Assassination attempt on Trump (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    J-DONK said:
    Just so we are clear:

    Evidence of liberal

    1. Gave to a super pac at 17

    Evidence of Conservative

    1. Registered Republican
    2. Wearing pro-gun merch
    3. Testimony from classmates
    Click to expand...
    1000005609.jpg
     
    MT15 said:
    Trump is already fundraising off of this shooting. 1 man died, he isn’t even buried. 2 others are critical but stable. And he is fundraising off of it.

    I say Biden gears up the ads again tomorrow. No more one hand tied behind our backs. We have to defeat this guy.
    Click to expand...
    Yeah, if he's attempting to profit and raise funds off of it, it's fair game.
     
    MT15 said:
    Okay, so we’re back to the flying glass vs bullet question. There were several officers injured by flying glass/metal shards at the shooting. Now that they have released that - I want to see a statement by a legit doctor that Trump was actually hit by a bullet.

    My hunch is he was not, but he has already graphically described the bullet tearing through his flesh, so he will never be truthful about it, IMO.

    There was one person killed and 2 gravely wounded and he’s going to just hog all the attention.
    Click to expand...
    It's really irrelevant. It was an assassination attempt regardless and the glass/bullet thing is just a distraction. It doesn't change the central story.
     
    DaveXA said:
    It's really irrelevant. It was an assassination attempt regardless and the glass/bullet thing is just a distraction. It doesn't change the central story.
    Click to expand...
    Well, it sorta does, respectfully. He’s going to ham it up that he was hit by a bullet and make a big deal out of it. Hell, he already has. The truth doesn’t matter to him, but it does matter to me. It’s kinda like stolen valor. He didn’t get shot, but is claiming he did.
     
    J-DONK said:
    A summation of evidence is moving goalpost now? What was the goal? Are you done with the secret Democrat arc? Has sanity finally won?
    Click to expand...
    You asked if I would come back and apologize for a Maga talking point being down the drain.

    Do I still apologize even though you didn't think to make a simple search to see if the claim was accurate? You were wrong.

    Then you moved on to analyzing your criteria.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Click to expand...

    lol.. well that settles it.
    if he's so sure if it, why start off with "in my opinion"?.. because he knows he's full of shirt that's why..
    his first false is he said when a president is speaking. Trump isn't president, so things are different for former and or candidates..
    it's done been said he was outside perimeter range of the Secret Service. but i know you don't like being bothered with facts .
    but i have no doubt you 100% believe him .. lol
     
    Bigdaddysaints said:
    lol.. will that settles it.
    if he's so sure if it, why start off with "in my opinion"?.. because he knows he's full of shirt that's why..
    his first false is he said when a president is speaking. Trump isn't president, so things are different for former and it candidates..
    it's fine been said he was out side perimeter range of the Secret Service.
    but i have no doubt you 100% believe him .. lol
    Click to expand...

    Right, he gives credentials, and then I expect some detailed anaylsis of the site, and the failures of those on site. He immediatly jumps to a conspiracy theory, and claims it's an inside job.

    Is this what RW social media is really like?
     
    SaintForLife said:
    You asked if I would come back and apologize for a Maga talking point being down the drain.

    Do I still apologize even though you didn't think to make a simple search to see if the claim was accurate? You were wrong.

    Then you moved on to analyzing your criteria.
    Click to expand...

    How many more data points is it going to take before you give this up?

    Wait, just so we are clear. I want to say this. I never claimed anything about that, but I for sure implied you were wrong about the PAC. I was wrong for that.

    As I already summarized it's 1 vs 3 points of data. How many more till you say you are wrong about this secret Dem theory?

    Can you do the same thing that I just did?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom