Donald Trump 2018

[bad_teammate 13351]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

The one that initiates physical force.

It's really frustrating when people say shit they don't believe just to make an argument.

If I walk up to you and your young daughter and say I can't wait for you to turn the other way so I can grab her and rape her and you punch me in the face, are you the aggressor? Answer honestly. Don't just try to argue with me, answer honestly.

The actual truth is that fighting words are real and exist. And you know that.

The problem here is that the fighting words weren't words that threaten you, so you fail to recognize them as fighting words.

[Tuco 5088]

Actually fighting words can be assault.  Wearing a MAGA hat isn't.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33973]

If the witness is to be believed and the boys were talking hate speech, is that provocation? Appears at least two witnesses heard them talking shit since apparently someone told them to stop.

I just don't think there is any grey area here. If you say someone and their race should be eradicated you probably deserve whatever is coming to you.

Either way I doubt it was just a hat that started all of this

[6th Street 6609]

Scott Pruitt out at EPA 

[4th&Five 41729]

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33973]

haha

[Lurch 5942]

[Longhorn_Fan68 33973]

https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/1014958387971309568

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[bad_teammate 13351]

24 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Actually fighting words can be assault.  Wearing a MAGA hat isn't.

According to whom?

What is the purpose of wearing a MAGA hat in a minority-heavy area? What is the message? Why are white teenagers out at 2 AM in a minority area with MAGA shit on?

Just because it's not a threat to you doesn't mean it's not a threat.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

Adoptions 

[achooloco 1086]

42 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's really frustrating when people say shit they don't believe just to make an argument.

If I walk up to you and your young daughter and say I can't wait for you to turn the other way so I can grab her and rape her and you punch me in the face, are you the aggressor? Answer honestly. Don't just try to argue with me, answer honestly.

The actual truth is that fighting words are real and exist. And you know that.

The problem here is that the fighting words weren't words that threaten you, so you fail to recognize them as fighting words.

Your first two sentences are philosophically incongruous. You do realize that the threat of violence is considered assault in many jurisdictions, right? Saying that to someone’s face will get you prosecuted, so your example doesn’t fit. Fighting words are real, but your example is of prosecutable offense, not fighting words per se.

and just because someone is offended by maga/political thought doesn’t give them the right to commit battery or threaten to assault someone else. That’s some safe space bullshit. 

[Chad Fuck 17915]

I can't believe that Kelly is not losing his goddam mind that Trump - who is under suspicion for having colluded with the Russians - is set to have an un-chaparoned date with Head Ruskie of all Ruskies.  

Why does he need to meet alone with any head of state, let alone the head of state of our most obvious adversary?

How is this not a bigger deal?

[DixonHur 11725]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I really can’t overstate how dangerous it is that Trump is meeting with Putin 1 on 1 without any witnesses while under criminal investigation for working with Putin to get elected.

I’m sure he will be working in our best interests.

I'll assume 1 on 1 meetings have happened in the past, but how are they legal?  Doesn't the public have a right to know what's being discussed?  Even if it's 20-30 years from now in the official records of the presidency?  Seems odd to me.

[achooloco 1086]

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

According to whom?

What is the purpose of wearing a MAGA hat in a minority-heavy area? What is the message? Why are white teenagers out at 2 AM in a minority area with MAGA shit on?

Just because it's not a threat to you doesn't mean it's not a threat.

Fashion? We support an piece of shit? Getting their munchies on just like anyone else up at that hour after boozing, gaming, smoking, fucking, or all four? Sounds like you’re advocating that minorities shouldn’t have the option to eat out late. Or if they are, there should be seperate big equal locations for all races? Think we know how that ideology turns out...

[lemonlime 5503]

1 minute ago, Chad Fuck said:

I can't believe that Kelly is not losing his goddam mind that Trump - who is under suspicion for having colluded with the Russians - is set to have an un-chaparoned date with Head Ruskie of all Ruskies.  

Why does he need to meet alone with any head of state, let alone the head of state of our most obvious adversary?

How is this not a bigger deal?

Because nothing matters anymore.

