[fingercuffs]

JD Vance is now the least popular VP candidate in modern history – even below Sarah Palin​

Polling averages show that JD Vance has a -9 net popularity rating, worse than Sarah Palin’s low in 2008​

​

​

Trump is easy to make fun of. Vance is easy to make fun of. And neither of them are likeable, even a little bit, unless you are racist or xenophobic. And neither should have any level of power.​

So there is that.​

​

Some of his sycophant fans keep arguing the toss about women hating him, lol.

 

[HOLA]

JD Vance is now the least popular VP candidate in modern history – even below Sarah Palin​

Polling averages show that JD Vance has a -9 net popularity rating, worse than Sarah Palin’s low in 2008​

​

​

Trump is easy to make fun of. Vance is easy to make fun of. And neither of them are likeable, even a little bit, unless you are racist or xenophobic. And neither should have any level of power.​

So there is that.​

​

He's going to be thrown under the bus so hard when Trump loses. I'm not even speaking metaphorically. They tried to hang Mike Pence, after all, so pushing JD into traffic isn't that far-fetched.

 

[Andy Capp]

I remember when that guy was much more rational of a poster.

I may have that effect on people

 

[ChosenOne]

...
If I'm going to be put in some alt-right MAGA box because I don't think that his words or actions on January 6th should be viewed as akin to Spartacus leading an attack on Rome, fine. I absolutely think that his words were stupid and irresponsible, but I wouldn't elevate them to the level of a crime. In much the same way, I think that a lot of anti-Trumpers have said and are continuing to say stupid and irresponsible things, not least the abundance of comments about wishing he'd actually be assassinated (while at the same time wondering why anyone would even suggest that this might have something to do with people trying to assassinate him), but I wouldn't elevate those to the level of a crime either. We need to keep the transitive property in mind, even when it comes to our cherished political beliefs. To keep beating this drum, it goes both ways: People on the left can't lose their shit over Trump's words on January 6th and then act like words have no consequences and that the supercharged anti-Trump rhetoric has nothing whatsoever to do with the current climate just like people on the right can't lose their shit over anti-Trump rhetoric and then pretend like Trump's words had nothing whatsoever to do with what happened on January 6th.
...

There are a number of States, as well a Federal investigation now starting to charge Trump and those in his campaign with a strategic plan to upset the electoral count, as part of a bigger plan to force the election to the HOuse in a Contingent election, in which the republicans win, if they all vote together.

Trump may escape these cases thanks to the SC giving him wide immunity, but the others will not.,

If/When they are all found guilty of these actions, as the evidence is immense thus far, that we have had glimpses of, will you say you were duped prior?

 

[ChosenOne]

Here we go some more... Trump is a threat to Democracy... straight from the White House.



That is the official Democrat Party line. WTF.

Trump campaigns on the promise of being a threat to democracy.

So what is the beef with saying it?

 

[Barteh]

JD Vance is now the least popular VP candidate in modern history – even below Sarah Palin​

Polling averages show that JD Vance has a -9 net popularity rating, worse than Sarah Palin’s low in 2008​

​

​

Trump is easy to make fun of. Vance is easy to make fun of. And neither of them are likeable, even a little bit, unless you are racist or xenophobic. And neither should have any level of power.​

So there is that.​

​

Nobody takes you serious with your dumb TDS buzzwords like racist and xenophobic.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

He's going to be thrown under the bus so hard when Trump loses. I'm not even speaking metaphorically. They tried to hang Mike Pence, after all, so pushing JD into traffic isn't that far-fetched.

correction: he's going to be thrown under the couch so hard when trump loses.

 

[Whippy McGee]

Cool story, are you one of the people who posted Biden tied up in the back of the truck painted on the back of people's tailgates, something I have seen in person since it's apparently hilarious and sold online? It's ok though because they also made a trump one... and a Kamala one.)

I'm assuming that is just protected 1st amendment speech unlike anything the celebrities did, was a direct incitement to violence.

