Donald Trump

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
I think instead of making an immediate off the hip speech right after the tragic event happened would have been lost on so many.  No one cares what a politician says during an extreme time of hate/mourning/pain.  After a few days for everything to sink in and emotions a little ( I say a little) less heated the people who the message was intended for were in a better position to receive it.  You can't react to everything at every second and expect your message to be heard.  It's like people that constantly post in one thread.  Eventually people don't read them. So to answer no I don't think it was damage control.

that's a great point!

how is that a great point? his comments 2 days apart contradict each other. the first was obviously from his puny brain, the second was probably written by Ivanka. 

I don't ever recall a sitting president saying nothing about a major event to "let the events sink in". 

I think a politician talking a day or two after the event is a ok.  I mean fdr waited until december 8th.

fair. but what about the "both sides" comment?

Did you not see the video footage of the protesters attacking the supremacists?

I was wondering where the police presence was.

It seems like the cops didn't do very good job on this one. 

I think they did pretty good....did you see the pictures of the armed supremacists?  Those guys were in body armor and camo.

Given the unrest I am surprised that there weren't shootings.  I would think the police deserve credit for that.

I saw a lot of pictures of armed people on both sides...

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

dignin said:

Go Beavers said:

PJPOWER said:

Go Beavers said:

PJPOWER said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

There he just called out all those hate groups.  Is he still a racist?

Yep, just named the KKK, Neo Nazis, White Supremacist specifically...Way better speech than Obama's dodging when BLM was setting Baltimore on fire...not that I'm a "trumpito" or anything.

How do you know blm was setting fires?

Um...Where were you last year???

Were the people setting fires part of organized blm? 

Power was there to check their BLM ID cards.

They burn those too, evidently BLM and Antifa's go to is to burn up everything in sight.

You're right, totally the same as Nazis and ISIS.

Those are your words bub.

Not this bub's words.

"I'm not sure who disagrees with this.  Let's name some groups known for intimidation through violence:
KKK
Antifa
Nazis
BLM
ISIS
etc...
They should all be named as terrorist organizations."

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
I think instead of making an immediate off the hip speech right after the tragic event happened would have been lost on so many.  No one cares what a politician says during an extreme time of hate/mourning/pain.  After a few days for everything to sink in and emotions a little ( I say a little) less heated the people who the message was intended for were in a better position to receive it.  You can't react to everything at every second and expect your message to be heard.  It's like people that constantly post in one thread.  Eventually people don't read them. So to answer no I don't think it was damage control.

that's a great point!

how is that a great point? his comments 2 days apart contradict each other. the first was obviously from his puny brain, the second was probably written by Ivanka. 

I don't ever recall a sitting president saying nothing about a major event to "let the events sink in". 

I think a politician talking a day or two after the event is a ok.  I mean fdr waited until december 8th.

fair. but what about the "both sides" comment?

Did you not see the video footage of the protesters attacking the supremacists?

I was wondering where the police presence was.

It seems like the cops didn't do very good job on this one. 

I think they did pretty good....did you see the pictures of the armed supremacists?  Those guys were in body armor and camo.

Given the unrest I am surprised that there weren't shootings.  I would think the police deserve credit for that.

I saw a lot of pictures of armed people on both sides...

Oh my god.

Come on man. You're really coming across as an apologist. Even if it was true... one side is armed to perpetuate hate, while one side would have been armed to stop hatred (just like in WWII when 'real' patriots took up arms against nazis).

These boobs are confused.

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

josevolution said:

lol so because today he came out opposing the KKK & Nazis he's all of a sudden a good guy sorry but he's still a deplorable and my opinion of him and any racist bigoted folks hasn't changed at all as far as I'm concerned you support him I want nothing to do with you at all ! 

cmon dude.  Come back to the middle at least.  The attitude of think like me or I don't want anything to do with you is divisive. A President calls out kkk and Nazis and you refuse to accept it?  

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

dignin said:

Go Beavers said:

PJPOWER said:

Go Beavers said:

PJPOWER said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

There he just called out all those hate groups.  Is he still a racist?

Yep, just named the KKK, Neo Nazis, White Supremacist specifically...Way better speech than Obama's dodging when BLM was setting Baltimore on fire...not that I'm a "trumpito" or anything.

How do you know blm was setting fires?

Um...Where were you last year???

Were the people setting fires part of organized blm? 

Power was there to check their BLM ID cards.

They burn those too, evidently BLM and Antifa's go to is to burn up everything in sight.

You're right, totally the same as Nazis and ISIS.

Those are your words bub.

Not this bub's words.

"I'm not sure who disagrees with this.  Let's name some groups known for intimidation through violence:
KKK
Antifa
Nazis
BLM
ISIS
etc...
They should all be named as terrorist organizations."

I never said they were the same, just all groups known for trying to get their points across by means of violence.

You've done nothing but equate the groups from the beginning of this topic.

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
I think instead of making an immediate off the hip speech right after the tragic event happened would have been lost on so many.  No one cares what a politician says during an extreme time of hate/mourning/pain.  After a few days for everything to sink in and emotions a little ( I say a little) less heated the people who the message was intended for were in a better position to receive it.  You can't react to everything at every second and expect your message to be heard.  It's like people that constantly post in one thread.  Eventually people don't read them. So to answer no I don't think it was damage control.

that's a great point!

how is that a great point? his comments 2 days apart contradict each other. the first was obviously from his puny brain, the second was probably written by Ivanka. 

I don't ever recall a sitting president saying nothing about a major event to "let the events sink in". 

I think a politician talking a day or two after the event is a ok.  I mean fdr waited until december 8th.

fair. but what about the "both sides" comment?

Did you not see the video footage of the protesters attacking the supremacists?

I was wondering where the police presence was.

It seems like the cops didn't do very good job on this one. 

I think they did pretty good....did you see the pictures of the armed supremacists?  Those guys were in body armor and camo.

Given the unrest I am surprised that there weren't shootings.  I would think the police deserve credit for that.

I saw a lot of pictures of armed people on both sides...

Oh my god.

Come on man. You're really coming across as an apologist. Even if it was true... one side is armed to perpetuate hate, while one side would have been armed to stop hatred (just like in WWII when 'real' patriots took up arms against nazis).

These boobs are confused.

So you consider Antifa the "real patriots"?  I guess I understand where you are coming from now...All that the violent protesters from any front cause is an escalation in violence.