Or more likely, the GOP took a lot of Russian money in the 2016 election, and are now going all in on treason.  I used to think Triplehorn's theories were tin foil conspiracy theories (I still kinda do), but there is zero rational explanation for the GOP rolling over for this crap than that they are all implicated.

[bad_teammate 13351]

4 minutes ago, achooloco said:

Your first two sentences are philosophically incongruous. You do realize that the threat of violence is considered assault in many jurisdictions, right? Saying that to someone’s face will get you prosecuted, so your example doesn’t fit. Fighting words are real, but your example is of prosecutable offense, not fighting words per se.

He said the person who starts the physical interaction is the aggressor. That is false, both in the legal sense and in the ethical/moral sense.

Quote

and just because someone is offended by maga/political thought doesn’t give them the right to commit battery or threaten to assault someone else. That’s some safe space bullshit.

What is it you mean by "offended"? Is that word you're using in order to purposefully obfuscate the intended message?

Quote

Fashion?

Again, you do not believe this. You guys are saying things you literally do not believe in order to argue.

Why were they wearing that hat in that space? Answer honestly.

Quote

Sounds like you’re advocating that minorities shouldn’t have the option to eat out late.

Maybe you should take a break, because you're lost.

Edited July 5, 2018 by bad_teammate

[F250 28991]

50 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's really frustrating when people say shit they don't believe just to make an argument.

If I walk up to you and your young daughter and say I can't wait for you to turn the other way so I can grab her and rape her and you punch me in the face, are you the aggressor? Answer honestly. Don't just try to argue with me, answer honestly.

The actual truth is that fighting words are real and exist. And you know that.

The problem here is that the fighting words weren't words that threaten you, so you fail to recognize them as fighting words.

The truth is you are full of shit and I suspect you have never been in an actual fight.

 

[bad_teammate 13351]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

The truth is you are full of shit and I suspect you have never been in an actual fight.

An unsuccessful dodge. You know damned well the aggressor in a confrontation can, and very often is, be the one who provokes with words or actions. You just can't admit it now because you're in an argument and you've got your dander up.

[Dertyberd 394]

7 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

I can't believe that Kelly is not losing his goddam mind that Trump - who is under suspicion for having colluded with the Russians - is set to have an un-chaparoned date with Head Ruskie of all Ruskies.  

Why does he need to meet alone with any head of state, let alone the head of state of our most obvious adversary?

How is this not a bigger deal?

It was reported a few weeks ago that Kelly has checked out.  Basically said he will no longer try to control the President and will not advise him until he gets impeached.  We know that is not going to happen unless the Congress flips.

It's a massive deal, but why would he put himself in any possible criminal/treasonous situation if Trump is going to do what he pleases anyhow?  He's just ordering the coffee and setting up the meetings I suppose.  

 

Edited July 5, 2018 by Dertyberd

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

To be fair, I’m impressed Kelly made it a whole year in the hardest job on earth.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

51 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Actually fighting words can be assault.  Wearing a MAGA hat isn't.

This.  Its like in Diehard with a Vengeance when Mclane had to wear the sandwich board in Harlem.  While he is cruising for a bruising, if he's attacked, its the attackers' fault.  He isn't directly threatening anyone.  He's simply offending them.

Still, those dudes are pretty stupid to roll up to a Whataburger counter and order food with a MAGA hat on.  They probably got plenty of special sauce.

[F250 28991]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

An unsuccessful dodge. You know damned well the aggressor in a confrontation can, and very often is, be the one who provokes with words or actions. You just can't admit it now because you're in an argument and you've got your dander up.

No not a dodge. I stand by my statement, the aggressor is the one that initiates physical force.

You are full of shit because you make assumptions based on what the voices in your head tell you.

 

[achooloco 1086]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

He said the person who starts the physical interaction is the aggressor. That is false, both in the legal sense and in the ethical/moral sense.

What is it you mean by "offended"? Is that word you're using in order to purposefully obfuscate the intended message?

