Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,266
- 126
Lol, he just bounced around, avoiding what he doesn't want to hear.Just stop diverting, if what Farrakhan said is so outrageous create a thread about it.
Only relevance to this thread would be if Farrakhan went to a McDonalds, pulled a knife on a white family and ranted on and on about how its supposed to be a black Country.
Nazis are not fine people. Neither are Neo-Nazis. Neither are Klansman. No one has argued that they are.
I don’t think Trump implied they are, but rather that there are decent people on both sides of the debate on whether or not to removes statues which was definitely in full swing at the time and what the damned protest was surrounding there - the removal of a Robert E Lee statue. There were protests like that happening all over the place so yes the broader context of that is relevant. He’s not a politician and so it came off sounding idiotic, but no I don’t think he was endorsing the KKK or Neo-Nazis or ANTIFA but rather acknowledging the differing sides of opinion (in Charlottesville and elsewhere) on whether or not to remove statues. You can choose to believe otherwise if you’d like.
Again, ignoring the facts. Trump was addressing Charlottesville directly during those speeches. He's been pandering to white supremacists for a very long time, and the nation had to twist his arm to get him to name specifically the alt-right hate groups.
You've been schooled on an event that's coming up on a year old. This debate was had last August. If YOU choose to believe otherwise, that's up to you.
You're also wrong. Trump is a politician, it came off idiotic because he speaks like a 3rd grader. But lucky for him, he's got some alt-right heroes to help write his speeches.
Like this guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Miller_(political_advisor)?wprov=sfla1
Or this guy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Bannon?wprov=sfla1
These are not alternative facts, it's the real deal.
Maybe he was, but this was right in the middle of the broader ongoing debate on statues though so I can’t help but think "both sides" referred to that. Like Obama’s comments that if he had a son he’d look like Trayvon were more than him addressing that particular shooting. Maybe I’m wrong though and Trump has swaztika on his undies and is an imperial wizard.
I haven’t jumped around any more than anyone else in this thread, and any topic brought up was related to race relations in America which is what the thread is largely about.
Ok cool there wasn’t a broader discussion. Nothing else going on in the country. Alt-facts.![]()
Obviously, you're just missing the broader discussion, or this is fake news, TBDAny fine people here?
I *think* this group help organize Charlottesville
Pay attention to the I *think* part. There is a chance I’m incorrect
It's not a diversion to explain to you the context that you yourself are diverting away from. In conservative circles the narrative leading up to Charlottesville very much would be focused on the statues and southern heritage / culture. Unless you think all white people and/or all southerns are Nazis then there are some "very fine people" mixed in with their belief of what happened. The reason why people were on the street in the first place.
You dropped the context Trump was exposed to and you included your own narrative to explain his exact words. The old bait and switch is a rather standard political attack tool. Where words and meanings are smeared onto people by the will of others, and not their own.
UglyCasanova is correct. If you simply watched Fox News around that time period, you'd understand the narrative Trump used.
It's not a diversion to explain to you the context that you yourself are diverting away from. In conservative circles the narrative leading up to Charlottesville very much would be focused on the statues and southern heritage / culture. Unless you think all white people and/or all southerns are Nazis then there are some "very fine people" mixed in with their belief of what happened. The reason why people were on the street in the first place.
You dropped the context Trump was exposed to and you included your own narrative to explain his exact words. The old bait and switch is a rather standard political attack tool. Where words and meanings are smeared onto people by the will of others, and not their own.
UglyCasanova is correct. If you simply watched Fox News around that time period, you'd understand the narrative Trump used.
The city of Charlottesville voted to move the statue. Notdestroy, move it off of public property. The rally at Charlottesville was organized by white supremacists. If you're not a white supremacist, then you should not have been at the rally. That's the context of the situation.
I see, if only I watched the news network that has a host who literally give the President a good night I love you bed time call I’d understand everything.
I’ll remember to bring up MSNBC next Obama or Hillary comment
That’s may be the context of the local situation, broadly though that’s not though. Across the US was a larger conversation going on at the time on statue removal. And yes I think it’s that broader context that Trump was referring to, just as Obama was speaking beyond just Trayvon.
And look at you, a year later, still engaged is the delusional idea that what happened at Charlottesville involved some very fine people
And look at you, a year later, still engaged is the delusional idea that what happened at Charlottesville involved some very fine people
No it clearly did not. But we are presenting you the factual basis of what the President knew at the time he said those words. The narrative Fox News was running with before, during, and shortly after Charlottesville.
I think there was very fine people engaged on both sides of the debate regarding removing statues across the US, yes. A discussion that people across the country were engaged in that very day even. Feel free to ignore the broader context if you want.
Again, the unite the right rally was informationally known to be exactly what we know it was. He knew exactly what it was. Maybe you disagree he knew
So if you're claiming he's ignorant because fox news is where he's getting his information from, and not listening to people providing him information. Well, that's a much bigger issue that needs to be addressed. But won't be, considering the state of the union today.
