"The Assassination Of Donald Trump"

But, but, Drumpf is the one inciting violence!
 
Strong arguments from a weak source. I look forward to the SDleft's response.
 
Space said:
Don't shoot the messenger.
Click to expand...
I agree. But still look forward to their response. Can't wait to see if this is going look like this:
traditional-wwf-wwe-30-man-royal-rumble-match.jpg

or this:
giphy.gif
 
Why have we imported a virulent anti-American Briton, that hack John Oliver, to insult us from our televisions when instead we could have had brought in an intelligent, no-nonsense fellow like the one who made this video?
 
I like this vid too, may as well post it here as well:

 
Oh shit, that was from Infowars?! Lol! Well, even a broken clock is right twice a day. At least they didn't inject anything about reptilian Bilderberger attendee Jews.

Very interesting to see how supporting Trump is becoming a global movement against the left and its thuggery. Did not expect a Yorkshireman* to be narrating a pro Trump video.

*I think that's some sort of Yorkshire accent, though I admit I'm no expert.
 
Typical infowars approach.
Completely one sided on protester violence versus trump supporter violence (no mention of the two prosecuted cases).
Failing to acknowledge the things Trump has said to provoke such hatred, and the things he said encouraging violence between his supporters and the protesters (aside from the one "punch aggitators in the face" line). He's not the most disliked candidate by a long shot just because of unfavourable press.
Completely ignoring the fact that being provocative is the way Trump has gotten so much media attention. Criticising the very media attention which has almost entirely formed the basis of his campaign.
Bringing up the secret service detail as if that's unusual for a candidate.
If you watch the fox interview in context, it's clear the Breitbart reporter wasn't talking just about getting grabbed as the "worst thing aside from her Father's death", but the attention she'd gotten, the work drama etc.
Essentially they are conflating random joking tweets, hecklers and stage rushes with assassination attempts.

Oh... and infowars criticising someone for cooking up a "major conspiracy"? Hah!

Infowars has a long history of claims about assassination. None of which have ever had any merit.
 
Last edited:
Ruprecht said:
Typical infowars approach.
Completely one sided on protester violence versus trump supporter violence (no mention of the two prosecuted cases).
Failing to acknowledge the things Trump has said to provoke such hatred, and the things he said encouraging violence between his supporters and the protesters (aside from the one "punch aggitators in the face" line). He's not the most disliked candidate by a long shot just because of unfavourable press.
Completely ignoring the fact that being provocative is the way Trump has gotten so much media attention. Criticising the very media attention which has almost entirely formed the basis of his campaign.
Bringing up the secret service detail as if that's unusual for a candidate.
If you watch the fox interview in context, it's clear the Breitbart reporter wasn't talking just about getting grabbed as the "worst thing aside from her Father's death", but the attention she'd gotten, the work drama etc.
Essentially they are conflating random joking tweets, hecklers and stage rushes with assassination attempts.

Oh... and infowars criticising someone for cooking up a "major conspiracy"? Hah!

Infowars has a long history of claims about assassination. None of which have ever had any merit.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.

The speaker posted several tweets from average people speaking about assassinating Trump openly from 1 day - Mar. 13th/16.

And who brought the drama, press to that woman protestor's life?! Ridiculous placement of blame, Ruprecht.

I live in the real world. In the real world the negative media Trump gets is easily 100 to 1.

And you, tpically attacking/discrediting a source that you don't agree with. At least you're consistent.

Further, why do you comment so much on Tump from the most Muslim-populate area of the world (SE Asia)? Does his illegal alien stance throw a crimp in your retirement plans?
 
Last edited:
Rex Kwon Do said:
Why have we imported a virulent anti-American Briton, that hack John Oliver, to insult us from our televisions when instead we could have had brought in an intelligent, no-nonsense fellow like the one who made this video?
Click to expand...
John Oliver is just the cockney accented attack poodle of the Democratic party at this point. He's not even 1/10th as funny as Stephen Colbert.
 
What do you expect from infowars?
 
In The Name Of said:
Typical ignorant regressive response.

Ignore the content, parrot other's responses discrediting the source.
Click to expand...
No need to be rude bro. I was hoping we could be friends.
 
Ruprecht said:
Typical infowars approach.
Completely one sided on protester violence versus trump supporter violence (no mention of the two prosecuted cases).
Failing to acknowledge the things Trump has said to provoke such hatred, and the things he said encouraging violence between his supporters and the protesters (aside from the one "punch aggitators in the face" line). He's not the most disliked candidate by a long shot just because of unfavourable press.
Completely ignoring the fact that being provocative is the way Trump has gotten so much media attention. Criticising the very media attention which has almost entirely formed the basis of his campaign.
Bringing up the secret service detail as if that's unusual for a candidate.
If you watch the fox interview in context, it's clear the Breitbart reporter wasn't talking just about getting grabbed as the "worst thing aside from her Father's death", but the attention she'd gotten, the work drama etc.
Essentially they are conflating random joking tweets, hecklers and stage rushes with assassination attempts.

Oh... and infowars criticising someone for cooking up a "major conspiracy"? Hah!

Infowars has a long history of claims about assassination. None of which have ever had any merit.
Click to expand...

I can scarcely believe that the crazy bastards at infowars could put out bullshit capable of seducing any of the intelligent, high-minded, thoughtful people on Sherdog. This entire thread must be a false flag.
 
JosephDredd said:
I can scarcely believe that the crazy bastards at infowars could put out bullshit capable of seducing any of the intelligent, high-minded, thoughtful people on Sherdog. This entire thread must be a false flag.
Click to expand...
Stop being so regressive and ignorant! You oppressive parrot!
 
People like Trump aren't allowed to be victims.

Soon someone will come in and say "Oh boohoo! Someone is attacking and saying mean things about poor little Trump. He had it coming."
 
Lets be honest here, any politician could be assassinated but it is not likely. I wouldn't be surprised if he was nor surprised if he wasn't but the same could happen to any of them. I am sure it will happen to some politician somewhere and I bet in every case someone predicted it. How many predictions have there been and it didn't happen? I thought people were saying Obama would be assassinated, hasn't happened yet. Sure there is a real risk and that if why the secret service exists but it's not likely.
 
In The Name Of said:
Hmmm.

The speaker posted several tweets from average people speaking about assassinating Trump openly from 1 day - Mar. 13th/16.
Click to expand...

...and?

And who brought the drama, press to that woman protestor's life?! Ridiculous placement of blame, Ruprecht.
Click to expand...
I didn't place any blame, I was referring to their dishonestly making it seem like she was saying the grab itself was the worst thing that had happened to her outside her father's death.

I live in the real world. In the real world the negative media Trump gets is easily 100 to 1.
Click to expand...
...and? He's deliberately courting it. It's how he gets coverage.

And you, tpically attacking/discrediting a source that you don't agree with. At least you're consistent.
Click to expand...
No, I don't discredit sources simply because I disagree with them. I point out people posting shit sources, without fact checking them or establishing bias. You on the other hand will post something from a shit source, simply because you agree with it. Guess which of those actions actually displays bias?

Further, why do you comment so much on Tump from the most Muslim-populate area of the world (SE Asia)? Does his illegal alien stance throw a crimp in your retirement plans?
Click to expand...

Why does anyone comment on Trump? He's getting a lot of attention, and may in fact have a shot at being president. Even if Trump could actually do the ridiculous stuff he's spouted on illegal immigration, it's unlikely to effect me. On the other hand, if he actually put a 45% tariff on Chinese goods entering the US, that'd screw most people.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,017
Messages
55,461,265
Members
174,787
Latest member
Santos FC 1912

Share this page

Back
Top