They are guilty and yes fighting words exist but again, that wasn’t your example. Maga isn’t fighting words. A maga hat is offensive, it doesn’t rise to the level of threatened, and if it does for you, they, whomever, something tells me that person has never actually dealt with real adversity. Conversely, tough titties.if a political thought threatens you, it is more important IMO to have free expression and political discourse than the alternative. Like I said, the end result of the position you are advocating for is pure anarchy. But fine, in your head my fuck trump pin is threatening, maga is threatening. If a threatened person’s only solution to being threatened is always fighting, then how do you see that playing out at game venues, restaurants, soccer fields, amusement parks, etc all across the country?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[Chad Fuck 17915]

It was reported a few weeks ago that Kelly has checked out.  Basically said he will no longer try to control the President and will not advise him until he gets impeached.  We know that is not going to happen unless the Congress flips.
It's a massive deal, but why would he put himself in any possible criminal/treasonous situation if Trump is going to do what he pleases anyhow?  He's just ordering the coffee and setting up the meetings I suppose.  
 

I can’t imagine a guy with his background going down without a fight. If you’re going to die upon a hill, this seems like a good one, rather than wandering around in the WH with your balls in a jar on the Resolute Desk.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

9 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

I can't believe that Kelly is not losing his goddam mind that Trump - who is under suspicion for having colluded with the Russians - is set to have an un-chaparoned date with Head Ruskie of all Ruskies.  

Why does he need to meet alone with any head of state, let alone the head of state of our most obvious adversary?

How is this not a bigger deal?

Kelly has proven himself to be a piece of shit. Ever since he flat out lied about Frederica Wilson and refused to apologize when his lie was exposed, I lost all respect for him. He was also one of the main advocates for the policy of separating children from their parents as a "deterrent". 

  

[jimmyjazz 46535]

While the concept of "free speech" is of course codified in the context of governmental suppression of speech, it goes without saying that there is no acceptable form of retribution (other than speech itself) as pushback against one's own expression of speech.

It's one thing to say "fuck you and your MAGA hat you traitor".

It's another thing entirely to take that hat and start throwing drinks.  That's where the (illegal) aggression started in this case.  

[Mojo Hand 4580]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Is that real? 

[Brisketexan 105790]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Is that real? 

It is.

America, 2018.  This is where we are.

[F250 28991]

The Whataburger response to the hat incident has been pretty good.

[Dertyberd 394]

11 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

I can’t imagine a guy with his background going down without a fight. If you’re going to die upon a hill, this seems like a good one, rather than wandering around in the WH with your balls in a jar on the Resolute Desk.

I couldn't imagine a guy with Flynn's background being a traitorous POS either, but apparently these low character guys exist in high ranking positions and Trump is good at finding them.  It blows my mind I type the word treason, and everyday that goes by it is playing out to be the case with these fucks.  I don't like the new normal.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[texas08 1599]

Holy fuck, they really view him as a god...this Pruitt resignation is nothing but a way to say “we are being attacked way too much by the non believers, we fear for our lives”...thus making the trumpist idiots believe that the administration are now being “victimized”.

We are reaching North Korean brainwashing levels amongst those pieces of shit.

Dotard will make an appearance in military garb anytime now.

[Hank Kingsley 21188]

29 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

[jimmyjazz 46535]

14 minutes ago, Dertyberd said:

I couldn't imagine a guy with Flynn's background being a traitorous POS either, but apparently these low character guys exist in high ranking positions and Trump is good at finding them.  It blows my mind I type the word treason, and everyday that goes by it is playing out to be the case with these fucks.  I don't like the new normal.  

It's almost as if he had a list to draw from.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I now watch The Handmaiden’s Tale to cheer up.

[bad_teammate 13351]

5 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

It was his ebonics and hilarious tough guy attitude and approach that is funny. Also funny, should be noted, were the twerpy white dorks who sat there and took it despite out-numbering the chicano guy 3:1.

Ebonics? Are you Pat Buchanan in 1996?

45 minutes ago, achooloco said:

Maga isn’t fighting words. A maga hat is offensive, it doesn’t rise to the level of threatened, and if it does for you, they, whomever, something tells me that person has never actually dealt with real adversity.

