Trump: 'Second Amendment people' could deal with Clinton

[yllus]

If you understand the English language there is only one way to read his "joke": The only option left if Ms. Clinton is elected and makes new Supreme Court appointments will be people with guns using them against Ms. Clinton or those Supreme Court judges.

"Jokes" like this are what get people assassinated. You need to watch your language because there are people on the edge of reason who will take things too literally. Here's a pamphlet that was circulated in Dallas in 1963.

 

[Schmide]

^ wow almost the same conservative arguments.

 

[FerrelGeek]

I've said it several times and I say it once more, I don't like Trump. He's a revolting twat.

That being said, many of you are going into full retard hysterics on this one; to the level of the people in that school that freaked out over a kid that they claimed he nibbled his poptart into the shape of a gun.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't see anyone going into hysterics, it's just incredibly irresponsible for a presidential candidate to make remarks about having his supporters kill his opponent. And no, there is no other way to take what he said.

If this isn't something to resoundingly condemn, what is?

 

[Brainonska511]

That being said, many of you are going into full retard hysterics on this one; to the level of the people in that school that freaked out over a kid that they claimed he nibbled his poptart into the shape of a gun.

It's not nearly the same at all. A prime example is the anti-choice movement - some terrorists and deranged maniacs have picked up on the dog-whistle language and carried out attacks on clinics and healthcare providers, all while the people issuing the rhetoric go, "Who me?"

 

[retrospooty]

I've said it several times and I say it once more, I don't like Trump. He's a revolting twat.
That being said, many of you are going into full retard hysterics on this one; to the level of the people in that school that freaked out over a kid that they claimed he nibbled his poptart into the shape of a gun.

No one is really freaking out. I think people are just pointing out that Trump isnt fit to be the leader of the free world. You cant say things like that, and you have to know it. It's like he simply doesn't understand that whole part of the job. Can you imagine how bad he would be when in office and no longer running and the filter is removed? I think you can, because you call him a twat (correctly I might add).

 

[JockoJohnson]

The moron just can't keep his mouth shut. He must need the attention on himself 24x7. The sly remarks of his are too easily misinterpreted....or not. He leaves it too ambiguous for the media and everyone and it only causes him to get attention, usually the bad kind.

 

[HomerJS]

Can someone explain to me what is the 2nd amendment remedy after Hillary is elected and picks her SCJ?

After all, that was the exact context of Trump's statement.

 

[retrospooty]

Can someone explain to me what is the 2nd amendment remedy after Hillary is elected and picks her SCJ?

After all, that was the exact context of Trump's statement.

That is just the standard thing they like to say to instill fear. They said it about Obama too. "Obama will take our guns". To date, Obama has done zero to take any guns. He has publicly mentioned that he would like Congress to put up a bill that will close the gunshow "no background check loophole" and shore up some other things with background checks, but not a single thing to ban any guns.

 

[fskimospy]

That is just the standard thing they like to say to instill fear. They said it about Obama too. "Obama will take our guns". To date, Obama has done zero to take any guns. He has publicly mentioned that he would like Congress to put up a bill that will close the gunshow "no background check loophole" and shore up some other things with background checks, but not a single thing to ban any guns.

Yep, this is what the NRA said about Obama in 2008:

Literally none of those things happened, yet here the NRA is again making the exact same insane claims. Do people seriously not figure out that they are being lied to?

 

[Brainonska511]

Yep, this is what the NRA said about Obama in 2008:

Literally none of those things happened, yet here the NRA is again making the exact same insane claims. Do people seriously not figure out that they are being lied to?

They're so brainwashed that they would probably say that the NRA and Republicans held the line against gun grabbing Obama.

 

[sportage]

Makes me sick these politicians on TV and in the media, Trump supporters, up there trying to justify what Trump said about Hillary as innocent and meaningless.
But every one of them are overlooking one little piece connecting this puzzle of Trump thoughts and words.

Donald was talking about the US Supreme Court. Ok, fair game.
And then Trump was talking about Hillary Clinton and her selecting justices. Ok, again fair game.
But THEN Trump brought in the "2nd amendment people" as the solution for stopping Hillary.
If Trump is so innocent and his words meant nothing more than a joke, why then did Trump go from Hillary, court justices, and on to the 2nd amendment people?
Code word for guns and violence plain and simple.
And frankly, this entire election from the republican side, from the very beginning, has been nothing but code words spoken to their base. Code words attacking blacks, Hispanics, women, gays, you name it.
And Donald Trump is the master of using code words.
Trump always has been, even before his claim that Obama was not a true US citizen nor his presidency legitimate.
One clear talent of racist and bigots, they sure know how to use their code words.

So many attempting to explain away Donald Trump as harmless are simply ignoring the fact Donald Trump had no reason to mention and bring "the 2nd amendment people" into his thought.
And, entirely out of the blue.