No... I am not one of those people. I just provided you a long list of exact quotes and actions of Democrats and violence and this is all you got?

 

[Whippy McGee]

Trump campaigns on the promise of being a threat to democracy.

So what is the beef with saying it?

No he doesn't. You're either wildly out of context or just making shit up. You're like the clowns quoting him saying he wants to be a dictator. Have you read or listened to the full quote? Or are you just cherry picking a sentence?

 

[ChosenOne]

Ok. I explained myself and you disagree---even though in one of your earlier posts you said that we don't disagree, which I can't imagine is the case with how often and how intensely you seem to want to disagree with me, but I'd certainly like for it to be the case.

What if anything remains for me to address?



It's not unique, and this isn't a point on which we can just agree to disagree. On this point, you're just plain wrong. That's why I provided a link to all the other contested elections in American political history, many of which had their own shenanigans. Here it is again for you to consult:

Contested United States presidential elections - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now, if you want to counter my point with a charge of pedantry, that the semantics of "contesting" and "overturning" and what have you is irrelevant to the question of whether what specifically Trump did was right or wrong, legal or illegal, good for the country or bad for the country, I'm already on record saying that his actions were Nixon-esque and absolutely wrong/illegal/bad for the country. Once again, it'd appear that we're in agreement, yet you're so intent on combating me...which, I might add, proves my point about anti-Trumpers being so fanatical as to alienate those who would otherwise be allies, which is a problem of rhetoric, which was my original point to which you took such intense umbrage.

What if anything remains for me to address?



As I've said many times, and will say here for the last time: I took issue with political rhetoric, and so everything that I said was in reference to rhetoric. You brought up all the rest, which was not what I was concerned with and was not what I cared to talk about, but even so I'm on the record in here calling Trump stupid and his actions immoral at best and criminal at worst. I'll note that you've gone from "indeed unique" to "fairly unique," which I'm going to interpret as a good sign, but you tell me where we stand.



I never did so point to her nor am I so pointing to her now. What if anything remains for me to address?

trying to equate 'contesting' with 'over throwing' is very simplistic to the point of being dumb. Sorry, it just is.

The equivalency does not exist.

That is like saying because people disagree in debate it is the same thing as disagreeing by trying to assault someone. What Trump attempted to do,as the Commander in Chief, is one of the highest offenses conceived by the founders and NO, nothing else done by other POTUS prior, in recent history or even a much wider lens does NOT equate.

 

[HOLA]

There are a number of States, as well a Federal investigation now starting to charge Trump and those in his campaign with a strategic plan to upset the electoral count, as part of a bigger plan to force the election to the HOuse in a Contingent election, in which the republicans win, if they all vote together.

Trump may escape these cases thanks to the SC giving him wide immunity, but the others will not.,

If/When they are all found guilty of these actions, as the evidence is immense thus far, that we have had glimpses of, will you say you were duped prior?

Many have already pled guilty. Besides for the ones out of this group of freaks:

84 of the fake electors have been charged (as of a few weeks ago, it might be more now). Some have pled guilty, been given immunity deals in order to testify etc, etc.

 

[HOLA]

correction: he's going to be thrown under the couch so hard when trump loses.

 

[ChosenOne]

Nobody takes you serious with your dumb TDS buzzwords like racist and xenophobic.

he says as Trump screams about the evil Haitians recruited to work in Springfield starting in 2017, when Trump was POTUS.

The Brown Menace. A continuing tale by Donald Trump.

2016 GE - MExicans are brown people and rapist and are coming for you. Vote Trump to save you .

2018 MT - Caravans of brown people are coming for you. Vote for us and we will save you.

2020 GE - Black and brown people like ANTIFA and who are like Corey Booker will move into your suburbs. Vote for us and we will stop them

2024 GE - Black and brown people at the border, black and brown people in Springfield. Vote for us and we will stop them.