Why is a MAGA hat offensive? Please answer the question without dodging or prevaricating.

38 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

While the concept of "free speech" is of course codified in the context of governmental suppression of speech, it goes without saying that there is no acceptable form of retribution (other than speech itself) as pushback against one's own expression of speech.

It's one thing to say "fuck you and your MAGA hat you traitor".

It's another thing entirely to take that hat and start throwing drinks.  That's where the (illegal) aggression started in this case.  

There's something about the retreat into legalism that white people engage in that's disturbing. It's like they know that legal authority is automatically their friend and on their side, so when moral or ethical problems arise they seek the warm embrace of institutionalized white power. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm just trying to figure out why so many posters here are howling, "THAT'S ILLEGAL!" like that has any relevance or importance to this conversation. It's also what motivates these angry white women to call the police on little black girls for selling water.

If "MAGA" is political speech, what is the political argument being made?

What is a white man saying when he says he wants to "Make America Great Again" to a minority?

[TheStoicPaisano 9941]

25 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

This guy ran PR for the Penn State BOT pieces of shit during the Sandusky scandal. They came through relatively unscathed, but Cohen doesn’t have Merck/US Steel money. Hard to get a read on this.

[Fudge Nuggets 19299]

9 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I would let Alveda King suck my dick if it meant I could raw dog Candace Owens’ turd tunnel.

Edited July 5, 2018 by Fudge Nuggets

[pyrohornIII 4842]

3 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I would let Alveda King suck my dick if it meant I could raw dog Candace Owens’ turd tunnel.

User name checks out.

[pyrohornIII 4842]

I am going to hypothesize that those 3 young men at some point decided to do a little candid camera play.  They had it set up and were waiting for someone to take the bait.  Once posted, they would show the world it was the left and minorities doing uncivil things, not the right.  They would be MAGAt heroes without having to actually do any fighting.  

It's odd that the video only captured the final part of that.  Either that, or more likely race baiting comments were edited out.

[jimmyjazz 46535]

14 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

There's something about the retreat into legalism that white people engage in that's disturbing. It's like they know that legal authority is automatically their friend and on their side, so when moral or ethical problems arise they seek the warm embrace of institutionalized white power. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm just trying to figure out why so many posters here are howling, "THAT'S ILLEGAL!" like that has any relevance or importance to this conversation. It's also what motivates these angry white women to call the police on little black girls for selling water.

If "MAGA" is political speech, what is the political argument being made?

What is a white man saying when he says he wants to "Make America Great Again" to a minority?

I don't know that MAGA is "political speech".  I don't find the phrase inherently disconcerting; I find the message disconcerting because I know how it's loaded and what is behind it.  That said, it's still protected speech, just as those stupid "Fuck You I'm From Texas" t-shirts were, and a Confederate flag is.

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at.  My only point is that merely wearing a MAGA hat, regardless of setting, does not justify physical retaliation.  It just doesn't.  Wearing a hat that says "fuck you honky" wouldn't, or "fuck you nigga" wouldn't.  Trump supporters wore t-shirts supporting the lynching of journalists.  I found them disgusting, but hey, 'murica.  Knock yourself out.

[Biff Tannen 45791]

Take the whataburger nonsense to a different thread.  Meanwhile, Pruitt.  Good riddance, but what comes next?  And the damage he did by completely gutting the EPA will take years to fix.

[Biff Tannen 45791]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Take the whataburger nonsense to a different thread.  Meanwhile, Pruitt.  Good riddance, but what comes next?  And the damage he did by completely gutting the EPA will take years to fix.

I guess there's a whole nother thread for that too.  I'll show myself out.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

but what comes next?

[Js1 85990]

Surprise!  He accepted the resignation even though Pruitt is a "good man, caricatured by the left and MSM."

Yes, WE manufactured at least 13 federal investigations into his behavior by a GOP congress. High fives all around, we did it.

[retread 2951]

It's all very unfair. It's horrible the way he was treated. - probably DOTUS at tonight's rally

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

Really not surprising here.

Trump continued to defend Mike Tyson AFTER he was CONVICTED of rape.