Trump was probably fine with bringing up Clinton nominating justices to the court, and Trump simply could have added that when she does that, that can not be changed.
Two simple statements that were fair to make.
However.... what people are missing here when they explain away Trump as just a jokester or just an innocent comment, is when Trump then added the "2nd amendment people".
There lies the smoking gun.
Crystal clear. Plain and simple.
Trump could have simply stopped with Clinton and her possible selection of justices.
However, Trump then went further suggesting other action was necessary for stopping Hillary Clinton.

Trump did not simply talk without thinking or make some flippant joke here.
Donald Trump made a direct connection between president Hillary Clinton selecting Supreme Court justices, and the 2nd amendment as the solution for stopping her.
No ifs ands or buts about it, Trump threatened candidate Hillary Clinton with violence, harm, and assassination plain and simple.
Trump just used the 2nd amendment people for doing the dirty deed that Donald Trump proposed.
Within law and justice, if someone even proposes a crime that someone else then carries out, that person doing the proposing is as guilty of the crime as the perpetrator. Even if they did not physically take part in the crime.
Just ask Charles Manson how THAT works....

 

[thraashman]

Trump is well aware of his supporters history of violent actions and is stoking them with this comment. The cat scratch psychopath Ted Nugent got a visit from the Secret Service for one of his insane statements in 2012, and Trump's comment here is quite a bit worse.

 

[wetech]

HIllary 2008 when asked why she was staying in the race against Obama.

My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.

So hey, maybe Obama gets shot and she can get the nomination.

 

[brycejones]

^ wow almost the same conservative arguments.

Well by definition conservatives don't like change so why would they change their arguments?

 

[brycejones]

Yep, this is what the NRA said about Obama in 2008:

Literally none of those things happened, yet here the NRA is again making the exact same insane claims. Do people seriously not figure out that they are being lied to?

You've got the wrong spin on it. The NRA would spin it as they prevented these actions and now you need to give them more money to prevent it again.

 

[thraashman]

You've got the wrong spin on it. The NRA would spin it as they prevented these actions and now you need to give them more money to prevent it again.

They've prevented it much like ISIS has prevented another Saddam Hussein from taking over Iraq.

 

[HomerJS]

HIllary 2008 when asked why she was staying in the race against Obama.



So hey, maybe Obama gets shot and she can get the nomination.

Hillary told a historical fact justifying why she stayed in race. Trump advocated people take out their 2nd amendment remedies after the election if they lose at the ballot box.

 

[Jhhnn]

No one is really freaking out. I think people are just pointing out that Trump isnt fit to be the leader of the free world. You cant say things like that, and you have to know it. It's like he simply doesn't understand that whole part of the job. Can you imagine how bad he would be when in office and no longer running and the filter is removed? I think you can, because you call him a twat (correctly I might add).

Hell- anybody with a lick of common sense & decency knows that you can't say that in public as a private citizen, let alone as a candidate for POTUS knowing your remarks will be broadcast nationwide.

It's astoundingly stupid. How do I know? When you invite violence against your political opponents you invite it against yourself.

 

[wetech]

Hillary told a historical fact justifying why she stayed in race. Trump advocated people take out their 2nd amendment remedies after the election if they lose at the ballot box.

That's a really bad attempt to spin that comment. People don't stay in losing races because their opponent may get killed. That's what was implied.

 

[fskimospy]

That's a really bad attempt to spin that comment. People don't stay in losing races because their opponent may get killed. That's what was implied.

Are you seriously trying to compare the two comments? They aren't even close.

 

[sourceninja]

...

 

[ivwshane]

I am not a Trump supporter in any way. I do not want him to win the election. That said, I do not take this comment as a call to assassinate anyone. I see it as a comment that if our country is corrupt and not following the constitution we can use the '2nd amendment' to take back our country. AKA Trump is saying that Hillary will corrupt the country so much the only answer is to overthrow the government and replace it with a new one. I see nothing here to condemn.

Ah, you are a terrorist sympathizer. Got it.

 

[fskimospy]

I am not a Trump supporter in any way. I do not want him to win the election. That said, I do not take this comment as a call to assassinate anyone. I see it as a comment that if our country is corrupt and not following the constitution we can use the '2nd amendment' to take back our country. AKA Trump is saying that Hillary will corrupt the country so much the only answer is to overthrow the government and replace it with a new one. I see nothing here to condemn.

Even if I grant your premise, you think there's nothing wrong with someone advocating the violent overthrow of the government of their political opponent?

wut. How insane has this country become?

 

[Brainonska511]

I am not a Trump supporter in any way. I do not want him to win the election. That said, I do not take this comment as a call to assassinate anyone. I see it as a comment that if our country is corrupt and not following the constitution we can use the '2nd amendment' to take back our country. AKA Trump is saying that Hillary will corrupt the country so much the only answer is to overthrow the government and replace it with a new one. I see nothing here to condemn.

And who is the decider for instigating such a revolution? Why do they always see resorting to violence first instead of, idk, maybe voting?